Paul - a Huguenot Family in London

[Georgfriedrich]

Dear Ciderdrinker,
Please have a large glass for me!  This information that you have given me is helping me a lot. 
What do you think about Richard's father?
Bye for now
Kirk

[smudwhisk]

Only one of Charles' sons appears to have been apprenticed.  If the remainder were weavers, they probably learnt the trade from their father.  In the case of Peter, it could just be he was apprenticed because they wanted him to be something other than a weaver and perhaps could afford to pay for the apprenticeship for only one son.

All/Hall Paul's father Peter was also a freeman but can't read the profession properly.  Hall Paul only became a Freeman in 1748/9 but his freeman papers state his father was admitted in 1703.

Can anyone decipher the father's profession?

[JaneyCanuck]

My Nottinghamshire family has a load of framework knitters, commonly abbreviated in records as FWK.

I wonder whether that isn't SW for silk weaver ... and what is after that I don't know ... unless it is a sort of consonants-only shorthand for Weaver.

[Georgfriedrich]

I think that you could be right Janeycanuck.

We thought it was initials too. It looks like 'undecipherable letter' then W, R, V.

Interestingly all the signatories appear to be family with at least two other Paul weavers plus a Stutchbury (All Paul's wife was a Stutchbury)

Kirk

[ciderdrinker]

Dear Georgefriedrich
Sorry not to get back to you sooner but I don't have a computer at home and the Library shuts at 12.30 on Saturday.
Anyway I think you're on the right track with that baptism Charles Etienne Paul 1729.The other alternative is Whitechapel  245.5.1736 to a Charles and Elizabeth Paul which would make him only 16 when he had Hester in 1753.
I was hoping to get something positive from their burials but the possibles I've found at st Dunstans Stepney don't help.Charles buried 6.12.1809 MEOT and Sarah MEOT 2.11.1817 have no occupation and while Sarah is 80 years old there is no age for Charles.
As for William Paul surgeon etc on the marriages 1729 and 1741 ,someone mentioned there should be a freedom of the city of London for his son Charles and there is 25.5.1736 Charles Paul so of William of the Surgeons guild.If this is the same William then Charles must have been at least 21 so born 1715 ish.Would the couple really have another son Charles Etienne in 1729?
What we  need is that 1729 baptism in full.
Birmingham Archives has a printed copy.
They've been shut for a year.
 But reopened today.
I went this morning.
Bad news no access till the end of the month.It's in storage,there is no procedure at present to access anything in store but there should be by the end of the month.So I'll get back to you on that.
In the meantime if anybody else has access to the Huguenot Quarter Folios -it's Volume 42 that you need.
Will carry on with a few other leads
Ciderdrinker

[ciderdrinker]

Have found marriage bond
Guillaume Paul to Ann Cazalot parish of St Bartholomew's Prope Regate Ecambums 4. May 1726.
Not sure where that it is but in London and Surrey marriage bonds.
They married at the  Artillery church 14.5.1726.)
Guilliaume Paul  native of Montpelier  (fils defeu noble) s of Charles Paul and Mdle.Antoinette Fabvre
Ann Cazalet native of Summnene en Cevenn something d of Eitenne Cazalet and Anne Abrie
Married by licence.
Signed Paul ,Anne Cazalet.Etienne Cazalet ,Peter ?aillett and John Chevalier
So it does look like the same couple.
Ciderdrinker
Ps this is the same guy marrying in 21.12.1741 to Elizabeth Tuquet,the Doctor and lawyer.

[smudwhisk]

As for William Paul surgeon etc on the marriages 1729 and 1741 ,someone mentioned there should be a freedom of the city of London for his son Charles and there is 25.5.1736 Charles Paul so of William of the Surgeons guild.If this is the same William then Charles must have been at least 21 so born 1715 ish.

If you take a closer look at the 1736 Freedom it states that the Charles Paul admitted to the Company of Surgeons was the son of William Paul of Aberdeen, Scotland, shoemaker (it's down the left hand side) and that he was admitted to the freedom by redemption.  Redemption means he paid for the freedom meaning his father wasn't a Freeman.

That Charles is NOT the same as Georgefriedrich's Charles who it has been shown was a weaver likes his descendents.  It is also not going to be Charles Etienne Paul because his father was a Lawyer & Surgeon.

[smudwhisk]

In the meantime if anybody else has access to the Huguenot Quarter Folios -it's Volume 42 that you need.

The Huguenot Society folio says that Charles Etienne Paul was born the 17 July and baptised the 5 August, therefore he couldn't have been admitted to Freedom of the Company of Surgeons in 1736 as he would have been 7 years old.

Charles Etienne Paul cannot be the same person as Charles Paul the weaver.

Ciderdrinker, as has already been discussed if your read the previous posts, Charles Paul of St Botolph Bishopsgate is more likely related to All/Hall Paul of the same parish and I believe that is the direction Georgefriedrich is looking to research.  It seems highly unlikely that someone whose father was a Lawyer and Surgeon is going to end up working as a weaver in Bishopsgate.

[DHLB]

Hi there. I've got Sansums, weavers, perching in my tree. Thomas Sansum, b 1773 Bethnal Green. silk weaver. married mary Coleman Are they the same as your Sansoms? He had apprentices. Huguenots?
Di