George William Rutland - never at home

[Panoply]

My gr-gr-grandfather is proving to be a bit of a hassle to track after 1881. I've only been doing the genealogy thing for a few months, so I'm hoping some more experienced eyes will see through this wall.

Here's what I know from certificates:
George married Edith Miriam Waters in St Olave, London in Oct 1891. He's listed as being a harness maker, and his father is listed as Matthias Rutland.
George's son Matthias Stephen was born May 1896 in Camberwell, London. George registers the birth 6 weeks later in June, and is listed as a harness maker (master).

I used censuses and freeReg parish records to find George as born in 1869 in Guist, Norfolk, to Matthew/Mathias (presumably just a misreading of Matthias? although George also had a brother called Matthew, so maybe dad couldn't decide what his name was!) and Alice. He's at home with his parents and siblings in 1871 and 1881, and then he vanishes. I can't find him anywhere in the 1891, 1901 or 1911 censuses, and I can't find a death. In 1891 Edith (born 1872) is with her parents in Holborn, London.

George and Edith had four children (I'm presuming they're all his though I only have certificates to confirm one). In 1901 they're with their mum and her parents in Dartford, Kent (the eldest 3 born in London, the youngest born 2 years prior in Kent). In 1911 Edith and her eldest have moved to Bishops Stortford in Hertfordshire and are working as laundresses, the second born is working as a domestic cook in Brentford, Middlesex, and the youngest two children are being raised by their grandparents in Brentford, Middlesex.

So where is George all this time? Edith lists herself as married, not widowed, so I'm led to believe he's not died along the way. I can't find any record of him as going oversees, or joining the military, although maybe someone wiser might find something or have other suggestions.

I'd be happy to hear anything about him - I found a George Rutland in an asylum in Kent in 1901 and got excited, but the age is difficult to read, no birthplace is listed, and he's a single labourer, which put me off the scent. He must be out there somewhere. That I can't find him in 1891, mere months before he married, is really frustrating.

Sorry for all this waffle - I wanted to give as much detail as possible, but not go too overboard (I might have failed at that I think!)

Thank you for any help and/or advice!

[davidwyatt6]

Panoply, Sorry I can't add to your information concerning George, in fact you added a few things for my tree. George is my 3x removed and I have quite (I Think) an extensive Rutland tree put together.

Please feel free to contact me.

[AdeleE]

Welcome to B-G forums!

If his parents are still alive on the 1911 census, how many children were born to the family and how many are still alive, according to the enumeration image?

Can you account for any who have died?

[Geoffers]

Welcome to the B-G forums - see the above messages, especially the one from davidwyatt6


I used censuses and freeReg parish records to find George as born in 1869 in Guist, Norfolk, to Matthew/Mathias (presumably just a misreading of Matthias?

Spelling of names wasn't particularly standardised then, variations on a theme are found frequently


That I can't find him in 1891, mere months before he married, is really frustrating

I see that in 1871 the family appears to be in Durham - RG10/4909 f7 p8; but by 1881 they're back in Norfolk - RG11/1982 f88 p14 (references to census in care of TNA). If your chap was in transit somewhere in 1891 (perhaps to London), he could easily be missed from the census. It is always worth searching the census for someone just by initials - just in case they were in some institution (asylum, prison, etc) - institutions do often record an age and birthplace, but sometimes get this detail wrong.


I found a George Rutland in an asylum in Kent in 1901 and got excited, but the age is difficult to read, no birthplace is listed, and he's a single labourer, which put me off the scent.

In your shoes I wouldn't be put off the scent just by that - what is recorded in your source depends on what the people who looked after him knew of their charge. Have you looked to see if any records of the institution survive?

Is there any suggestion of your chap having been born illegitimate? - Have you found a marriage for his parents?

Was the 1896 birth, the last known child for this couple?

Have you checked the army deaths indices to see if there was a George/William RUTLAND shown as having died whilst serving in the army?

[AnjaliUK]

I found two George Rutlands b. abt. 1869 in Guist, Norfolk, in the 1891 and 1901 censuses, which you probably found already:

One (George J) married to a Phoebe in 1891, then widowed in 1901 (George James), a draper's assistant RG13 4764).

One the son of Maria in 1891, a bricklayer
One, possibly the same one, a shepherd married to Harriet in 1901 (RG13 1876)

Although the information doesn't match, it may be worth looking into, as I only found one George Rutland b. abt. 1869 Guist, Norfolk in 1871 and 1881 - if both/all three 1891/1901 guys aren't your George, then there really should be more matches in the earlier censuses. Could just be they're missing or gave put a different place of birth, but could be the start of an interesting mystery...

If you haven't checked censuses from other countries, that could help. One of my ancestor's husband's showed up after being missing from about 3 censuses. Another researcher thought they had found him in a US census.

Another option is bigamy. If you suspect that, you could prove it by seeing if the same father's name is on the other marriage certificates, although it's an expensive theory at £7 a certificate!

There are also apparently some cases of people being widowed then pretending to still be married to hide the fact their children are illegitimate. Staying with her parents in 1891 could have encouraged her to lie about this, or maybe they lied to keep up appearances with the neighbours. I don't know how you would prove this theory, as his name could still be on the birth certificates. Perhaps by finding his death?

Lastly, he could be a soldier or at sea. The records might be difficult to track down or non-existent!

Just some ideas :)

[Panoply]

Wow! Thank you all for your replies and welcomes! I knew I could rely on the BG forum to offer warm greetings and clever suggestions.

David, I will get in touch with you forthwith - can't wait to hear how we're related, and what you know of our ancestors.

Adele, I'm not sure which "his parents" you're referring to, but in the 1911 census Edith says that she has been married for 20 years (which fits with her marriage to George in 1891) and has four children born and still living (which fits with what I know). As for George's parents, they cite 10 children born, 2 died. Up until replying to your post I could only account for 9 of those children, but you've reminded me to track the missing one down, and I found the little lad born and died aged three in Durham, a few years before they return to Norfolk. Thanks for the reminder :)

Geoffers, yes; George's family moved about a bit, for what reason I don't know. Their eldest two were born in Norfolk, then four born in Durham, one died, and the remaining four children born back in Norfolk, where another died. I did consider he might be in transit in 1891, since the census is taken just a few months before he marries, but am still hoping he's just snuck away mistranscribed in an inn somewhere! I've tried every combination I can think of, even trying people based on ages and locations rather than names.
The George Rutland in Kent in 1901 is in Darenth Asylum, and is listed as an imbecile. I've taken a second look at it, and the way it's been crossed off - with a thick black line through the first digit of the age - what the transcriber has interpreted as 34, I think is 84. Especially since a George Rutland dies in that quarter in the district, aged 84. I took a look back through previous censuses, and there's a wealth of George Rutlands born in the 1817 bracket listed in asylums and workhouses, so I'm fairly certain this George isn't my George.
To your final questions: George wouldn't have been illegitimate; having been born in Norfolk and thanks to the wonderful freeReg, I've seen a transcribed copy of his baptism record and his parents marriage record. George and Edith's children were born in 1892, 1893, 1896 (all London) and 1899 (Kent). I've checked all I can find of military records, and can find no mention of George. I can't say I'm very proficient with the military records though, so I may be looking under the wrong stones.

Phew - if you're still reading I commend you! I should probably have stopped writing half an hour ago!

Anjali, you bring up an interesting point, and your post and your mention of mystery made me smile. When I first started looking into this line George's absence caused me to go in totally the wrong direction. Since I didn't know where he was born I grabbed the first George William Rutland I found and started plotting his tree, not stopping to think that he might be the wrong George. It was months of effort later that I happened to pop the newfound details into the later years... and found him married to the wrong woman. I immediately invented an intrigue - a scoundrel bigamist, the poor second wife raising her children alone, moving closer to the secret husband and his "real" family. I immediately ordered real George and wrong George's marriage certificates, and my imaginary ancestry was dashed - wrong father, wrong job, wrong home. I sadly put that tree to the side (if anyone has relations of George William Rutland from Gravenhurst, Bedfordshire, I have a fair sized chunk of tree and tons of census and BMD records that're yours for the taking!) and started again, though I must say my real tree is far more interesting - I'll take exile to Australia over humble country living any day!
Anyway, I digress! How would I go about viewing census from other countries? And where are you buying your certificates that you're only paying £7? I've been getting mine at the GRO, and paying £9.25. I get the feeling I'm going to end up buying a lot of certificates in the hope that he turns up somewhere - surely he'd come to his childrens' weddings, right?

Well, this is quite long enough! Thank you for your brilliant suggestions, and for making it this far through my ramble. It's wonderful fun talking to other genealogists about genealogical theories - I fear my family have had enough of me talking about dead people!

[AdeleE]

As for George's parents, they cite 10 children born, 2 died. Up until replying to your post I could only account for 9 of those children, but you've reminded me to track the missing one down, and I found the little lad born and died aged three in Durham, a few years before they return to Norfolk. Thanks for the reminder :)


Was one of the 10 children a girl named Hannah born 1881 and died 1898? If so, then there would be 8 children still alive in 1911 and George would have to be one of those 8 children still alive somewhere in 1911 in order for the math to work.

[Panoply]

Was one of the 10 children a girl named Hannah born 1881 and died 1898? If so, then there would be 8 children still alive in 1911 and George would have to be one of those 8 children still alive somewhere in 1911 in order for the math to work.

Yep, Henry and Hannah died before their time. D'you know, it never occurred to me that that is a sign that he's still around. Thanks for pointing it out! Silly of me to miss something right in front of my nose!

[AdeleE]

Although you seem to have spent more than your fair share at the GRO, I'd suggest that you buy the birth certificate of the last child:


George and Edith's children were born in 1892, 1893, 1896 (all London) and 1899 (Kent).

just to see if George is still around as the informant, and to see if his occupation is still harness-maker.

[ShirleySS]

Hello Panoply
I would be very interested to see where your research with this man has taken you as I have lost one too.
Mine is on the 1881 Census in Watford. I know the daughter, Mary C Rutland is my husbands Grandmother and lived in Bedfordshire in 1911. If you could PM me I would be very grateful
ShirleySS

[Geoffers]

George's family moved about a bit, for what reason I don't know.

Work - most migration was in search of a living and historically there has always been a lot of migration along the east coast.

You mentioned him being a harness maker. In case you haven't tried, you might look to see if he served in the army - I believe the medal rolls are now available on the pay-per-view site 'ancestry', have a look to see if someone with your chap's name may be found in the South African (Boer) War. It might be a starting point to look for surviving military records.

[AnjaliUK]

Anjali, you bring up an interesting point, and your post and your mention of mystery made me smile. When I first started looking into this line George's absence caused me to go in totally the wrong direction. Since I didn't know where he was born I grabbed the first George William Rutland I found and started plotting his tree, not stopping to think that he might be the wrong George. It was months of effort later that I happened to pop the newfound details into the later years... and found him married to the wrong woman. I immediately invented an intrigue - a scoundrel bigamist, the poor second wife raising her children alone, moving closer to the secret husband and his "real" family. I immediately ordered real George and wrong George's marriage certificates, and my imaginary ancestry was dashed - wrong father, wrong job, wrong home. I sadly put that tree to the side (if anyone has relations of George William Rutland from Gravenhurst, Bedfordshire, I have a fair sized chunk of tree and tons of census and BMD records that're yours for the taking!) and started again, though I must say my real tree is far more interesting - I'll take exile to Australia over humble country living any day!
Anyway, I digress! How would I go about viewing census from other countries? And where are you buying your certificates that you're only paying £7? I've been getting mine at the GRO, and paying £9.25. I get the feeling I'm going to end up buying a lot of certificates in the hope that he turns up somewhere - surely he'd come to his childrens' weddings, right?

It sounds like you've been very thorough already!

I know you can see some overseas census records on the most expensive Ancestry subscription. Perhaps if a nice person who already has the membership sees this, they will have a quick look and send you a private message :)

I got the certificates from the GRO, but haven't bought one for a while so I probably just remembered it wrong.

I read a statistic today that there were far more married women than men in the censuses, with a discrepancy of a fair few thousand. So that is one option, but the other evidence you have does seem to suggest he is alive somewhere!

[Panoply]

Although you seem to have spent more than your fair share at the GRO, I'd suggest that you buy the birth certificate of the last childjust to see if George is still around as the informant, and to see if his occupation is still harness-maker.

Have I really spent more than my fair share? Do people tend not to buy the certificates?

Anyway, I think I shall do as you suggest. Unfortunately the last-born is of the least interest to me, as she died when she was 25, whilst the other siblings lived to a good old age and so were around to be in living memory. I think I might order the first born's certificate also, since she is well remembered by my mother and has an extra bit of interest - George's youngest sister was born in 1888, named Edith Emily Redberry (I know this from the parish baptism record), then George's first was born in 1892 and named Edith Emily B... I'd love if that B was for Blueberry!

Ooh... I've just had a thought... George and Edith married Oct 31st 1891, and then baby Edith was born January 13th 1892 (I "know" this since she was on a birthday card list I found, and her birth was definitely registered in the first quarter anyway). Sounds like an unplanned pregnancy and a rushed wedding - maybe George was living in sin and didn't want to put it down on the census (although I thought this would be more a female thing to do, and I've seen many future couples living together on censuses). Still doesn't explain why he's not in the 1901 or 1911 censuses though.

Shirley - I'll PM you regarding your George! Tricky fellows aren't they!


Work - most migration was in search of a living and historically there has always been a lot of migration along the east coast.
You mentioned him being a harness maker. In case you haven't tried, you might look to see if he served in the army - I believe the medal rolls are now available on the pay-per-view site 'ancestry'

If nothing else this thread is really helping me open my eyes to the information I already have. Since there's been so much going into my head putting it all together from pieces, I'd not really stopped to look at it as a whole. George's father was consistently an agricultural labourer - except for the one census (1871) when he was in Durham working as a plate layer. He must have taken the family up there to help with the railway expansion, and once that was done they trudged back to Norfolk and returned to their old life. Quite the distance to go just for some railway, must've paid well!

I looked at that site over the past weekend while the records were free, and couldn't find anything. There are so many George Rutlands and the medal rolls don't really tell you anything. The pension and service records are fascinating, but none of them matched my George. Did find some other relatives, including wonderful detailed information on George's brother Matthew - including a 1994 letter from his son inquiring about his service (I would love very dearly if this man were still alive, but he'd be 88 now so I may be pushing my luck).

Finally, I just found a death record for a 79 year old George Rutland in East Dereham (aka where my George was born) in 1948. I think I may have to buy it to see if it's him. The dates fit perfectly. Though even if it is him, doesn't mean the record will prove it - knowing my luck a neighbour would be the informant!

Anjali - I have my fingers crossed someone will take a look for me. I'm already subscribed to FMP and love it for its ease of use. I've found Ancestry to be quite confusing to navigate, and don't want to fork out another subscription!
I wonder why there's so many more married women than men. That's so strange. Men dodging the paperwork, eh?

[Geoffers]

George's father was consistently an agricultural labourer - except for the one census (1871) when he was in Durham working as a plate layer. He must have taken the family up there to help with the railway expansion, and once that was done they trudged back to Norfolk and returned to their old life. Quite the distance to go just for some railway, must've paid well!

Life for an ag.lab in Norfolk could be a very uncertain affair and many adverts were posted over time telling people of the geat opportunities for work in the urban north. Many stayed in these industrial areas, but I would guess that quite a few longed to be back with the familiar, if only so that they could have someone whose accent and dialect they could understand; and so wandered back to good ol'Norfick.



Finally, I just found a death record for a 79 year old George Rutland in East Dereham

Depending on where you are - if you have a county record office anywhere nearby, try giving them a call to ask if they have the Probate Calendar on film and the coverage in time (If they have it for the period when this ol'bor popped his clogs see if you need to book a film reader). The calendar itself is easy to use and will tell you when and where someone died, and to whom probate/admon was granted - if this was a relative, the relationship is often provided as well.

Fare y'well tergether

[susan-y]

What about the George Rutland born in Guist, Norfolk in 1870 with a wife Harriett and living in Sculthorpe in 1911..... could the bigamy idea perhaps be true? ... Or were they a family where all brothers named their children the same names?

Sue

[Panoply]

Life for an ag.lab in Norfolk could be a very uncertain affair and many adverts were posted over time telling people of the geat opportunities for work in the urban north. Many stayed in these industrial areas, but I would guess that quite a few longed to be back with the familiar, if only so that they could have someone whose accent and dialect they could understand; and so wandered back to good ol'Norfick.
If you have a county record office anywhere nearby, try giving them a call to ask if they have the Probate Calendar on film and the coverage in time (If they have it for the period when this ol'bor popped his clogs see if you need to book a film reader).

Thank you for this interesting info Geoffers. Really gives some context as to why they moved, and how they knew where to go for the work.
Your take on the Norfolk accent also inspired me to go find a recording of a Norfolk-er talking. I've never been there or knowingly heard anyone from there speaking, so now I know what my ancestors would've sounded like!
I looked up my local county record office (and what probate meant!), but they don't hold records late enough, or for outside of the county. Oh well.

Thanks for the suggestion Sue, but I'm leaning away from the bigamy idea now. Tracing George from George and Harriett back seems to leave a George with a Maria as mother, whilst my George's mum was definitely Alice/"Allas" (I wonder who can't spell!)

I just thought I found the death of George's wife Edith, but upon thinking how she would've been known by my grandfather I remembered I'd written down a bunch of people ("gran" etc.) and dates and never known who was who... so I found the papers and checked and I'm glad I did. The Edith I thought I'd found was not my Edith, as my Edith died in Ealing in 1961. Not Kent in 1947 as I'd just thought! Bit of a difference there!

UGH! And on that same piece of paper was the death of "aunt Tib" who I'd never been able to pinpoint. I've still no idea why she was known as Tib, as she was in fact the youngest of George's children - Eva Jessie W. I'd thought she'd died when she was 25, and I have no idea why I did. The "proof" I had was ridiculous. I dread to think what else I have had sitting in front of my blind eyes all this time. I think I need to go re-read one of the "stupid mistakes" forums to cheer myself up :P

I hope my ancestors are having a good laugh at me!

[Geoffers]

Thank you for this interesting info Geoffers. Really gives some context as to why they moved, and how they knew where to go for the work.
Your take on the Norfolk accent also inspired me to go find a recording of a Norfolk-er talking. I've never been there or knowingly heard anyone from there speaking, so now I know what my ancestors would've sounded like!

If you have Norfolk ancestry, you should read about the dialect. The 'Boy John Letters' are brilliant and there are some really good books that can help you to understand about Norfick - books by Colin Skipper e.g. Normal for Norfolk; David Stannards 'Broader Norfolk' en do yew hev a look at that Friends of Norfolk Dialect (FOND) web-site en yew can larn ye'self some Norfick - you'll find all about bishy-barney-bees, dickeys, erriwiggles, floaters, harnsers, what it is to mardle, etc

[Panoply]

do yew hev a look at that Friends of Norfolk Dialect (FOND) web-site en yew can larn ye'self some Norfick - you'll find all about bishy-barney-bees, dickeys, erriwiggles, floaters, harnsers, what it is to mardle, etc

Haha! That site is brilliant! Thank you Geoffers! I was surprised to see some words that my family and I use are "Norfick" in origin. Though from reading the "speaking the dialect" section it sounds like I'd not be very welcome there - a lot of my family are from London, and I was raised in the West Country. I don't think any true Norfolk-ers would be fooled by my attempt at the dialect!

Now, I must work out which certificates I'm going to order and get the ball rolling. Hopefully one day I'll be able to say where George got to.

[Panoply]

Hello all. I'm back with an update.

I ordered birth certificates for the first and last of George's children, and also the death certificate of his wife. I can't say they've told me a great deal, unfortunately. Although another little mystery has come to light.

The first daughter was born January 13th 1892 in Rotherhithe, London. Her name was Edith Emily Buxton Rutland. Where does that Buxton come from? There's no Buxtons in the rest of the tree. I can only assume that George is not her biological father. Remember George and Edith married October 31st 1891. Odd that George would marry a woman pregnant by another man though. I tried to find an eligible Buxton, but failed.
Her mother registers the birth, and lists George as a "Saddler journeyman"

The next child I have the birth certificate for has George registering the birth, and listing his occupation as "Harness maker (Master)" in May 1896.

The last child born is Eva Jessie Waters Rutland on the 7th of August 1898 in Swanley Junction, Sutton at Hone in Kent. The Waters comes from her mother's maiden name. Again, her mother registers the birth, and lists George as being a "Harness Maker Journeyman".

Finally Edith (George's wife)'s birth certificate. She died in 1961 in Isleworth, Middlesex. She is living with her youngest daughter, Eva Jessie, at the same address her parents were living and raising her two youngest kids in 1911. Her occupation is listed as "Widow of George William Rutland a Harness Maker".


So. George was certainly a harness maker all his life! I searched some Kelly's Directories in the hopes that he might have been there, especially since he was a master in 1896, but couldn't find anything. I think I'll take a punt on the 79 year old George dying in East Dereham in 1948 in case he went home for some reason. If it is him I have to wonder about the state of his marital relationship. He shouldn't be back in Norfolk while his wife is still in London. It's a miracle they ever had four kids since I've never found 'em in the same place at the same time!

[Mutley]

Have you seen the Baptisms 1813 to 1880 at St Andrew's, Guist?
George is there and his dad and dad's brothers and sisters.

It is on the Genuki site (http://www.origins.org.uk/genuki/NFK/places/g/guist/), along with quite a bit of other interesting information, though I don't think that is much help in finding George in the census.

Where were they living in Rotherhithe in 1892 when Edith was born?

[Mutley]

In 1854 in Guist was a farmer named Mathew Dack.
On 1 June Fanny Rutland baptised an illegitimate child called Ben Dack.

Are Dack's in your line, sorry this is a real long shot that has gone nowhere, I was just trying to see if George may have used another family name. :(

[Mutley]

In the 1891 census of Fakenham is a widowed Maria Rutland with her children.
The eldest child is George born about 1869 in Guist, he is a bricklayer and single.
(George may have learned his Harness Making job when he moved to London. There is not one Harness Maker in the Parish Records but one of George's relatives was a Brick Maker.)
RG12/1558, Folio 31, Page 33

Now on the list of Parish baptisms, I cannot see a George Rutland with a mother Maria. Your George was baptised on 12 Dec 1869.
Could this be your George with either a stepmother Maria or there was a mistake and he is another relation rather than a son?

P.S. Forget that idea, George is with Maria and William on previous census but born Stibbard. :(

[Panoply]

Have you seen the Baptisms 1813 to 1880 at St Andrew's, Guist?
George is there and his dad and dad's brothers and sisters.

Where were they living in Rotherhithe in 1892 when Edith was born?

Yes I have seen that site. It's brilliant and I wish every other tiny little parish had one too! A whole heap of my ancestors are on there, and it's great to be able to see them all at once.

In 1892 they were living on Parfitt Road, which is now long gone, but was where Rotherhithe New Road is now.


In 1854 in Guist was a farmer named Mathew Dack.
On 1 June Fanny Rutland baptised an illegitimate child called Ben Dack.

Are Dack's in your line, sorry this is a real long shot that has gone nowhere, I was just trying to see if George may have used another family name. :(

I've no idea about Mathew Dack, but I did find Fanny Rutland and her illegitimate son. I think that's as far as the Dack relations go though. Fanny is George's first cousin once removed, so not close enough relation for it to be relevant I think. Incidentally I believe Benjamin Dack is the son of Knights Dack, a married chemist Fanny Rudland was working for as a servant in the 1871 census.

I've not yet added Maria and her family to my tree, but I know about them. Maria's George goes on to marry a Harriet, so he's definitely the wrong person. Certainly doesn't help all these people having the same names!

Thank you for your help :)

[Mutley]

In 1892 they were living on Parfitt Road, which is now long gone, but was where Rotherhithe New Road is now.

I asked because on FMP, one of the pay per view sites, you can search by address. They have numbers 1-66 for the 1891 census.
Another long shot, that maybe they, or a relative are there, mistranscribed.

[Panoply]

I asked because on FMP, one of the pay per view sites, you can search by address. They have numbers 1-66 for the 1891 census.
Another long shot, that maybe they, or a relative are there, mistranscribed.

It was number 20. I'm subscribed to FMP and have tried that too, but no luck. I didn't search all 66 houses though, but I doubt that he's going to be there, really. His future wife is at 53 Graham Street in the 1891 census, and then she, her parents and their four children are at Swanley Lane, Sutton at Hone in Kent in the 1901 census. Yet George refuses to be around. Most frustrating, and is giving his 2xgreat-grandaughter a rather cloudy opinion of him!

Am wishing I was subscribed to Ancestry too now, as I want to look at his wife Edith's parents' wills to see if that sheds any light on where their son-in-law got to. What started out as a free trial is getting rather expensive!

[Geoffers]

The first daughter was born January 13th 1892 in Rotherhithe, London. Her name was Edith Emily Buxton Rutland. Where does that Buxton come from?

The surname Buxton occurs quite frequently in Norfolk, it could be a name which has resurfaced from several generations earlier.

I cannot find any reference to the name RUTLAND in the parish of Buxton, Norfolk.

Pure speculation now...............

How long had your family been in London? Perhaps they travelled to London by wherry, leaving from Buxton? (DOwn the Bure and around the coast). Was Edith conceived in Buxton before the family left for London?..........and rather convoluted possible explanation, had the parents lived in Cubitt Town? (Built by Thomas Cubiit who came from Buxton).



I think I'll take a punt on the 79 year old George dying in East Dereham in 1948 in case he went home for some reason.

If you're near the Probate Calendar, try that first incase you can save yourself a few pounds. The Probate Calendar usually contains sufficient information to identify an individual.........or have you looked at any directories for Dereham to see if there is someone of the same name who can be tracked there?

[Panoply]

The surname Buxton occurs quite frequently in Norfolk, it could be a name which has resurfaced from several generations earlier.

Pure speculation now...............
How long had your family been in London? Perhaps they travelled to London by wherry, leaving from Buxton? (DOwn the Bure and around the coast). Was Edith conceived in Buxton before the family left for London?..........and rather convoluted possible explanation, had the parents lived in Cubitt Town? (Built by Thomas Cubiit who came from Buxton).

I don't think it's going to have anything to do with the place Buxton. George's wife was born and raised in London, and her parents and grandparents were from Essex and Berkshire, so there's no Norfolk roots on the maternal side.

As far as I'm aware George went to London and met future wife Edith there. He's in Norfolk in 1881, marries in London in 1891 and his daughter is born in London in 1892. Edith had lived in London all her life, so her daughter Edith would have been conceived there. From what I can tell Cubitt Town isn't close enough to where mum Edith was living in 1891 for it to be a reasonable explanation. Thank you for the suggestions though - definitely gave me something extra to think about.


If you're near the Probate Calendar, try that first incase you can save yourself a few pounds. The Probate Calendar usually contains sufficient information to identify an individual...

I don't think I really understand the Probate Calendar. I don't live near the place that I'm investigating, and it would certainly cost a lot more than £9 for me to travel there. Looking online at the Ancestry website it says their calendar is for 1861-1941, but the date I'm considering is 1948, so how would I go about viewing that? Is that just the period they have, or is that all that there is?


have you looked at any directories for Dereham to see if there is someone of the same name who can be tracked there?

I'm not sure what you mean by this?

[Geoffers]

I don't think I really understand the Probate Calendar. I don't live near the place that I'm investigating

The Probate Calendar is a national index; you don't need to be near to the area of interest.

If you live anywhere near a record office or major reference library, give them a call to see if they have the Probate Calendar on film, together with the coverage they have in years; and if you need to book a film reader to view it.



I'm not sure what you mean by this?

The idea is this. You have found a death of a chap of the right name and age in Dereham.

Try searching directories - you can do this online for Norfolk via Norfolk Sources (http://www.norfolksources.norfolk.gov.uk/)

If there is a George RUTLAND who appears to be consistently in Dereham over a number of years, back to a period when you know your chap was in Rotherhithe, or Kent, or wherever - then it is likely that the George RUTLAND in Dereham is different to your chap.

[AnjaliUK]

The first daughter was born January 13th 1892 in Rotherhithe, London. Her name was Edith Emily Buxton Rutland. Where does that Buxton come from? There's no Buxtons in the rest of the tree. I can only assume that George is not her biological father. Remember George and Edith married October 31st 1891. Odd that George would marry a woman pregnant by another man though. I tried to find an eligible Buxton, but failed.

I would say it was fairly common for men to marry women who were pregnant with someone else's child, more so today probably, but I still have seen plenty of examples of women with illegitimate children getting married in PRs and the census in earlier centuries. I would say it was less likely that having married, the couple would choose to put the biological father's surname into the child's name - more likely he or she would be brought up as their own, especially if it says George's name on the marriage certificate. Do you know the maiden names of both parents' mothers? Could Buxton (in Derbyshire) be a place of relevance?

[AnjaliUK]

especially if it says George's name on the marriage certificate.

I meant birth certificate, sorry! Hope it makes sense now.

[Panoply]

So sorry it's taken me so long to reply to this thread. Christmas and snow got a hold of me and I'm only just returning to a normal life! Many apologies. I wasn't ignoring your feedback!



If you live anywhere near a record office or major reference library, give them a call to see if they have the Probate Calendar on film, together with the coverage they have in years; and if you need to book a film reader to view it.

I spent a long time trying to work out if I had a record office or major reference library near me. I think I've found somewhere that fits the bill, and have sent them an email to ask, however I expect it to be futile; their website says what I told you before - their collection only covers the local area.

I did find a record office about an hour away that covers the county that another large chunk of my ancestors come from, so I shall have to pay them a visit sometime.



Try searching directories - you can do this online for Norfolk via Norfolk Sources (http://www.norfolksources.norfolk.gov.uk/)


Thank you for that link. I'd not found that website before. I spent a good few hours scouring the pages and didn't find a single George Rutland, although I now bear a grudge against Rutland Street. Oh well.


I would say it was fairly common for men to marry women who were pregnant with someone else's child, more so today probably, but I still have seen plenty of examples of women with illegitimate children getting married in PRs and the census in earlier centuries. I would say it was less likely that having married, the couple would choose to put the biological father's surname into the child's name - more likely he or she would be brought up as their own, especially if it says George's name on the birth certificate. Do you know the maiden names of both parents' mothers? Could Buxton (in Derbyshire) be a place of relevance?

I find it very weird and can't think of any way to find the truth and be sure of it. Edith married, but had no children, and she and her husband are long dead. I don't know much about her husband, but can't imagine the reasoning behind one of her middle names would have been passed down to nieces and nephews and so on. None of her living relatives remember anything much about her, least of all her middle name's origin, so I fear it's a dead end.

As for maiden names: Edith's mother was a Waters, and her mother was a Outen/Clay (born as an Outen [presumably her mother's maiden name, although she may have been married and her husband died just after she was born, this was all pre-1837 so I'm a little fuzzy here] but her mother married the year after she was born and she took the new surname Clay).
Edith's father's mother was a Marshall, and I believe her mother was an Anderson, although I'm not positive of this, it's the only record that fits.

I don't think the Buxton would come from a place. Edith and her mother were born in London. Her mother's father and above were from Berkshire/Wiltshire, and her mother's mother and above were from Essex. Her father and all of his ancestors were from Norfolk.

Unless I've gone wrong somewhere in my tracing, I can't fathom where Buxton has come from.

[pwholt]

Middle names don't always have to be for family members. Sometimes they are for godparents, sometimes for other people of influence in the family life. My grandmother's eldest brother had the middle name Paterson; this was the name of the father's employer, who must have been generous to him and was thus honoured. Have you tried a search for anyone surnamed Buxton in the area of the parents at the relevant birth, on a census? It might turn up something. pw

[Geoffers]

I spent a long time trying to work out if I had a record office or major reference library near me.

ARCHON is the answer - click here (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/archon/)- you can find County and other record offices nd the directory even provides their web-site and contact details.


sent them an email to ask

A 'phone call is usually most effective. If the world and his wife has sent the same office e-mails over the midwinter holidays, by the timethey open up again you could well be at the bottom of a long queue.


their website says what I told you before - their collection only covers the local area.

Try another record office instead.


I did find a record office about an hour away that covers the county that another large chunk of my ancestors come from, so I shall have to pay them a visit sometime.

There you go, give it a try. If you don't you'll never know. But do telephoen first to see what coverage they have and whether you need to book a table/film reader/fiche reader to avoid being disappointed when you get there.

[AnjaliUK]

I spent a long time trying to work out if I had a record office or major reference library near me. I think I've found somewhere that fits the bill, and have sent them an email to ask, however I expect it to be futile; their website says what I told you before - their collection only covers the local area.

Most of the probate calendar is available on Ancestry. If you aren't subscribed, or only on the basic package, some libraries have a library version of the subscription which should include the calendar. Not all staff know about the calendar, you could try just asking if they have an Ancestry subscription and how much it costs for visitors to go on. It's only 50p an hour at my library so it's pretty good if there's not too much you need to do.

[Panoply]

Middle names don't always have to be for family members. Sometimes they are for godparents, sometimes for other people of influence in the family life. My grandmother's eldest brother had the middle name Paterson; this was the name of the father's employer, who must have been generous to him and was thus honoured. Have you tried a search for anyone surnamed Buxton in the area of the parents at the relevant birth, on a census? It might turn up something. pw

I've searched around for Buxtons near to them and looked at every male of a baby-making age, but found no one who gave me reason enough to go "Yes! It's him!" In the 1891 census (taken around the time baby Edith would have been conceived), mother Edith and her parents are "Coffee House Keeper"s and marked as neither employers nor employed. In other censuses her father is a confectioner and although in 1901 he's listed as a worker, he's now in Kent. In 1881 he was a confectioner in Essex. Goodness knows if they ever stayed still long enough to build relationships with their employer.

On re-examining the 1891 census I did find a W Bussen living next door to their Coffee House. He's a single stevedore and is listed as being 66, although it may be 46. He's living with his sister, a widow, [scribble] Neville, and his nephew W Neville, as well as a domestic servant. I failed to find any of them in any other census. I searched for his sister's marriage and the only record I found was for a Mary Ann/Mary Jane (there's two for the same record, for some reason) Bullen marrying a Thomas Neville in West London in 1852. The scribble may be short for Mary. Bussen sounds enough like Buxton that it may have been a census mistake, but from the very meagre information given for that household I can't guarantee they're Buxtons in disguise.


Geoffers - My local record office replied to my email yesterday, saying they only had the probate calendar up to 1943. Since I'm interested in a 1948 death, that's no good.


Most of the probate calendar is available on Ancestry. If you aren't subscribed, or only on the basic package, some libraries have a library version of the subscription which should include the calendar. Not all staff know about the calendar, you could try just asking if they have an Ancestry subscription and how much it costs for visitors to go on. It's only 50p an hour at my library so it's pretty good if there's not too much you need to do.

Haha, funny you should mention this Anjali, as I'd been planning to go to the library and try out their Ancestry subscription as soon as the Christmas chaos died down. Yesterday was my scheduled day and I trotted in and got a computer (free here! for two hours!) and surfed. I must say I was disappointed by the library edition of the Ancestry subscription. Very minimal. It did have the probate calendar though, which was my goal. I searched every person I had death dates on (which was appallingly few - I seem to only be interested in their life, and never bother to find them an end date!) and failed to find any probate records for direct ancestors, though the odd brother or sister turned up, so I guess it wasn't a total failed mission. Unfortunately the people I'd been hoping would give me clues to George in their will weren't there, so that's another dead end.

[AnjaliUK]

Haha, funny you should mention this Anjali, as I'd been planning to go to the library and try out their Ancestry subscription as soon as the Christmas chaos died down. Yesterday was my scheduled day and I trotted in and got a computer (free here! for two hours!) and surfed. I must say I was disappointed by the library edition of the Ancestry subscription. Very minimal. It did have the probate calendar though, which was my goal. I searched every person I had death dates on (which was appallingly few - I seem to only be interested in their life, and never bother to find them an end date!) and failed to find any probate records for direct ancestors, though the odd brother or sister turned up, so I guess it wasn't a total failed mission. Unfortunately the people I'd been hoping would give me clues to George in their will weren't there, so that's another dead end.

Oh that's a shame, wills are so interesting - perhaps I've been luckier than I realised with so many direct ancestors having written them... ... although the cost soon adds up!

[AnjaliUK]

Geoffers - My local record office replied to my email yesterday, saying they only had the probate calendar up to 1943. Since I'm interested in a 1948 death, that's no good.

Ancestry only goes up till 1940 I think. As you may know, if you have the date of death you should be able to have a look-up done along with your order - it doesn't cost any extra, but I think you still have to pay if the will doesn't exist. The instructions are here: www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/1226.htm#004

[Panoply]

Hello all. I'm back with an update.

I went ahead and ordered the death certificate of the George Rutland I found dying in East Dereham, and it arrived today. As soon as I'd ordered it I immediately began doubting it was him. I'd forgotten about the other George Rutland who was also born in 1869 in Guist. I was convinced I'd ordered his certificate - he'd stayed in Norfolk up to 1911, whilst my George was born later in the year than the certificate was for (so he should have been a year younger) and I then saw a George Rutland dying in Battersea at the right age for his date of birth.

I became resigned to the idea that I'd wasted another £9.25 on an insignificant relative, but lo and behold, I don't think I have. As I said, the certificate arrived today, and it looks like my man. His occupation is listed as "of Guist, R.D. (anyone know what R.D. stands for?) a Harness Maker". Well that's my great-great-grandpa! He died of a cerebral thrombosis in March 1948 aged 79 years. His place of death is listed as Beech Hill, Gressenhall. R.D. (again with this, what does it mean?) From what I can tell Beech Hill is another name for the Workhouse. But as of 1948 Gressenhall is no longer a workhouse, and is just "providing accommodation for the elderly". I can't find any date as to when this switchover happened, so don't know whether he was in the workhouse, or just in an old people's home.

Good to have him pinned down, but it doesn't explain his relationship with my family. My grandfather writes about his Gran and aunts (George's wife and two of his daughters) regularly visiting, playing cards etc. in the early 1940s. Why was George in Norfolk while his wife and children were in London? I may never know. If only there were 1931 and 1941 censuses! Maybe the 1921 will have some clues.

[Jellylegs]

I think I'm right in saying that R.D. stands for Registration District.

[Geoffers]

A few of the common abbreviations that you'll find are:

B = Borough
CB = County Borough
MB = Municipal Borough
MetB = Metropolitan Borough
RD = Rural District
RSD = Rural Sanitary District
UD = Urban District
USD = Urban Sanitary District

The main Acts that dealt with these being the PUblic Health Act 1872 and the Local Government Act 1894.

[Geoffers]

Further to the previous message.........


He died of a cerebral thrombosis in March 1948 aged 79 years. His place of death is listed as Beech Hill, Gressenhall. R.D. (again with this, what does it mean?) From what I can tell Beech Hill is another name for the Workhouse. But as of 1948 Gressenhall is no longer a workhouse, and is just "providing accommodation for the elderly". I can't find any date as to when this switchover happened, so don't know whether he was in the workhouse, or just in an old people's home.

Beech House, or The Beeches, became a residential home for the elderly in 1948, so your ol'bor couldn't have been there long.

Gressenhall Farm and Workhouse is now a museum - there should be something about it on the Norfolk Museums & Archaeology web-site (http://www.museums.norfolk.gov.uk/)

There are quite a few photos of it on the inter-webby-thingy Geograph (http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/1309504) is quite good as it also has some background information.

[AnjaliUK]

I became resigned to the idea that I'd wasted another £9.25 on an insignificant relative, but lo and behold, I don't think I have. As I said, the certificate arrived today, and it looks like my man.

Nice one, that was lucky! :) As for why he was there, he may have just gone to his home town to retire... was his wife definitely in London by this point? I am losing track of it all!

I saw an episode of Who Do You Think You Are? the other day, the celebrity's grandfather had been in the army and then got a job abroad as a policeman, instead of going back home to his wife and two children. They went to the country he'd worked in and his job application said his marital status was 'separated' - either he was lying so they wouldn't expect him to go off home, or his wife was hiding the separation, as her children (still living) didn't know about it. A really good episode, in their National Archives there were documents about his death including a letter from the grandmother - if only we all had the budget of the BBC behind us, eh? :)