John MOTT, born c. 1806

[vickifperry]

And would you believe that there are two John Motts working as Porters in 1841 in London?! It appears that the one I was sure was him isn't- as looking at the London household of the 2nd Marquess he is there, aged 50. He's mis-transcribed as 'Mett'.

Vicki

[AMBLY]

Well done  Vicky

This is one he's not in 1841 - I still think this is John NUTT, Plasterer  - not MOTT a Porter.



I was thinking, it would have been more likely to find you man 'living in' his employer's residence in 1841 - what's the reference for that one? Curious now !

[rosie99]

And would you believe that there are two John Motts working as Porters in 1841 in London?! It appears that the one I was sure was him isn't- as looking at the London household of the 2nd Marquess he is there, aged 50. He's mis-transcribed as 'Mett'.

Vicki

Well done Vicki  
So are the family with him, and does it say Yes or No for born in County (and was the London household in Middlesex or Surrey )

Rosie

[vickifperry]

Yes I think you're right, sometimes we see what we want to see  I got confused with my 1851 fellow Ambly who was also a plasterer (and not who I was looking for either!)

The reference for him in the 1841 census is HO 107/734/3 p14. Several of them are transcribed incorrectly, although I'm not surprised as the writing's terrible!

I think I may have also found him in 1851 (but still a bit of checking to do). There is a John Mott living in James Street, Westminster with a wife and son. He is described as a 'servant out of place', which is interesting as he wrote to the 2nd Marquess over a period of several months after he lost his job as he couldn't find a new one without a reference. If this is the correct one then he must have really struggled to find something new. 

The reference for 1851 is HO 107/1840 p[512 I think]. This one was born in Mitford, Sussex, so it's something to go on anyway.

Many of the servants 'lived in' in the 1840s, but not all.  Those that didn't lived nearby and it was usually the upper servants (eg the chef) who didn't. Although as he had a family he may have had his own lodgings as well.

Vicki

[AMBLY]

Again well done     the new 1851 you've found seems to tie in very well indeed with the letters you have .  I see John "METT' in 1841 now - age 50, a M.S.  - Not born Middlesex.....
No apparent wife or children in the house which is  enumerated just with 16 servants in residence on Census night, and 'next door' to the Earl & Countess of Zetland - on Arlington St.

Eerie coincidence  thing with THIS one is - there are two servants named BLIGH in the house with John 'METT'  And there was a BLIGH  in the same house as 1841 John NUTT too (right before him on that image peice).

You'll have a brilliant display for work - just need to find a photo of John MOTT now   


Cheers
AMBLY

[AMBLY]

If you haven't already found them, his wife Eliza & son John are here in 1841:

HO107 /  Piece 738 /  Book: 12 / Folio: 20 / Page: 35

Cheers
AMBLY

[vickifperry]

Wow, thank you! That makes it so much more likely that I have the correct one in 1851.

We're having some actors coming in to re-enact the servants. I wasn't going to research John Mott, but his story was so fascinating- I wish my own family history would get this interesting!

[AMBLY]

Did you notice in 1851, that  the son John MOTT jnr (22) was a Wine merchants Clerk?
         Quite....poignant....considering the reason poor dad  was out of Employ!

Historical Re-enactment - lovely! Wish I could see it !

Cheers
AMBLY