PDA

View Full Version : Penny in Hertfordshire



Debryany
19-12-2006, 2:15 AM
Hi

Could someone please do a look up for me please

I am looking to see if there was an Elizabeth Ann Penny born in Hertfordshire to William Penny and Emma Bates in the years 1885 to 1888, i live in oz so it is a little hard to see parish records, this is a very big brick wall for me as i cant find her being born in Australia and i don't know when they arrived in oz.

deb

Annie
19-12-2006, 9:38 AM
Not able to check PRs but on the freebmd there is:
Name: Elizabeth Penny
Year of Registration: 1887
Quarter of Registration: Apr-May-Jun
District: St Albans
County: Hertfordshire
Volume: 3a
Page: 540

she doesn't appear on the death index for the next few years or on the 1891 census so a possible starter.

Debryany
19-12-2006, 9:41 AM
Hi Annie

Had a look at this one and the parents are wrong the parents to this one is William and Ann and mine is William and Emma, but i do thank you for your reply, i do have a feeling she may have been born on the way to Australia, i need to get some certs i think.

deb

Clive Blackaby
20-12-2006, 1:13 AM
Hi Deb,

I was about to write "don't discount the possibility that your Emma was in fact Emma Ann or Ann Emma, so that Annie's find could still be your Elizabeth".

I had looked for Elizabeth on 1891 census, and failed to find her, and (reading between the lines a bit) I guessed that your ancestors emigrated to Oz around the time your Elizabeth was born, yes???? So not on census could mean died or emigrated

However coming at it from another angle I tried looking for William, and sure enough he is there (age 32) with wife Ann (29), and daughter LIZZIE age 4, plus Henry (1), and Kate (6).

By 1901 they are living in Watford, Herts, now with 6 children, incl Lizzie, aged 14.

This Elizabeth was bapt Redbourne 28 AUG 1887 (Film 1537903 - Parish registers, 1581-1907 Church of England. Parish Church of Redbourn). There are no others on IGI, and we in Herts are fortunate that IGI is a pretty good transcription

(None of this helps you much, except to totally eliminate her from your
present enquiries, and to demonstrate that you can't always say that two different names = two different women :D . Never mind about mis-stated ages, which in this case she has got right)

Clive Blackaby
20-12-2006, 1:44 AM
p.s. I assume you already know about

WILLIAM PENNY married EMMA BATES 25 DEC 1884 Redbourn, Hertford, England, and
WILLIAM PENNY married ANN HALSEY 25 NOV 1882 Redbourn, Hertford, England

Same William, different William, first cousins, widower, bigamy ??? hoooo boy good luck with that one.

There do not seem to be any baptisms to William and Emma on this film. So it looks as if you can narrow your search down a bit: they were in UK in Dec 1884, but had left by 1901 and probably considerably earlier, before Elizabeth was born. Being married on 25/12 probably means they were paupers, as I believe marriages were free of charge on Christmas Day.

(same source/film as before.)

It might be an idea to order the film from your local LDS library (298 North Street, Grafton, New South Wales, Australia, Phone: 61-2-6642-4148 Hours: T,W 9.30am-3.30pm) and try and count your pennies :) (Alternatively download the details from IGI)

Debryany
20-12-2006, 2:45 AM
p.s. I assume you already know about

WILLIAM PENNY married EMMA BATES 25 DEC 1884 Redbourn, Hertford, England, and
WILLIAM PENNY married ANN HALSEY 25 NOV 1882 Redbourn, Hertford, England

Same William, different William, first cousins, widower, bigamy ??? hoooo boy good luck with that one.

There do not seem to be any baptisms to William and Emma on this film. So it looks as if you can narrow your search down a bit: they were in UK in Dec 1884, but had left by 1901 and probably considerably earlier, before Elizabeth was born. Being married on 25/12 probably means they were paupers, as I believe marriages were free of charge on Christmas Day.

(same source/film as before.)

It might be an idea to order the film from your local LDS library (298 North Street, Grafton, New South Wales, Australia, Phone: 61-2-6642-4148 Hours: T,W 9.30am-3.30pm) and try and count your pennies :)
Hi Clive

I have William and Emma's marriage cert and on the cert Julia William's sister is a witness.
And also there was a child born to Emma called Beatrice born 20/5/1883 in Redbourne she was christened as Bates and married out here in OZ.
the next child was Lilly Maud born in 10/7/1888, in Queensland, Australia.
I have been to the family history center in North Street and have had films ordered in for me to aid me in trying to track down where Elizabeth was born, bit i am still of the belief that she was born at sea, as there isn't any record of her being born in oz.
Iwas a different William that married Ann Halsey, i have had an ongoing discussion with a fellow researcher in England about this.
the children for George and Anne Harris are
William born 1859
Julia 1862
George 1863
Alfred 1864
Albert 1868
Frederick 1862

I do thank you for all the looking you have done

Deb

christanel
20-12-2006, 3:18 AM
Hello Clive

I was just reading this post out of curiosity when I read your statement

"Being married on 25/12 probably means they were paupers, as I believe marriages were free of charge on Christmas Day."


Where do I find out more about this practice and for how long it existed?
regards Christina

ChristineR
20-12-2006, 4:48 AM
... in trying to track down where Elizabeth was born, bit i am still of the belief that she was born at sea, as there isn't any record of her being born in oz....
Deb

Deb, if she was born at sea, she was still required to be registered in the State of arrival. I know that Victoria has a separate index for Marine BDMs. Have you checked Queensland and NSW (if Qld was not a State then, I'm ignorant on that one!) but of course, they may have not have bothered to register her.

Another possible source are hospital records, if Elizabeth was ever admitted to hospital or an institution. The records often contain the ship and year of arrival.

Christine

Debryany
20-12-2006, 8:01 AM
Deb, if she was born at sea, she was still required to be registered in the State of arrival. I know that Victoria has a separate index for Marine BDMs. Have you checked Queensland and NSW (if Qld was not a State then, I'm ignorant on that one!) but of course, they may have not have bothered to register her.

Another possible source are hospital records, if Elizabeth was ever admitted to hospital or an institution. The records often contain the ship and year of arrival.

Christine
Hi Christine

I have looked in other states for her brith but to no avail, but i do have similar problem with her sister called Rose she was supposed to have been born in Gympie Queensland in 1893 but i cant find her either or in any other year, but the rest of the children are registered, so i just don't know, i know i do need a death cert of one of the parents to see the approx year of their births, but i cant do that just at the moment as it costs $25.50 for a cert from Queensland as there isn't any one doing transcriptions.
so if you have any more ideas i am only too willing to hear them.

Deb

Peter Goodey
20-12-2006, 8:12 AM
"Being married on 25/12 probably means they were paupers, as I believe marriages were free of charge on Christmas Day."

Where do I find out more about this practice
Some vicars offered cut-price or free marriages on Christmas day to encourage people not to live in sin. This would have been more common in urban areas. I wouldn't read into it that they were paupers. In fact you're probably in danger of misleading yourself if you try to attach any particular significance to the date.

Debryany
20-12-2006, 9:38 AM
I guess i have a real mystery on my hands, eh.

Deb

Clive Blackaby
20-12-2006, 6:33 PM
Some vicars offered cut-price or free marriages on Christmas day to encourage people not to live in sin. This would have been more common in urban areas. I wouldn't read into it that they were paupers. In fact you're probably in danger of misleading yourself if you try to attach any particular significance to the date.
Thank you for the confirmation of that, Peter - I had heard of the practice from several people, but was never sure whether it was custom and practice throughout C of E for a time, or just at the dispensation of the incumbent, which you imply is the case.

Yes, I'll give you the point that "probably" is a bit too strong - "possibly" would have been more appropriate - I've not done a statistical analysis.

In this case, with the first child being baptised with her mother's maiden name ... we may draw the inevitable conclusion

Peter Goodey
20-12-2006, 8:08 PM
I'd say the probability is that young able-bodied "paupers" would be in the workhouse!