Author Topic: huddersfield family history society  (Read 26615 times)

Offline geoanngewood

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 13
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: huddersfield family history society
« Reply #63 on: Tuesday 17 August 10 20:07 BST (UK) »
hello every one I want to say a big thank you to each and every one who has wrote a message I dont know what to do to send a thread will this be the one  connfusion sets in at 60 I have john h wood two mc and his death  ct I would love to get his birth I made cotact with dewsbury twice about his birth they did not have one 1866 to 1867 with dad james mother hannah .and I have had a three yrs search done  from 1865 to 1867 . the reason I still go for them dates is in 1916 when he he was 50 and when he died he was 71 in 1937  many thanks  you again ann

Offline heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 42,407
    • View Profile
Re: huddersfield family history society
« Reply #64 on: Tuesday 17 August 10 20:15 BST (UK) »
Oh Ann,
we are so glad you're here. This is the 'thread' and you have posted here- that's what was needed.  :)

I hope you have followed the various finds we have made.

As James and Hannah did not marry until 1971, she would not be his mother. She is single in 1871 as a servant.

As we have found, neither james nor Hannah were too truthful about their ages - it may not have mattered that much.

The main thing is that people know exactly what you already have as fact.

Who were the witnesses on John Henry's marriage to Charlotte?

heywood
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline libby9

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 853
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: huddersfield family history society
« Reply #65 on: Tuesday 17 August 10 20:23 BST (UK) »
Hello Ann,

Welcome back to your thread  :)

Thanks for clarifying why you think John Henry's birth was circa 1866/7.  

I'm not convinced he was born so early.  If Hannah 1901/11 staying with the Cocking's, is John's mother, then I believe the 1891 census posted on your thread is 'your' John, and he was born circa 1873.  Also the 1901/1911 census have recorded his age as circa 1873.  

So, the question is: are the census records mentioned above another John?  If not, why would he consistently state his birth year circa 1873, if infact he was born 1866.  If he was born 1866, and James and Hannah married 1871, surely his birth should be registered as John Henry Sykes as Sykes was his mother's name.

Do you have any other bits of info you can share with us, anything which may help the search?


Offline Christine in Portugal

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 563
  • Grandparents, Ernest & Emily Walker 1920
    • View Profile
Re: huddersfield family history society
« Reply #66 on: Tuesday 17 August 10 20:28 BST (UK) »
Hello Ann,

Pleased you've made it back here.

You have obviously based his age from his 2nd marriage cert and his death.

The census details we have found suggest he was born  1872 or 1873 as he was 19 and 29 in 1891 and 1901 so are more likely to be correct.

I think you need to be looking for the birth 1871-1873.

Christine
Mallinson- Lepton, Huddersfield
Walker, Smith, Slater, Blacker - Farnley Tyas, Huddersfield
Claybourne/Clayburn - Norton Doncaster
Birkenshaw/Birkinshaw - Doncaster
Hall - Skelbrooke, Doncaster
Bisby - Campsall, Doncaster
Hemsworth - Doncaster

Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Offline heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 42,407
    • View Profile
Re: huddersfield family history society
« Reply #67 on: Tuesday 17 August 10 20:30 BST (UK) »
I wish Ann would stay just long enough to answer some more of our questions  :D
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline libby9

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 853
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: huddersfield family history society
« Reply #68 on: Tuesday 17 August 10 20:32 BST (UK) »

The main thing is that people know exactly what you already have as fact.

Who were the witnesses on John Henry's marriage to Charlotte?

heywood

Heywood,  do you mean John Henry and Hannah?  If so, Dob's gave the names from the PR's, they are .......

Richard Goohall and James Robuck

Added: Ignore this post, I'm very confused, you will be too if you try to make sense of my comments  ;)

Offline heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 42,407
    • View Profile
Re: huddersfield family history society
« Reply #69 on: Tuesday 17 August 10 20:34 BST (UK) »
I thought James married Hannah?

I am looking for any clues re John Henry's first marriage?

he is in 1891 with Charlotte and we think we have him with Hannah in 1881 but not sure - is that right?

I could be very confused  ::)
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline libby9

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 853
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: huddersfield family history society
« Reply #70 on: Tuesday 17 August 10 20:45 BST (UK) »
I thought James married Hannah?

I am looking for any clues re John Henry's first marriage?

he is in 1891 with Charlotte and we think we have him with Hannah in 1881 but not sure - is that right?

I could be very confused  ::)

Sorry, Heywood ignore me; I'm getting my John's and James' mixed up.

Offline dobfarm

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 7,938
  • Scarcliffe village Derbyshire
    • View Profile
Re: huddersfield family history society
« Reply #71 on: Tuesday 17 August 10 22:58 BST (UK) »
Hi Ann,
Nice to have you back! we get so many on this website who will play people about? and if they don't reply then it make it very hard to help.

There are two possibles

Either Mary Jepson(Wood) James's first wife had John Henry 1865 Wortley she died in child birth and was brought up by Hannah also she made it look as if He was her son on the census's

or

John Henry was as census say as Hannah son born 1871/2/3

As I said earlier that there was no real heavy steel industry round Heckmondwike 1870's and the lack of any evidence of them living in or the birth of John Henry there either GRO or Baptisms also James not in the Electoral Rolls or Newspapers in BMDs.  There is also the strongest fact that there is no evidence of James in Heckmondwike area we know of 1871c. Though Libby points out Hannah and John Henry are together 1891c stating they were both born in Dewsbury it could be Hannah did not know John H's birth place. Futher to this is who looked after the children of Mary Jepson after her death till James married Hannah in 1871c

In my opinion the marriage residence is not always the place of birth. Never forget Workhouse and overseers accounts records of birth