Nice People Thread No. 15, a Cyber Summer

PasturesNew

Last night I accidentally stumbled across the evidence I needed for the marriage of my GGG-gf.

I'd found online where somebody said Charles married a particular Mary in a church miles away and I couldn't find any formal evidence of that.... until last night. Bizarrely, in a record set that exists, but hadn't reached my workable radar. The GRO online search that gives you the mother's maiden name.

My GG-gm has an entry in the GRO giving her mother's maiden name as that same person. So that's "evidence enough" for me and it all ties in.

So then I tenuously put in 2 more generations above her from the Parish Records available online. Mary dau of Thomas/Rachel; Rachel dau of John/Elizabeth.

It's all a bit flakey, but plausible.... so it's in the tree "in pencil" so to speak. That line now starts with births in 1750. But I think I can push it back a bit further due to some settlement/removals of a couple who MIGHT be the parents of this chap.... a shoemaker apprentice.

PasturesNew

I'm also "looking for anybody whose name is spelt similarly to my family name, that lived anywhere in the Corridor of Usual Expected Movement" hoping to join them up at some point, or get a clue where Richard randomly turned up from when he married in 1827. Richard/born ~1797 is my first fella that "randomly turned up in a marriage as of this parish, but no idea where he really came from".

Trying to tie Richard into "some posh folks seem to have this name in the same 1-2 mile radius" and even a landowner in the same village. There's also a Manor 2 miles up the road.

I found a family group with the right name - and found an old document online that explained that lot away ... and they died out as cripples and drunks, but inherited great wealth from the half sister. The last of the line there left all the money to some other people if they changed their name to my family surname - so I can discount anybody from that downline being "blood related" to me.

Bizarrely, people are keen to keep the name going as this is the second will in this name where people've died and left their money to other people who have to change their name to get the money.

I've now got two lines of enquiry: the giants line (very tall) and the cripples/drunks line. I think the giants line is feasible as I did have a "giant" cousin ....

Everything always seems so feasible ... so close.

This great inherited wealth, that was then left via the half sister to the cripples/drunks was worth £200k in 1726. So the next question is where the half sister and the cripple came from.... who were they.... the half-sister married the wealth.

chris_m

PasturesNew wrote: »

I'm also "looking for anybody whose name is spelt similarly to my family name,

I once knew a guy called John New - any help?

PasturesNew

chris_m wrote: »

I once knew a guy called John New - any help?

Not really.

I've just found a huge memorial - and an online page that explains the people behind it.

It all gets very complicated without drawing it out. When you have to decipher it from somebody's writing you can lose track. Looks like:

One of the richest men in the country, Josiah, married Mary.
They had two children: Elizabeth & Josias.

Josiah died in 1703 and left his money to his children, not much to his wife Mary. Mary remarried (to George, with my family surname). Mary & George had three sons: George/John/Peter. None of them married, John was a drunk, Peter was a cripple.

Meanwhile, Mary's son Josias died, so Elizabeth inherited her brother's share, so now owned a vast fortune. But she had no children.

Elizabeth then left the entire estate of "one of the richest men in the country" to these three hapless half brothers.

The money was then all passed to people "not related", instead of going back up the tree and across and down .... I might be "one of those who might've inherited it if it'd moved round the family tree instead of to outsiders".

I need to find out who George was.... we're in the first half of the 1700s at this point.

He shouldn't be hard to find ... famous last words.

Pyxis

chris_m wrote: »

I once knew a guy called John New - any help?

:rotfl:



What's the Corridor of Usual Expected Movement?
The one from the classroom to the Head's office?



Re. the inherited wealth if you change your name....... What's to stop you changing your name, getting the loot, then changing it back again?
Is there a clause to say you have to keep it changed for x years, and if so, who would police it?
I suppose if there were other people who would get it,if you didn't change your name, they would police it. There must be cut-off date, though, I'd have thought.



I don't know for sure, but I think that these days it's quite difficult to impose conditions. Say, like, "provided the beneficiary remains unmarried". I don't think that would be allowed.

Any will lawyers on here?

PasturesNew

Pyxis wrote: »

Re. the inherited wealth if you change your name....... What's to stop you changing your name, getting the loot, then changing it back again?
Is there a clause to say you have to keep it changed for x years, and if so, who would police it?
I suppose if there were other people who would get it,if you didn't change your name, they would police it. There must be cut-off date, though, I'd have thought.

The two times I've now found it, in both instances they become double-barrelled. "Happy to take your money, add your name, but not REPLACING my name".

I guess that to be in a position of inheriting "great wealth" you'd have most likely already been "somebody, with a family name" - and keen to keep it.

So, of the two, both just went double barrelled.

Wentworth-Stanley http://www.thepeerage.com/p41070.htm#i410696
Sclater-Bacon http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1715-1754/member/sclater-thomas-1664-1736

If somebody offered you, say, £2million to £10million to change your surname to your mother's maiden name, would you? I'd be there in a shot

Even an uncle's wife's maiden name.

Heck, it's free money - who wouldn't!

For £1million I'd change my name to most things

Miss PN Chuckle Bum Burnt Fart .... Yep. I'd do that.
Miss PN Fartypants the Drunk .... why not?

There's no shame in greed if nobody's hurt is there.

PasturesNew

I think I'm onto the "why".... rich woman doesn't leave her money to her husband, she leaves it to her half brothers.

It looks like the husband was most likely kn0bbing the coachman's wife, probably producing babies.... a darned good reason to ensure he doesn't get his hands on your dosh.

I suspect he was probably a chancer. Aged 51 when he married the heiress aged 21, he got a fortune for changing his name ... he did that ... and was probably a bit of a rogue to start with, so was carrying on with all sorts of women. Wife realised she'd married a dud, who'd married her for the money ... so made sure he didn't get it.

vivatifosi

I've been doing some work on my mum's mum's line. I have a bit of an advantage with most of my lines as some of my relatives have already worked on them.

What I like about this line is that for the not quite 300 years that I have records for, the furthest away that they lived from where I am now is about 10 miles. Plenty of opportunities to visit graveyards, view records etc.

Many of them worked in the straw plaiting industry, which was notoriously poorly paid. My gg grandparents in this line went bankrupt at one point and ended up in the workhouse. No right honourables in this line (or the others as far as I am aware).

PasturesNew

Well, nailed the "who was the man that owned the Abbey - he sounds close enough to be a relative". It turns out that the Abbey was part of the massive inheritance, one of the three brothers.

So now I know who owned the Abbey - that he had no children that could've been my ancestors; that he inherited it from his sister - and she inherited it from an entirely different family.

So that's nailed that one finally. My ancestors did not own the Abbey. Great. Another piece of the jigsaw fitted together of "who is related to who" - and this chap who "might have been" in my tree definitely isn't a direct upline!

P.S. It's not a big or impressive Abbey.
http://www.dennyfarmlandmuseum.org.uk/content/things-to-see/history-of-denny-abbey

Not a posh alert ... it's a "definitely not posh here then" flag as it's "not mine".

PasturesNew

vivatifosi wrote: »

.... advantage ... relatives have already worked on them.

... for the not quite 300 years ... 10 miles. Plenty of opportunities to visit graveyards, view records etc.

Big advantage. I'm working an area that starts in a village in ~1820 but the family name seems to cover a bigger area, up to 10-15 miles, with these tantalising glimpses of "he might be related/he looks a bit rich" that have all been dead ends so far.

I am 200-250 miles from there, so no chance to do anything.

I am relying on all the free sites + the local searchable archives.

The trouble with archives is they get a bunch of random boxes that they stack in a room. Randomly somebody will choose a bunch of boxes to open, or a room to index. They'll then write that up online... but many boxes and many rooms are unopened.

I just found some information in a collection that had been indexed - and indexed sufficiently for me to know what's in the box and to understand "who lived where/when". If that box had never been opened, nor indexed, I'd have never known that "John is the one in T"; "Peter is the one in W -and- he's the one in P -and- he's the one in Suffolk -and- he's the one at C". Having inherited a fortune and entire villages and lots of buildings, he lived for a further 54 years, so had plenty of time to get about a bit and pop up seemingly randomly with the family name. So this "Thornhill Collection" helps me to nail some of his locations/dates and know they are the same bloke.

One day "the right box I want" might be opened, it might be indexed .. heck, it might even be scanned and online

I've just found, online, that the chap who inherited the Abbey was sued in 1760 for the tithes. His defence was that he didn't have to pay a tithe, because of royal grants in 1614 and 1628 which conveyed the lands tithe free, because of the old monastic exemption. He lost and had to pay. Vicar was pleased as that gave raised his income from £39/year to £140!

Edit:
Ah, the drunk, who died in 1761 had a wife! Nobody else mentioned her, but this source is sound. So now I need to find out who she was and triple check they didn't have kids.