• Welcome to this forum . We are a worldwide group with a common interest in Birmingham and its history. While here, please follow a few simple rules. We ask that you respect other members, thank those who have helped you and please keep your contributions on-topic with the thread.

    We do hope you enjoy your visit. BHF Admin Team

Finding Information

Thanks Janice, that's the right one, John, his father is a sadler, although looking at Charles occupation it says sadler but the p and s look different. Also, in census records, the place of birth for Charles looks like Poleshill, think it might be Polesworth but could be Foleshill. You're an early bird, my cats got me up early, how about you?
 
catmum said:
Thanks Janice, that's the right one, John, his father is a sadler, although looking at Charles occupation it says sadler but the p and s look different. Also, in census records, the place of birth for Charles looks like Poleshill, think it might be Polesworth but could be Foleshill. You're an early bird, my cats got me up early, how about you?
Click to expand...
i would say its saddler for both

lyn
 
Has the baptism of Charles Smith 25 Jun 1837 (born 4 Sep 1832) in Polesworth been mentioned?

Parents John & Sarah Smith. John's occupation Saddler. John Smith married Sarah Cant 15 Apr 1816 Polesworth.

They had a number of children, including both a Frances and a Richard.
 
I see on their marriage certificate Elizabeth gives her address as Fazeley St where they are in 1861.

And in 1851 there is a John Morgan and family on Fazeley St. He is listed as a Fresh Waterman - a porter of some type? Looking at the birthplaces of the children they have travelled a bit. Elizabeth Ann is not with them.

Is this already known?
 
MWS said:
It seems to be.

In 1861 there is a Charles Smith living on Fazeley St with a daughter Florence. Her birthplace is listed as Walsall 1858 which matches the Smith/Morgan birth reg. that I mentioned. Charles is listed as a Horse Collar Maker b 1833 possibly Foleshill. Son John is also there.

Wife not with them.
Click to expand...
1861 census. Elizabeth Morgan is a widow
1792162071441.png
 
  • Appreciate
Reactions: MWS
I'm not sure if something weird is going on or it's just a transcription thing.

All the Morgan children born after 1837 are reg. as Morgan with mmn as Radbourn (or variant).

Elizabeth Ann is listed variously as Elizabeth and Ann. In 1871 she is listed as Ann with a birthplace of Barnacle, with is hamlet near the villages of Shilton and Anstey and not far from Coventry.

This appears to tie in with the birthplace of her mother which is given as Anstey and Coventry on the censuses.

Now there is no marriage for a John Morgan to an Elizabeth Radbourn that I can see but there is a marriage for an Elizabeth Radburn to a John Morcott/Murcott in 1827 at Anstey with Banns at Shilton I think.

So did he change his name for some reason or was his name just recorded incorrectly. Though it was recorded as such on two separate occasions.
 
Despite the above I think I've found Elizabeth Ann's baptism.

Listed as Ann 26 Oct 1828 at Foleshill parents John and Elizabeth. John is listed as a boatman and their abode is given as Alderman's Green which is a small area NE of Coventry less than a mile from Barnacle and adjacent to the Oxford canal.
 
MWS said:
I'm not sure if something weird is going on or it's just a transcription thing.

All the Morgan children born after 1837 are reg. as Morgan with mmn as Radbourn (or variant).

Elizabeth Ann is listed variously as Elizabeth and Ann. In 1871 she is listed as Ann with a birthplace of Barnacle, with is hamlet near the villages of Shilton and Anstey and not far from Coventry.

This appears to tie in with the birthplace of her mother which is given as Anstey and Coventry on the censuses.

Now there is no marriage for a John Morgan to an Elizabeth Radbourn that I can see but there is a marriage for an Elizabeth Radburn to a John Morcott/Murcott in 1827 at Anstey with Banns at Shilton I think.

So did he change his name for some reason or was his name just recorded incorrectly. Though it was recorded as such on two separate occasions.
Click to expand...
It defiitely says Morcott
1792167564333.png
 
  • Appreciate
Reactions: MWS
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top