Greensleeves Scavenger Hunt...Everyone Welcome To Join In

[angelfish58]

I had a look on the North East Inheritance database but the only Shadforth Will in Hartlepool was for a William Shadforth,barber,probate 1762.
There is a Will for William Burrell,plumber & glazier of Hartlepool,probate 26 Aug 1771.

You can search from http://familyrecords.dur.ac.uk/nei/data/intro.php

[Greensleeves]

That's an interesting site, Angelfish - and it has given me a bit more info on someone else in the family!

I believe (thought I can't be certain yet) that the parents of Robert Shadforth Senior were Thomas Shadforth and Catherine Pemberton who married on 30 October 1710 at St Michael's Church, Bishopwearmouth.  In the PRs they are described as 'of Panns' which is (or was) part of Sunderland where the salt pans were.

Well, when I searched for Shadforth on the link you gave me I found Probate records of:

Thomas Shadforth of Bishop Wearmouth Salt Panns
Date of probate 18 January 1735
Further probate 31 October 1735
Administration bond, penal sum £100, 18 Jan 1735
ditto                                        £50 31 Oct 1735
regranted to Thomas Pemberton as goods were left unadministered by Mary Shadforth widow and relict

and also

Mary Shadforth widow of Bishop Wearmouth Salt Panns also spelt Shadfoorth
Date of probate 23 Aug 1735
Will 22nd Jan 1735


So yet more stuff for me to check out - I am having a great time with all this.  How lucky I retired on 31st Dec!

[angelfish58]

Glad it was useful,the staff at Durham Uni library are really helpful too if you have any queries.

[Greensleeves]

Angelfish, it looks like there will be hours of fun for me on that website - am most grateful

[Ruskie]

... Robert Jnr remarried less than four months after the death of Alice - on 17 August 1788 -  and as their son, Thomas, was born on 31 March 1789, it seems that his new wife, Mary Whittingham, was pregnant at the time.

Is it fishy or just very convenient that baby William and Alice both died when they did? What were their causes of death? 

[alpinecottage]

By my calculation, Mary Whittingham conceived around the 8 July, which is 10 or so weeks after Alice's death - quick by today's standards but not entirely unreasonable for those times perhaps and especially if there were some "issues" about Alice and her behaviour.

I would look into what other parish records survive from say 1785 to 1795, to see if anything can be gleaned about Robert's (jnr) character and the circumstances surrounding his marriages to Alice and Mary.  You could also email the record office to ask their opinion about the wording in the PR - their local knowledge may cast light on the wording.  Also I wonder if there was a local newspaper at that time (the RO would be able to tell you); if Alice became pregnant as the result of rape for example, it may have been reported.

[deb usa]

Hi

I'm here ....just finished reading the first thread .... what a mystery ....will be back

deb

[Trees]

Hi Greensleeves
It would appear that the baby was healthy when born or else it would have been baptised at home privately to be entered into church later if it survived it looks like the mother was giving concern and as someone else has said if the mother was weak the child would not thrive with out a wet nurse and fadewas there any sign of disease in the parish such as cholera a new born and newly delivered mother would easily succumb to any infection were there more deaths than usual in the parish spring 1788?
A sexton was not a full time job and would have held a second post if that is known you could see if he was likely to be away from home at all. It certainly looks like he is making it known that although he accepts the child in his family he does not claim it his natural child
The speedy remarriage looks like the new wife did a bit too much comforting of the widow necessitating the speedy marriage.
I doubt the child would be mentioned in the bastardy records as it appears that Robert is taking them into his family or he would have made sure his name was not associated with the baptism at all
Trees also in need of a trip to Durham

[AngelaR]

Just finished reading both threads... lots of material... but I think that one possibility hasn't been mentioned yet - do correct me if it has 

I have a married couple in my tree whose children were described as illegitimate in their baptism records. This was because, although the parents married (and I have the certificate), the man had previously been married to the woman's sister and therefore, at the time, the subsequent marriage was illegal.

In most cases, once the knot was tied, everyone accepted it and life carried on, but in this one case, the vicar of the church did not accept it and pointedly stated the children were illegitimate.

Is that even remotely possible here in that Alice, being older, could have been married to Robert's brother, who then died?