Ellington's of Hull

[OLFEN1]

Hi LKL, thank you for that, but I have seen that on the Census. It appears that only the top of Little Queen St is on there, and I was informed it was a long street in it's day.


Ol

[Necromancer]

ah, I did wonder - altho the schedule numbers seem contiguous, so i wonder if it was to be split across districts, but they messed up ?

[OLFEN1]

Hi Yorkslass, thanks for that, I have followed this Harriet in Beverley through, and she is definitely not mine. She was using the surname Wilson and married a Joseph Dale in 1841. There seems something funny going on with this Harriet though, whether she was related to my Harriet I don't know. I even sent for her marriage certificate to see if it would give me any more info on her, but sadly it doesn't. I was hoping it would give her fathers name and occupation but it was blank. Her eldest son Richard was a stonemason. And my Daniel Wilson [ son of Thomas & Harriet] was a stonemason as well. Spooky.

Ol

[OLFEN1]

Hi Jill, I suppose it's possible that it was split in some way. But I have tried searching all I can with no luck.

Ol

[OLFEN1]

Hi Sisterjane, thanks for the offer, but I have already got it. But thank you all the same.

Ol

[jillruss]

Hi Yorkslass, thanks for that, I have followed this Harriet in Beverley through, and she is definitely not mine. She was using the surname Wilson and married a Joseph Dale in 1841. There seems something funny going on with this Harriet though, whether she was related to my Harriet I don't know. I even sent for her marriage certificate to see if it would give me any more info on her, but sadly it doesn't. I was hoping it would give her fathers name and occupation but it was blank. Her eldest son Richard was a stonemason. And my Daniel Wilson [ son of Thomas & Harriet] was a stonemason as well. Spooky.

Ol

I may be missing something here (it has been known! ) but doesn't all this prove that the Beverley Harriet IS yours?

I looked on the IGI for the Richard & William Ellinton that Yorkslass found on the 1841 census living with Harriet Wilson (N.B. 'widow crossed out'). I couldn't find Richard, but William is baptised in Beverley 1832, son of Harriett Ellington. So, it looks as if both boys are illegitimate.

Why would they be living with a woman named Harriet Wilson in 1841 if that Harriet wasn't their mother? it would be one hell of a coincidence otherwise.

1. She obviously told the 1841 enumerator at first that she was widowed and it was then crossed out. Does this mean that she and Thomas Wilson were separated?
2. Where is Daniel (I'm assuming he didn't die in infancy?). Is he with Thomas Wilson? Have you found Thomas Wilson on the 1841 census? Were there any other children that you know of to Thomas & Harriet?
3. Is the Beverley Harriet on the IGI? I can't find her now, though I thought I'd found her earlier today! Was she illegitimate - as suggested by the 1841 marriage cert? Or was she (whisper it!) deliberately withholding information because she was committing bigamy? It happened!! (I'm determined to get her clapped in irons one way or another!!!  ).

I'd be interested to know your thinking behind dismissing the Beverley Harriet as yours - other than the fact that she married someone else in 1841.

Jill

[Sisterjane]

I see what you mean about Harriot marrying Joseph Dales in 1841 

On the 1851 cencus they are in Beverley with her children Richard and William..Strange about Richard though with his surname Foreman and according to IGI he is Richard Foreman chrisened 1831 in Beverley with father John Foreman and mother Harriet.....Weird or what !!

Harriot died in Beverley in 1858 and Joseph died also in Beverley in 1859...and Richard Foreman also died 1859 in Beverley....and also it looks like William Ellington also died 1856 in Beverley...its all very strange and sounds rather sad too

Jane

[OLFEN1]

Hi Jill, I have thought along these lines myself at some point, but dismissed it as the Harriet in Beverley is still around on the 1851 Census, were as my Harriet died 1848, I have her death certificate as I told you.
Curiously, I have found a Daniel Wilson aged 6 yrs in Baston Lincs on the 1841 Census. He is with a Mary Porter. It states, Daniel was not born in the county of Lincs, were as this Mary Porter was. She gives her age as 50.  Now assuming that my Harriet and Thomas were in the nick, could be that Daniel was being looked after by Mary Porter. Another curious thing, on the same Lincs Census there are a family of Banks on there, I wonder if there is any relation of Mary Banks who later married Thomas Wilson in 1849. As for the children, Thomas and Harriet had three children, Daniel b. 1834, Elizabeth b. 1843, Ellen b. 1847.
What do you think.

Ol

[OLFEN1]

Hi Jane, thanks for that, I had come to the same conclusion myself.
As I have just written to Jill about what I think may have happened, see what you think and let me know.
Ol