PDA

View Full Version : Anyone heard of Meybourn



richardstree
27-10-2009, 7:14 AM
On the 1911 census I found people I believe to belong to my husbands family. There are three people, head and son are born in Deptford.

The wife is born in a place called Meybourn.

Googled it and nothing of interest came up, do you know where Meybourn is/was?

Peter Goodey
27-10-2009, 7:28 AM
Can you show us a bit of the household schedule?

richardstree
27-10-2009, 10:47 AM
This is all from the 1911 census

Thomas Loveridge Head married 6 years, aged 26 Deptford
Sussa Loveridge Wife aged 22 Meybourn
John Loveridge Son aged 7 Deptford

The wife is named as Sussa, I have had a really good look, it isnt Sussan, it could be Tessa. It has been transcribed as Sussa

They live at 15 Hale Street Deptford.

Hale Street and the name Loveridge seem to go hand in hand. I was told there was a Jumbo Loveridge, which could be the John named above.

Wirral
27-10-2009, 11:15 AM
There is a marriage on FreeBMD that looks likely:
Thomas LOVERIDGE Sep 1905 Dartford 2a 1241. On the same page is Susan SULLIVAN. I can't positively identify her in the censuses. You would need to get a copy of the marriage certificate to find the name & occupation of her father. With a name like SULLIVAN she could well be Irish.

Wirral
27-10-2009, 11:27 AM
What about this family?
1891 census RG12/98 f93 p30, 41 Devonshire St, Marylebone, London
Jno SULLIVAN, head, M, 36, Gen lab, Ireland
Mary ", wife, M, 41, Ireland
Mary ", dau, 10, London, Marylebone
Susan ", dau, 6, London, Marylebone
Jno ", son, 4, London, Marylebone

You definitely need the marriage certificate first, but Meybourn could be a translation of Marylebone. Maybe a Londoner can tell us how Marylebone is pronounced?

richardstree
27-10-2009, 11:47 AM
Marylebone did cross my mind.

Forgot to say that the occupations given for Sussa and Thomas is hawker for each.

blue eyes
27-10-2009, 12:20 PM
Looking on the censuses there is a Maybourne Hampshire recorded as a pob, St Maybourne, St Mary Bourne, no Sullivans with that as pob. The only one I could find for a Susan Sullivan in Hampshire born abt 1889 Winchester father John born India mother born Ireland. John is a solider but couldnt find them after 1891.

blue eyes
27-10-2009, 12:48 PM
A possibility for Thomas Loveridge in 1901

Civil parish St Paul

52 Hale Street

Thomas Loveridge head age 40 occ street hawker born Deptford
Elizabeth wife age 48 occ hawker born Croydon Surrey
Thomas son age 18 occ hawker born Deptford
Henry son age 14 born Deptford
Edith dau age 8 born Deptford

Class RG13
Piece 527
Folio 70
Page 15

Could this be the Jumbo Loveridge (this is the only time he appears as Jumbo)


1891

Civil parish St Pauls

5 Stanhope Street

Adolphus Loveridge head age 28 occ hotel cook born Deptford
Elizabeth wife age 34 born Deptford
Polly dau age 13 born Deptford
Jumbo son age 6 born Deptford
Adolphus son age 10mths born Deptford

Class RG12
Piece 494
Folio 117
Page 34

blue eyes
27-10-2009, 1:50 PM
Hi,

I'm on holiday this week, but if you like I can pop into the local archives at Lewisham next week and see who was listed at the address in 1911.

Mutley
27-10-2009, 2:06 PM
In 1911 at 52 Hale Street were

Emma Ault a 74 year old widow
Frederick Ault, her son a 33 year old hawker.

Charles Gunston as head a 62 year old Fishmongers Assistant with wife Clara and son Arthur.

Hawkers rarely stayed in the same place for long.

Mutley
27-10-2009, 2:28 PM
Is there any chance Sussa could be Bessie?

In the birth and baptisms for Saint Paul Deptford are a

Margaret May on 21 May 1899 daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth Loveridge of 54 Hale Street. Thomas is a costermonger.

Henry born Feb 25 1897 baptised 21 March,
to Elizabeth and Thomas, a hawker, living at 52 Hale Street then.

Obviously the ones Blue Eyes found in 1901.
No sign of a John baptised to Thomas and ? ***? though.

Wirral
27-10-2009, 2:44 PM
This is all from the 1911 census

Thomas Loveridge Head married 6 years, aged 26 Deptford
Sussa Loveridge Wife aged 22 Meybourn
John Loveridge Son aged 7 Deptford




Is there any chance Sussa could be Bessie?

In the birth and baptisms for Saint Paul Deptford are a

Margaret May on 21 May 1899 daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth Loveridge of 54 Hale Street. Thomas is a costermonger.

Henry born Feb 25 1897 baptised 21 March,
to Elizabeth and Thomas, a hawker, living at 52 Hale Street then.

Wouldn't that make Sussa/Bessie only age 8 at the time of Henry's birth? Even Thomas would only be age 12!

Mutley
27-10-2009, 2:54 PM
You are right. ;)
I'm getting into a right muddle with the Thomas names and getting no nearer to the answer to the original question.

It could well have been "Marry-la-bone" but other Londoners may say it differently, especially the costermongers who spoke a language that was completely different.

There is more on the Loveridge family here (http://www.british-genealogy.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45745).

Wirral
27-10-2009, 3:01 PM
The best way to find out the mother's name would be to get a copy of the birth certificate for one of her children.

blue eyes
27-10-2009, 3:03 PM
I pronounce Marylebone as Marleybon(e)

Mutley
27-10-2009, 3:20 PM
At the moment we only know of John as their son and I cannot, for the life of me, find a John Loveridge birth or baptism around 1904 in Deptford, (Greenwich registration district).

Curiosity got the better of me and I have looked at the original.
Thomas wrote his 'L' very similar to his 'S' (as in Loveridge and Single). It certainly looks like Sussa but could be Lussa or Lissa as he did not dot the i in Loveridge.

Thomas wrote her birth place as Meybourn, quite clearly, and I think he would have written it different had it been Marylebone. He seems quite literate so I think he would have not have wrote Marylebone the same as he said it.

Wirral
27-10-2009, 3:43 PM
At the moment we only know of John as their son and I cannot, for the life of me, find a John Loveridge birth or baptism around 1904 in Deptford, (Greenwich registration district).

In the 1911 census, Thomas & his wife have been married 6 years but their son is age 7. If the 1905 marriage of Thomas LOVERIDGE & Susan SULLIVAN that I suggested was correct, then could this be John's birth?

John SULLIVAN born June 1904 Greenwich 1d 1116?

MythicalMarian
27-10-2009, 3:46 PM
You definitely need the marriage certificate first, but Meybourn could be a translation of Marylebone. Maybe a Londoner can tell us how Marylebone is pronounced?

Having lived in London a while ago among real 'Cockneys', they pronounce it 'Merrybone' (to a northern ear) - I guess 'Marrybone'. :)

Let me add here - this was in the Deptford area!

Mutley
27-10-2009, 3:47 PM
Ooooh! that will 'rattle them bones'. ;)

Sounds possible to me.

keith9351
27-10-2009, 3:55 PM
Blue eyes, my wife pronounce Marylebone as Marleybon it still makes me cringe. This seems to be the BBC way of pronouncing it now, they do have offices in Marylebone High Street.

I was born in Marylebone and have always pronounced it "Marra bourne" My school was at the rear of St Marylebone Parish Church, this was St Mary's and it was by the bourne hence the name. I've seen early references to St Marylebone spelt Marybone.

Keith

MythicalMarian
27-10-2009, 3:56 PM
Ooooh! that will 'rattle them bones'. ;)

Sounds possible to me.

I have no doubt of it, Mut. The Deptford/New Cross lingo rubbed off on me - I still say 'Merrybone' myself. But London is a huge place with various accents.

Also - having had a squint at the 1911 now myself, Thomas hasn't put another county down for his 'Meybourn' - it strikes me that maybe he would have done if the 'Meybourn' was not in the London area. But that might just be me...:)

blue eyes
27-10-2009, 4:06 PM
I had a look on the London marriages in case Thomas and wife were witnesses to any of the Loveridges marriages didnt spot anything (hoping to get her right name). There a few Thomas Loveridges on the medal card index/service and pension records.

Mutley
27-10-2009, 4:08 PM
I have no doubt of it, Mut. The Deptford/New Cross lingo rubbed off on me - I still say 'Merrybone' myself. But London is a huge place with various accents.

Also - having had a squint at the 1911 now myself, Thomas hasn't put another county down for his 'Meybourn' - it strikes me that maybe he would have done if the 'Meybourn' was not in the London area. But that might just be me...:)

You are quite right the accents are so different. However, the costermongers as opposed to the cockneys spoke in their own language, which was backward.

On - No.
Say - Yes.
Tumble to your barrikin - Understand you.
Top o' reeb - Pot of beer.
doog - good

So, I think she was born in Nruobyem! :)

richardstree
27-10-2009, 4:41 PM
Things have moved on quite a lot since I last checked this thread.

I have looked at the Loveridge family which includes Polly and Jumbo before, still not sure whether they are related.

The Loveridge name seems to be all over Hale Street.

Thanks for the offer of looking at who lived at the address. This morning I subscribed to the 1911 census for 6 months, so have been able to look at all that were living there at the time.

MythicalMarian
27-10-2009, 6:16 PM
So, I think she was born in Nruobyem! :)


Thank goodness we've cleared that one up ;)

Nicolina
27-10-2009, 9:54 PM
there are a couple of possible births fro Susan SULLIVAN
March 1885 in Marylebone District
December 1890 in West Ham District
plus Susannah March 1888 in St George in the East District

richardstree
28-10-2009, 4:55 AM
Thanks for everyones help with Meybourn.

So far we have the possibility that Thomas Loveridge married Susan Sullivan.
That Susan shows up on the 1891 census aged 6 years.
That Sussa could also be Lussa/Lissa/Susan/Sussanah.
That there is a possibility that Meybourn could be Maryleborn or Maybourne Hampshire.

My MIL's family is so very easy to research, she has so much information to give and the family have lived in a very small area for many generations.

My FIL on the other hand (which is the Loveridge side) is terrible. No one seems to know anything or if they do, they wont tell.

I knew my FIL, he died in 1998. I met his father Albert Loveridge, he didnt have a birth cert so had to go to court to be given a birth date, so that later on he could claim a pension - so the story goes. The date given was 1.1.1900. I have wondered if there would be a record of this and whether that record would have family details on it?

He married an Ethel Mary Ellingford-Baxter 25.12.1924. They lived at 5 and 23 Hales Street. Albert was a Labourer.

Alberts father is named as Thomas Loveridge (Labourer) on Alberts marr cert. Albert is recorded as being 22 and Ethel 18. Ethel was born 8.2.1908. Both ages dont fit their birth dates.

When my FIL was born Albert occupation was Hawker, they lived at 5 Hales Street

Albert has one remaining daughter, although she doesnt remember anything at all about her family.

The name Jumbo came up when I last visited my MIL - that is the only connection with Jumbo. She also mentioned Polly and that Albert sold fruit with her on the road side.

Polly and Jumbo could be no more than family friends, it is hard to get to the bottom of that story.

So on my husbands fathers side of the family, we know his father (John), his grandfather (Albert) and grandmother (Ethel). His great grandfather (Thomas). The trail then goes cold.

I had hoped that Meybourn might have meant something to someone which would have given me a positive feeling that i was looking at the correct Thomas Loveridge.

Every time I think I am getting somewhere with this branch I just seem to go back to Thomas Loveridge, DOB unknown, wifes name unknown. Other children unknown.

I have been researching this side of the family for about 5 years now and never get any further than I am at this stage, I think I have made a breakthrough but Thomas Loveridge could be one of many Thomas Loveridges that crop up. The Ellingford-Baxters are very easy to research back.

If I had the name of a known brother or sister for Albert Loveridge this could be the turning point, but no one at all is willing to give up a single detail about him.

Thank you all for your help, something in this thread might be the missing piece of the puzzle.

Wirral
28-10-2009, 7:55 AM
I met his father Albert Loveridge, he didnt have a birth cert so had to go to court to be given a birth date, so that later on he could claim a pension - so the story goes. The date given was 1.1.1900. I have wondered if there would be a record of this and whether that record would have family details on it?

He married an Ethel Mary Ellingford-Baxter 25.12.1924. They lived at 5 and 23 Hales Street. Albert was a Labourer.

Alberts father is named as Thomas Loveridge (Labourer) on Alberts marr cert. Albert is recorded as being 22 and Ethel 18. Ethel was born 8.2.1908. Both ages dont fit their birth dates.

When my FIL was born Albert occupation was Hawker, they lived at 5 Hales Street




This is all from the 1911 census

Thomas Loveridge Head married 6 years, aged 26 Deptford
Sussa Loveridge Wife aged 22 Meybourn
John Loveridge Son aged 7 Deptford

.........They live at 15 Hale Street Deptford.

Hale Street and the name Loveridge seem to go hand in hand. I was told there was a Jumbo Loveridge, which could be the John named above.
Could John be your missing Albert? If he was born before his parents married, this could explain why there wasn't a birth certificate for him in the name of LOVERIDGE.

richardstree
28-10-2009, 8:04 AM
Anything is possible with the Loveridge connection, however, when would John become Albert? I could understand John being changed to Jack or Jim, but Albert is nothing at all like John.

Would such extreme measure have been taken to cover up the parents not being married?

Wirral
28-10-2009, 8:15 AM
The 1911 census often only records one christian name, he might have been Albert John or John Albert.

I'd try a search of the electoral registers for Hales St. That should help you determine who is who.

AdeleE
28-10-2009, 8:48 AM
On October 10, I had posted this baptism of an Albert Lovidge on another of your threads. It's the last post on that thread. The dates seem to fit:

http://www.british-genealogy.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45745&page=2

Parish church, Christchurch, Deptford

Born 4 Jan 1902, Bapt 26 Jan 1902, Albert, son of Thomas & Elizabeth LOVIDGE, 34 Hale St, hawker

Adele

richardstree
28-10-2009, 8:50 AM
Well that is a real possibility, Albert had two sons, the eldest one was Albert George, the other was John Frederick. So your point that he may have been an Albert John himself holds a lot of water

Ethels father was Alfred George.

So perhaps each son took a name from their own father and one from their grandfather.

How do I go about searching the electoral roll for Hales Street?

blue eyes
28-10-2009, 8:59 AM
Hi I can go to Lewisham Archives next week and have a look.

AdeleE
28-10-2009, 9:01 AM
And further to the baptism of Albert that I've noted in post #31, this may be Albert's sister Polly:

Baptism St Paul Deptford

Born 4 May, Baptized 21 May 1899, Margaret May, parents Thomas & Elizabeth Loveridge, 54 Hale Street, costermonger.

Adele

richardstree
28-10-2009, 9:06 AM
That would be so extremely kind of you, Blue Eyes!

Is there any other information that i could give you?

This thread does seem to have turned into another search for Albert Loveridge and his parents rather than a search for Meybourn. I dont mind at all, if it finds something concrete, but I think i have posted it in the wrong place.

If I knew how to do a link to my other Albert Loveridge threads I would make one long thread from all the bits and pieces.

Procat
28-10-2009, 9:13 AM
I can move this entire thread if you wish - just tell me where you want it to go to.

It is not possible to make one long thread out of all your threads. They would merge the posts in date order and the whole thing would end up being nonsense.

To link to other threads all you need to do is open the other thread then right click on the information in the address bar then select copy. In your original thread (this one in this instance) start a reply post then just right click and select paste - of course it helps if you include some words to indicate what is going on. :)

See post 31 from AdeleE in this thread for an example.

AdeleE
28-10-2009, 9:16 AM
And in reference to the baptisms of Albert Lovidge on 4 Jan 1902 in post #31 and Margaret May in post #34, this may be another sibling:

Baptism - Christ Church Deptford

Born 25 Feb 1897, Baptized 21 Mar 1897, Henry, parents Thomas & Elizabeth Loveridge, 52 Hale Street, Hawker

Adele

richardstree
28-10-2009, 9:17 AM
Thanks Adele,

Although my MIL brought up the name Polly and Jumbo as names she had heard, she said it could be a brother but really couldnt remember any more than the names.

Almost certainly if I asked her about Polly or Jumbo again they may be described as cousins or friends. There is no concrete evidence to say for certain they are in anyway connected.

I wonder if they are red herrings and really with so little information on a family is there any hope of finding out who the parents of Albert Loveridge DOB approx 1900 really are?

If only Alberts remaining daughter could remember her grandmothers name.

I tried to research Thomas Loveridge who married an Elizabeth Mary and came up with a maiden name of Seagust. This name didnt mean anything to my MIL.

AdeleE
28-10-2009, 9:23 AM
Well, the baptism I found for an Albert Lovidge in 1902, with a father Thomas, a hawker of Hale Street, does seem to fit the details on Albert's marriage certificate.

Adele

blue eyes
28-10-2009, 9:26 AM
I'll have a look through the electoral rolls. As this on my way home from work I wont be able to do to much on the same day. If I need to go back I will.

richardstree
28-10-2009, 9:36 AM
When a relative is extremely hard to pin down, how much information is enough to persuade you to add someone to your tree?

I think i may be a point with the parents of Albert, fathers name definitely Thomas, were I will have to take a stand and say they cant be traced, or possibly add someone that ticks enough boxes.

If Albert did have a second name (John) he could well be the person on the 1911 census.

AdeleE
28-10-2009, 9:44 AM
I feel that the 1902 baptism of Albert Lovidge is the most likely piece of data so far. This birth does not appear in the GRO indexes, but then neither do the births of Margaret May Loveridge nor Henry Loveridge. So did this family baptize their children, but not register their births?

I'd suggest finding this family on the 1901 census, minus Albert of course, in order to determine the ages/birthplaces of the parents Thomas & ELizabeth, then seeing if you can find them on the 1911 census.

Adele

richardstree
28-10-2009, 11:35 AM
I have had a look at the baptism for Albert LOVIDGE.

A thought crossed my mind. When Albert needed a date of birth for his pension, wouldnt the courts have looked into baptism records if there was no other documentary evidence?

But it does look promising!

Wirral
28-10-2009, 12:04 PM
When Albert needed a date of birth for his pension, wouldnt the courts have looked into baptism records if there was no other documentary evidence?


I doubt the courts would have done any looking for anything. The onus would have probably been on the person wanting the certificate to provide the evidence. If Albert couldn't produce anything, then that could be why he was given the date of 1st Jan 1900 on his new certificate.

I've just thought, if he was actually given a new birth certificate by the Register Office (whether the local RO or the GRO), then that should be on the indexes somewhere. Have you tried looking for that registration? It could be an extremely late registration if he applied when he wanted a pension!

richardstree
28-10-2009, 12:09 PM
This seems like a bit of a roundabout I looked up Thomas and Elizabeth on the 1911 census.

This came up

LOVERIDGE, Tom head Married M 46 1865 Hawker Barns Comenon
LOVERIDGE, Elizabeth Wife Married 35 years F 50 1861 Hawker Croyden
LOVERIDGE, Henry Son Single M 14 1897 School Deptford
LOVERIDGE, Robert Son Single M 10 1901 School Deptford

50 Hale Street, Deptford.

I will have to check back through this thread and see if this is a family/house number I have mentioned before.

richardstree
28-10-2009, 12:38 PM
I had the same idea myself quite a while ago and did check to see if I could come up with a birth cert entry, perhaps written at the bottom of a page.

No luck with that either.

I think if I have a list of three possible families, three lists of the names in each family and then perhaps see if that would jog the memory of Alberts last remaining daughter.

One daughter never married and never had children, the other did marry but didnt have any children.

I have no idea if Alberts other son had any children.

esdel
28-10-2009, 1:14 PM
Maybe a Londoner can tell us how Marylebone is pronounced?

Dead right Wirral

michaelpipe
28-10-2009, 1:38 PM
A Londoner would say Marlebon, (the 'y' is silent and the 'e' at the end is ignored), which ain't that far from 'Meybourne'.

MythicalMarian
28-10-2009, 8:50 PM
With Michael's post that now makes three of us who have offered different pronunciations from different districts of London :)

As I still sit next to our London cousins at Stamford Bridge on the odd Saturday, I can vouch for 'Marrybone' and Michael's 'Marlebone' during the present day, depending on where in London the guys come from - which in the case of the majority of the Matthew Harding stand diehards is West or South London. :D

I think we have to give a high probability to Meybourn being Marylebone.

Mutley
28-10-2009, 10:41 PM
Mutley - Marry-la-bone
Blue Eyes - Marleybon(e)
Marian - Merrybone or Marrybone
keith's wife - Marleybon
keith - Marra bourne
esdel - dead right (?, ee ain't on same planet anyways ;))
michaelpipe - Marlebon

See, it depends where you were dragged up?
Yer wanna be in on me family rows abaht Clerkenwell or Clarkenwell, or worse -
Suffuck or Soufoulk or Sufolk or Suthuck or Southwark, both just dahn the road and we can't agree even when born, lived and died there.
:)