Father of Thomas Smith born Hanslope, Northamptonshire, England

[Orpheus]

OK, so shall we attack this from a different direction!

Thomas SMITH seems to be quite consistent in the various census returns that his birthplace was Hanslope.  He also states that his father's name is Thomas. 

Although there are at least two Thomas SMITHs baptised at Hanslope about the right time, none of them has a father named Thomas.  However, there is a baptism for a William, son of Thomas and Susannah SMITH on 22 Nov 1822 - this being the only baptism I can find at about the right time with a father named Thomas.  Thomas and Susannah didn't get married in Hanslope, nor can I find burials for them.  Where did they get married?  Did they have a son named Thomas before moving to Hanslope where William was born?

[:sjl]

OK, so shall we attack this from a different direction!

alright

Thomas SMITH seems to be quite consistent in the various census returns that his birthplace was Hanslope.  He also states that his father's name is Thomas.

this was confirmed on his marriage certificate  

Although there are at least two Thomas SMITHs baptised at Hanslope about the right time, none of them has a father named Thomas.

agree

  However, there is a baptism for a William, son of Thomas and Susannah SMITH on 22 Nov 1822 - this being the only baptism I can find at about the right time with a father named Thomas.

Didn't notice that one

  Thomas and Susannah didn't get married in Hanslope, nor can I find burials for them.
 
ok

 Where did they get married?

 Did they have a son named Thomas before moving to Hanslope where William was born?

I can understand your thinking, but WHERE does that leave me???

I was also trying to think outside the box and was wondering if maybe Thomas was not the FIRST name of the father??? but maybe his middle name....so he was perhaps for example William Thomas Smith --- but went by Thomas.

but I still didn't find anything from a quick look that would make that work in Hanslope.... I don't think, I will look again.

thanks for helping me out

:sjl

[smudwhisk]

Joseph Smith may simply have been visiting his maternal grandparents at the time the 1851 Census was taken, which is why he appears on that entry, rather than actually living with them.  It's not unusual, nor is it that unusual to find some people appearing twice on the same census.  OK you'd expect him to be listed as a visitor, but this isn't always the case.

Eliza Read was more than likely born in Wicken because the family came from Wicken, and were there for many generations before.  She, like her father and siblings, were all baptised in Wicken.  Jemima Read the witness to her marriage was indeed her sister, she married Henry Onan/Owen in 1846 in Wicken.  Both of Eliza's parents were buried in Wicken in 1877 and 1882.  There are, as I'm sure you have found, numerous trees on ancestry for this Read family, although with varying degrees of accuracy.  I've been researching them for almost 15 years but don't have any further information on Eliza's husband Thomas Smith.

One thing to bear in mind with the marriage certificate.  As Sandy has said in relation inaccuracies on Census entries, it's not impossible that Thomas's father is listed incorrectly on his marriage even if he was literate.  I've a few examples of this and still wonder how it could have happened.  The trick is going to be finding a Thomas Smith to a father who is a game keeper in light of one not existing in Hanslope.  Not necessarily an easy task with Smith being a common surname.  I have Smith ancestors in Suffolk and have a similar problem.

Sharon, I know you have said on one thread you are not prepared to spend any money on this research but I really do think you would be well advised to spend £3, which can be paid online and received via email, to get a 100 year search of all Smith baptisms in Buckinghamshire covering the period perhaps 1760-1860 to see if any Thomas Smiths are born to a father who is a gamekeeper (you may well catch Thomas and Eliza's children baptisms in that time period too).  David I believe has given you a link to the Bucks FHS website search facility on your other RC post.  The single search option isn't as cost effective as a blanket 100 year search and all you need to provide them with is the surname and any variants (such as Smyth(e) or Smithe perhaps) and the 100 year period required.  It won't involve any issues of giving wrong information.  At least then you would be able to see if there were any Smith gamekeepers in the county which may eliminate or confirm who your Thomas' father is. 

I've had a quick look on the non-conformist indexes on ancestry but there don't appear to be any obvious Thomas Smith baptisms on there so it's probably more likely he was baptised Church of England.

Nicola

[:sjl]

Re: Father of Thomas Smith born Hanslope, Northamptonshire, England
« Reply #11 on: Today at 19:26 »
Quote

Joseph Smith may simply have been visiting his maternal grandparents at the time the 1851 Census was taken, which is why he appears on that entry, rather than actually living with them.  It's not unusual, nor is it that unusual to find some people appearing twice on the same census.  OK you'd expect him to be listed as a visitor, but this isn't always the case.

I might have eventually come to this conclusion, not sure, but as you say it doesn't prove that he lived there.  okay I get it

Not sure why Sandy has suggested otherwise, but Eliza Read was more than likely born in Wicken because the family came from Wicken, and were there for many generations before.  She, like her father and siblings, were all baptised in Wicken.  Jemima Read the witness to her marriage was indeed her sister, she married Henry Onan/Owen in 1846 in Wicken.  Both of Eliza's parents were buried in Wicken in 1877 and 1882.  There are, as I'm sure you have found, numerous trees on ancestry for this Read family, although with varying degrees of accuracy.  I've been researching them for almost 15 years but don't have any further information on Eliza's husband Thomas Smith.

Yes, most definitely have found some trees on ancestry with the wrong info, amazing how some folks just add whatever, but I do try to add ACCURATE info...

I did find the Oman/Owen tree also, and wondered about the name, but found an answer on Ancestry about that, which pretty well cleared up the problem

If you have been researching this line for 15 years, would I be jumping to a conclusion to say that you are connected to this line?  If so HOW?

One thing to bear in mind with the marriage certificate.  As Sandy has said in relation inaccuracies on Census entries, it's not impossible that Thomas's father is listed incorrectly on his marriage even if he was literate.

one would suppose that you know your father's given name, but again, as I mentioned in a previous reply it might have been his MIDDLE name..

it seems nothing is EVER written in stone.  even when you appear to have the proof in your hands. the information is only as correct as the person giving it is aware !!! - does that make sense? I think you know what I mean.


  I've a few examples of this and still wonder how it could have happened.

 The trick is going to be finding a Thomas Smith to a father who is a game keeper in light of one not existing in Hanslope.


  Not necessarily an easy task with Smith being a common surname.  I have Smith ancestors in Suffolk and have a similar problem.

Sharon, I know you have said on one thread you are not prepared to spend any money on this research but I really do think you would be well advised to spend £3, which can be paid online and received via email, to get a 100 year search of all Smith baptisms in Buckinghamshire covering the period perhaps 1760-1860 to see if any Thomas Smiths are born to a father who is a gamekeeper (you may well catch Thomas and Eliza's children baptisms in that time period too).  David I believe has given you a link to the Bucks FHS website search facility on your other RC post.  The single search option isn't as cost effective as a blanket 100 year search and all you need to provide them with is the surname and any variants (such as Smyth(e) or Smithe perhaps) and the 100 year period required.  It won't involve any issues of giving wrong information.  At least then you would be able to see if there were any Smith gamekeepers in the county which may eliminate or confirm who your Thomas' father is. 

no offence to anyone else that suggested this, but I like your thinking much better, sorry I like to get a big bang for my buck....

will see about doing as you suggested.

I've had a quick look on the non-conformist indexes on ancestry but there don't appear to be any obvious Thomas Smith baptisms on there so it's probably more likely he was baptised Church of England.

sorry not sure what this means....other than the obvious.

again I appreciate your help

:sjl

Nicola

[smudwhisk]

If you have been researching this line for 15 years, would I be jumping to a conclusion to say that you are connected to this line?  If so HOW?

Eliza Read's great grandparents Thomas and Jemima nee Ironmonger (who didn't die in London at the age of over a 100 as quoted by so many ancesty tree's ) were my 6x great grandparents.

I've had a quick look on the non-conformist indexes on ancestry but there don't appear to be any obvious Thomas Smith baptisms on there so it's probably more likely he was baptised Church of England.

sorry not sure what this means....other than the obvious.

again I appreciate your help

:sjl

In addition to the normal parish churches which were Church of England, you also get a number of non-conformist (ie. didn't conform to Church of England) "denominations" for want of a better word.  This would include, but not exhaustive, catholic, quaker, baptists, methodists et al.

As regard's Thomas' father's name, it could just be plain incorrect and not even a middle name.  I've an ancestor whose father was Isaac, yet his sister's marriage entry lists their father as Thomas yet both she and her mother, who was a witness, were both literate.

There is also the possibility that Thomas could have been illegitimate and his mother married a Smith at a later date.  Then his step father could have been Thomas Smith.  There is also a possibility his mother was the Smith and the father's  name is fabricated I'm afraid.  My grandmother's cousin was illegitimate and they fabricated a father for the birth certificate and his mother used her mother's maiden name as her own maiden name even though she wasn't married.  Unfortunately it does happen and doesn't help us poor researchers.

[:sjl]

Eliza Read's great grandparents Thomas and Jemima nee Ironmonger (who didn't die in London at the age of over a 100 as quoted by so many ancesty tree's ) were my 6x great grandparents.

my husband has to go back 9 generations to get to them, but is directly connected to them.

so you are distant....very distant relations.....


As regard's Thomas' father's name, it could just be plain incorrect and not even a middle name.  I've an ancestor whose father was Isaac, yet his sister's marriage entry lists their father as Thomas yet both she and her mother, who was a witness, were both literate.

yeah I can see that happening....

There is also the possibility that Thomas could have been illegitimate and his mother married a Smith at a later date.  Then his step father could have been Thomas Smith.  There is also a possibility his mother was the Smith and the father's  name is fabricated I'm afraid.  My grandmother's cousin was illegitimate and they fabricated a father for the birth certificate and his mother used her mother's maiden name as her own maiden name even though she wasn't married.  Unfortunately it does happen and doesn't help us poor researchers.


no kidding.....thanks for another explanation

:sjl

[smudwhisk]

OK, this could put the cat amongst the pidgeons so to speak.  It's been bothering me that the Thomas Smith who was in Lillingstone Dayrell was variously a farmer and agricultural labourer, yet your Thomas is listed as a cordwainer on his marriage certificate.  As Sandy has enquired, did he come into an inheritance or something?  Not impossible but seems less likely that a cordwainer would become a farmer.

So that got me thinking.  Is the Thomas Smith in Lillingstone Dayrell the correct Thomas Smith, especially as his wife Eliza/Elizabeth is listed on at least two census as being born in Potterspury?  As they were living not that far from Northamptonshire it's less likely she'd perhaps list her birthplace incorrectly and, as I've mentioned, the Read family are in Wicken for many generations, although some branches do move elsewhere.

So I had a search on another site for a Thomas Smith cordwainer and not just in Northamptonshire.  Interestingly on the 1851 Census in Passenham is a Thomas Smith with wife Hannah and step son Joab Jones (probably Job Jones).  That Thomas Smith is born in Thornton, Buckinghamshire.  Thomas Smith and Hannah Jones married Sept qtr 1850 in Potterspury Registration District.  That got me thinking, so I had a look on the NBI and there is a burial in Wicken on 12 April 1846 of an Eliza Smith aged 26 years.  As Eliza Read was baptised May 1819, she may not have been 27 years old yet in April 1846.  Now I'm not saying that definately is Eliza but it would explain why her son Joseph is resident with his maternal grandparents on the 1851 Census.  If his father had remarried, he may not have wanted a child from a previous relationship living with him, although if that was your Thomas he obviously has a stepson with him.  It may have been that Joseph didn't want to live with his father and stepmother, he would of course have been almost 9 years old.

I only have the Northants Marriage Index to 1837 so can't confirm where Thomas Smith and the widow Hannah Jones married unfortunately.  One ancestry tree for her son Job James Jones lists her as Hannah Bailey and the information listed about her son Job ties in with the 1851 and 1861 Census when he is resident with Thomas Smith and Hannah.  That tree claims she is in Scotland in 1861 but I suspect that person hasn't really looked into what happened to her closely.

If anyone can confirm where that marriage took place and/or the details about who the father of this Thomas Smith is, it may confirm or refute my suspicians that the Lillingstone Dayrell family are not the correct one.  I note several ancestry trees list them as being the same couple but none appear to have any birth certificates of the children to definately confirm this.

Nicola

[smudwhisk]

To add to the possible Thomas Smith in Passenham, there is a Thomas Smith in Thornton on 1841 Census who is a gamekeeper.

1841 Census
Thos Smith 40 Gamekeeper
Maria Smith 40
Daniel Adams 75 gardener
Mary Smith 20 Lacemaker
Eliza Smith 15
John Smith 14
Ann Smith 10
Susanna Smith 7
William Smith 5
Joseph Smith 1

1851 Census, this would seem to be the most likely candidate:

Tattenhoe, Buckinghamshire
Thomas Smith Head 56 years agricultural labourer born Whaddon
Sarah Smith Wife 54 years born Ashton
William Smith Son 15 years agricultural labourer born Thornton
Joseph Smith Son 11 years agricultural labourer born Thornton

Three of the daughters are living elsewhere in the county, one visiting her married sister.

It's possible that Thomas' wife is incorrectly listed on the 1841 Census as Maria, or he may have remarried between the two Census.

Admittedly Thomas Smith senior in 1851 is an agricultural labourer, but I can't find any other Smiths born in Thornton, Buckinghamshire, other than this family, and a gamekeeper who had fallen on hard times could very well find himself working as an agricultural labourer.

In light of this, I think you really need to confirm whether or not the Thomas Smith who married Hannah Jones/Bailey in 1850 was the son of a Thomas Smith, gamekeeper or possibly agricultural labourer in light of the 1851 Census entry.

If you wanted to be certain the Eliza Smith burial in 1846 in Wicken is your Eliza, you would need to get her death certificate to confirm she was the wife of Thomas Smith, cordwainer, as that information won't be available though any other means.  There are a few other Smith burials in Wicken but nothing obvious to say she was somebody else's wife.  There is interestingly an Elizabeth Smith buried in there in 1846 aged 2 years.  Another child perhaps?

Nicola

[mgeneas]

This appears to be the marriage of the Lillingstone Dayrell couple (found in the online Northants strays index)

Thomas   SMITH   otp, full age, bachelor, timber carrier, father John, labourer   
Eliza   WOODWARD of Potterspury, full age, spinster, lacemaker, father Thomas, groom
1849   16-Feb   at Lillingstone Dayrell BKM

And this is the other marriage mentioned above
Thomas   SMITH   of Stony Stratford, widower, age 30, shoe maker, father Thomas, labourer
Hannah   JONES   of Puxley, widow, age 28, lacemaker, father John Bailey, labourer   
1850   30-Sep   at Passenham

There is    a SMITH family of Game keepers living in Horton, Northants in the 1841 census.