Genealogy Chat

Hi everyone. I'll be meeting my friend late next week and will give her all the information so far, and have ordered a few certificates for confirmation. I'll certainly let you all know how things go and thank you all again for all the work you've put in---it's amazing and so heartwarming.
Alison

hi alison have you tried the free births i was looking for my grandma with no luck i then tried free births and it was there good luck

Well do let us know the outcome Alison.

This is one that quite a few of us have taken to heart.

I can't know exactly how my friend will react on her husband's behalf but I agree with you Nana-Sue. Much better to know all the facts than dwell on possibilities. I've found all sorts of skeletons in my family tree but they are in the past and can't be altered and all go to make up lifes rich tapestry.
Alison

Rose - From my experience the cold hard approach is the best. I've done this 6 times now and it is better to know the facts than to be left not knowing even if there are unanswered questions.

It hurts when ones mothers takes some children and leaves some behind - I personally know how it feels.

The worst case I worked on is a distant relation who was adopted but her mother kept her sister. They met. What drama. I followed the trail and found another half brother from the fathers side. Found his tel no and called him - wife was in. She was so worried that I wouldn't contact her again, You have to take a little more care with really elderly people. Hubby had known about 1 sister not 2 and had been looking for her for 60 years.
The way it happened from my call at 9.30 pm by 11pm they all spoke to each other and Christmas 2010 they met up. They sent me some money to get all the certs to tie it all up.

The point I'm trying to make is that no matter how such issues may affect a person emotionally just knowing something is a bit like a heavy cloud being lifted. Seeing the docs is like having your family before you. :-)

It's very hard to be sure if the girls did actually stay with her. Edith Lena shows up on the ER, presumably once she was old enough to vote - but has she always been there?

Alison - I sent you a pm regarding the forwarding of Hearn's service records.

Have only just logged on again--lots of other things needed doing! It's amazing how much information you've found for me and I am so grateful. I wonder why the boys went into care while the daughters stayed with their mother. Perhaps the Grinham family looked after their own but disowned the Hearn offspring? I've found a picture of the first daughter posted on another tree and she's holding a drink and a fag annd looking as if she's having a good time!! Thanks for your concern about the effect all this might have on my friend's husband. I shall
certainly run it all past her and then she can decide how much to reveal, but I suspect that he will want to know the lot, warts and all. Now I shall try to find out if there are any records of Arthur and Joseph's lives in care.
Very many thanks to all of you, Alison

That's a very good point Rose. Perhaps Alison's friend can review the information and decide how best to approach revealing what we've found. She will presumably know best as to whether her husband would want the "warts and all version" to give him closure, or whether it may be better to edit some of it.

We can only give the facts (cold and hard as they may be).

In Alison's opening post she says "The only family hints about their backgrounds were that their mother was killed in a zeppelin raid in North London in WW1 and their father was in the Royal Flying Corps and also killed in WW1---but this may well be wishful thinking" - perhaps the family knew more than they let on and were trying to protect the children from what really went on.

EDIT: Perhaps when Alison comes back she can decide how to proceed.

Alison,

I'm concerned as to what your friend's husband will make of all this. If he's been severely depressed because he didn't know who is grandparents were, this mess we've uncovered isn't going to help, especially as Eliza's 2 daughters appeared to stay with her.

Rose

This probably explains why Daniel Thomas Hawkins is with Eliza:

England & Wales, Death Index: 1916-2006
Name: Edith L Hawkins
Birth Date: abt 1909
Date of Registration: Oct-Nov-Dec 1957
Age at Death: 48
Registration district: Surrey South Western
Inferred County: Surrey
Volume: 5g
Page: 1096

This marriage ties in with the 1931-4 ERs:

Surname First name(s) Spouse District Vol Page
Marriages Jun 1936
Grinham Edith L Hawkins Southwark 1d 55
Hawkins Daniel T Grinham Southwark 1d 55

What on earth is going on? Why is Edith Lena's husband living with her mother in the '50s?

(Apologies - just noticed this marriage already posted on page 1)

Daniel Thomas Hawkins died 1962 - same address as 1958/9.

England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1858-1966
Name: Daniel Thomas Hawkins
Probate Date: 1 Apr 1963
Death Date: 10 Dec 1962
Death Place: London, England
Registry: London, England

Died Brompton Hospital, Kensington. Probate to Yorkshire Insurance Company. Effects £6051 9s

Actual death index shows birth year 1909.

Seems to be a gap on the ERs for Eliza Fanny between 1934 and 1958.

London, England, Electoral Registers, 1847-1965
Name: Eliza F Grinham
Electoral Year: 1959
Parliamentary Division: Putney
County or Borough: Wandsworth

Living at 89 Wimbledon Park Road. Also at that address is a Daniel T Hawkins. (Same in 1958)


London, England, Electoral Registers, 1847-1965
Name: Eliza Fanny Grinham
Electoral Year: 1931
Parliamentary Division: Camberwell
County or Borough: Southwark

Living 35a Holmby Street. At same address is Gilbert John Philips. (Same in 1932)
In 1934 Eliza and Gilbert are still there but also recorded is Edith Lena Grinham - must be the daughter from the 1911.

Following up with these descendants might provide more information on Eliza:

Marriages Jun 1936
Grinham Edith L Hawkins Southwark 1d 55
Hawkins Daniel T Grinham Southwark 1d 55

Marriages Jun 1928
CARESWELL Arthur GRINHAM Camberwell 1d 1757
Grinham Isabel M Careswell Camberwell 1d 1757

I'm guessing the girls stayed with her because Eliza is listed in electoral registers as living in these areas.

Rose

There are several Grinham/Squires children.

Rose

I think that "Housekeeper" was probably a euphemism.

Lots of avenues to explore here. Also looks like Edward married 3 times:

Marriages Dec 1925
Grinham Edward E Squires Holborn 1b 1206
Squires Mabel M Grisham Holborn 1b 1206

I tracked down the children of Arthur Hiram to his later wives and they both died young before marrying.

Rose

Hearn is a well established Romany gypsy surname, just a thought.

Mgnv, My mistake, Think I was looking for a reason (and may of got carried away a tad) why the child born to Eliza Fanny Grinham had the name Arthur Hearn and all children listed as the off spring/children of head of house Arthur Hiram Hearn because If their mother is listed as the house keeper then her children should be listed as visitor or boarder apart from Arthur Hearn Grinham if the head was his father

Roy

Births Mar 1911 (>99%)
Grinham Arthur H Willesden 3a 265

Births Dec 1912 (>99%)
Grinham Joseph H Beck Willesden 3a 509

Roy - Re "The record shows married 4 years and 3 children born and 3 still living but only on the line for Eliza Fanny Grinham and nothing listed for dad Arthur"
What would be strange would be to have this info listed for Arthur (in the columns headed "State, for each Married Woman entered on this Schedule, the number of:-") - well, I'ld have thought it strange, except I know by now folk don't read the headers properly. Since the 1911 iimages are free on Ancestry, it's easy to page forward thru them, A couple of h/h's further on, the man does list this info and it gets crossed out.

Alison, if you're not a member of Ancestry then I'd suggest you or your friend take their one month free trial (you have to give card details so just remember to cancel in time) - you can then print off the service records and piece the story together.

It doesn't say what Eliza Grinham's "immoral conduct" was or why the children were in an Industrial School, but I guess they could be in because she wasn't looking after them.