Genealogy Chat

My man seems to be James on certificates but William on the census. Also the professions are quite differnt, Wondering if I have the wrong census.

1841 Census St Leonards Shoreditch Middlesex
William Bateman 1821 – Printer
Jane Bateman 1816
William Bateman 1838
James Bateman 1840

This is their marriage

1834 IGI marriage of James William John Bateman to Jane Louisa Johnson in Spitalfields

Cannot find births or baptisms of the children William and James. William dies in 1870 age 35. Possible birth for James in Marylebone in 1840 but we have no connections with Marylebone that I have found.

1847 birth of Ann Bateman in Bermondsey, father James William John Bateman, Tinsman and Brazier, mother Jane Louisa Bateman, formerly Johnson. Registered by the father.

Possible death of James the father in 1849.

By 1851 Jane is a widow and no sign of James junior born 1840.

Incidentally when William the son marries in 1859 he gives his father as William James Bateman, Waterman.

Any suggestions would be appreciated to help me be more certain I have the right family in 1841. Unfortunately I don't have ancestry to make any comparisons.

Thanks

Selena

Have you found son, William, on the 1861 census? If so, where does he claim to have been born? This could be a clue as to whether he's the one living in Shoreditch in 1841. I noticed that William was described as deaf on the 1851, but couldn't find a deaf William Bateman on the 1861. Maybe he recovered.

Haven't been able to see any other, more likely, family on the 1841.

Thanks Mick but I don't think that's him as he seems to be William James on marriage, death and son's marriage certs.

Hi Christina, William is on the 1861 census age 25 Living in Collier Street Deptford. He is with his wife Frances and daughter also Frances. Williams Says he was born Southwark and he is a bricklayers labourer, no mention of deaf.

Thanks for taking the time to look on the 1841, its appreciated

Selena

How do you know its the right marriage? Have you bought the childs birth cert for mothers maiden name?

They seem to be south of the river but you have a marriage and an 1841 census entry for north of the river PLUS a skilled printer and a totally different job later on. It doesnt sound right to me.

First thing is to get one of the kids birth certs.

Hello Heather,

I have Ann Bateman's birth certificate 1847 stating those parents given above.

I have Jane's marriage certificate in 1851 to Richard Ranoe stating Jane Louisa Bateman, formerly Johnson, widow. Note that Jane Bateman is living next door to Richard on the 1851 just before their marriage.

I have the son William's death certificate in 1870, informant was Jane Ranoe. Jane Ranoe being his mother.

William's widow, Francis Bateman remarried to Charles Bromley and R Ranoe is a witness. R Ranoe being her stepfather in law. (!)

Maria Bateman (daughter of James & Jane Bateman) married Jessie Gregory. Their daughter Priscilla Gregory is on the 1881 with Jane & Richard Ranoe, her grandmother and stepgrandfather.

I thought this might be sufficient evidence to claim the 1834 marriage.

Are there any other certificates you think I should get? Appreciate any thoughts.

Selena

PS its the changer of profession and change of first name that makes me doubt the 1841 but I don't doubt the marriage.

Ok, so it seems the marriage is sound :)

So we are back to the census info. In the 1841 do the ages work out ok for the couple. It does look like the enumerator has rounded down to nearest 5 in this case. And Jane is older than William possibly up to 5 years older? Does that add up? His age is given as 20 and hers as 25. So she could be up to 29 and he could be up to 24.

Have you moved forward to 1851 to see if that lot appear again?

Thanks Heather,

There is an IGI birth of
Jane Louisa Bateman, father Richard mother Mary
July 1810 St Saviour Southwark

A kind member looked up the 1834 Marriage for Jane Johnson at the LMA and one of the witnesses was Richard Johnson.

So Jane should be 29 on the census. I will check her age on the other censuses.

Selena

Well she should have been 30 on the 1841 but we are all allowed a fib, especially is OH is younger :)

Age 60 on 1881
Born 1822 on the 1861 (age 39)
Full age on 1851 marriage
1851 born 1811

must have dropped a few years off upon marriage to second husband

don't have Jane Ranoe on 1871 or 1891.

Death in Greenwich 1892 age 81 = 1811

does that help?

Just had a look at the 1841 hoping that the printer was really a painter but sadly does look like a printer. Guess you noticed he seems to have a rellie next door - Samuel aged 30 who is an undertaker.

Hmm. difficult one. Things seem to add up but for that occupation. The son saying he was born Southwark no great prob as they may have moved there when he was very young, as mum was from that area. But how do we get a definite on it. Oh gawd, just read that there is a third occupation thrown in on the sons marriage cert. A waterman? A waterman had to serve 7 years apprenticeship. How can this guy have 3 different skilled occupations - LOL.

Yes I have had some threads about Samuel Bateman and traced him forward but cannot find any connection!

Thanks for your interest, this has been my sticking point for a couple of years. Just not sure what to do next.

Selena

The three different skilled jobs are the worrying thing.

Slightly off track, but Samuel is in Neptune Street Rotherhithe in 1861. Same address Maria Street Shoreditch on 1851.

Back to James, I can understand if William got dad's job wrong on his marriage certificate, dad had been dead over 10 years.

I suppose the 1847 birth reg of Ann, registered by James himself, is the most accurate info? Tinsman and Brazier.

I think I can claim this as my brick wall.

Selena

LOL, my mother was born in Neptune Street :)

Oh it was 1875 Mick.

Hi Selena

A thought just occurred to me - from the 1841 census what evidence do you have to prove that those two boys (William b1838 and James b1840) were the children of James Wm John Bateman and Jane? The 1841 census doesn't list relationships so in all fairness they could well have been nephews staying with them.

Was just wondering if on the off-chance that this was the case, it would explain why on William's marriage cert he states his father as a William James with occupation of waterman - rather than the James Wm John, tinsman/brazier that you have.

Could your James Wm John had a brother named William James perhaps?

Also, I just checked the IGI looking for any children christened with parents James Bateman and Jane - and only two are showing up - you have already got Ann b1847 Bermondsey, but there is also the following son:

ALFRED THOMAS BATEMAN - International Genealogical Index
Gender: Male Christening: 23 NOV 1845 Saint Mary Magdalene, Bermondsey

Anyway, sorry if I've confused things for you all the more. I was just trying to look at things from a different angle.

Regards - Athena

Thanks Mick, I think that that is probably the case, only the last child Ann seems to be registered.

Hello Athena, yes you are quite right - there is no evidence that they are their children. That's why I have the nagging doubt.

I had seen the 1845 for Alfred and sadly there is a corresponding death in 1846 which explains why he is not on the censes.

There is also a Jane born 1837 but in Marylebone so not sure if this is my girl. Anyway she is not on the census!

I remember you kindly helped me to look over the research on this and it was very much appreciated. I have not been able to get to look at the original baptism for James Bateman/Urquhart (previous thread) but hope to when I can get a bit of time off work.

Must hand the computer over to the kids now for homework.

Thanks

Selena