General Chat

Well that spelling takes the prize so far I think Mackelworleth and it 'should' be Mackleworth or Mackelworth.

Mind you I think putting an s in and in another variation a 'u' is also pushing for first prize.

Dear Rose you take my breath away!I

I am hitting Charles military records and just came upon this (I am writing it as a narrative for my cousin in Oz) - From 16.12.1902 it shows father and mother as dead.(The missing John and Sarah Mackelworth Snr). It gives details of his marriage on 7th July 1902 Kingston on Thames to Alice Harmes spinster. Witnesses shown as Eliza J Harmes and Harry Howerd.

Cousin has sent me a pic of Alice's gravemarker (not a stone) and it shows Alice Lizzette Mackleworth 1881-1971.

You are right with Kingston. If figures a lot in Charles records and that was because the barracks were there. I think the marriage you show is them.

Pulling it together from what you have put above (I hope) - Alice Lizzette (or Lissette) Pointer was born in 1881 in Kingston. In 1891, her mother Eliza Jane PoYnter (born c1861), married Henry Harmes. Which explains why Alice L Harmes married Charles in the name of Harmes in July 1902 although she was born a Pointer.

So it looks like at the moment that Alice Lizzette was born out of wedlock unless we can find Eliza Jane marrying a guy called Pointer (Poynter)? Does all that sound right?

Only because I can't remember if this spelling/ mis-transcription has been mentioned

Births Jun 1851 (>99%)
Mackelworleth John William Whitechapel 2 657

Births Sep 1881 (>99%)
POINTER Alice Lisette Kingston 2a 317

it looks possible that Henry and Eliza were only married 20 years ( they have put 30 on the 1911 census) ? they are with Alice in 1891 census...

add, it looks like henry had a previous marriage , from the 1871, he is with an Elizabeth ( name Heather)

Marriages Jun 1869 (>99%)
HARMES Henry Kingston 2a 405
Heather Elizabeth Kingston 2a 405

from what I can see Elizabeth didn't die, they may have seperated/divorced as there is a possible later re- marriage which would explain why henry was not free to marry Eliza untill well after Alice's birth???

Alice in 1901? if this is right age for her?

1901 England Census about Harry Harmes
Name: Harry Harmes
Age: 50
Estimated Birth Year: abt 1851
Relation: Head
Spouse's Name: Eliza Harmes
Gender: Male
Where born: Kingston, Surrey, England
Civil Parish: Kingston on Thames
Ecclesiastical parish: All Saints
Town: Kingston
County/Island: Surrey
Country: England
Street Address:

Occupation:

Condition as to marriage:

Education:

Employment status:

View Image
Registration District: Kingston
Sub-registration District: Kingston
ED, institution, or vessel: 24
Neighbors: View others on page
Household Schedule Number: 109
Piece: 665
Folio: 94
Page Number: 17
Household Members:
Name Age
Harry Harmes 50
Eliza Harmes 40
Alice Harmes 19 <<<<<<<<<
Harry Harmes 14
View
Original
Record

View original image

Mick, it may be random

Marriages Sep 1891 (>99%)

Harmes Henry Chapman Kingston 2a 570 <<<<
Poynter Eliza Jane Kingston 2a 570 <<<<<

1911 England Census about Henry Chapman Harmes
Name: Henry Chapman Harmes
Age in 1911: 60
Estimated Birth Year: abt 1851
Relation to Head: Head
Gender: Female
Birth Place: Kingston upon Thames, Surrey, England
Civil Parish: Kingston on Thames
County/Island: Surrey
Country: England
Street Address: 29 Acre Road, Kingston Upon Thames, Surrey
Marital Status: Married
Occupation: Maltster Labourer
Registration District: Kingston
Registration District Number: 40
Sub-registration District: Kingston
ED, institution, or vessel: 19
Household Schedule Number: 272
Piece: 3516
Household Members:
Name Age
Henry Chapman Harmes 60
Eliza Jane Harmes 50
Henry John Harmes 24
Charles Gascoyne 42

Andy,

I went to bed shortly before you posted this. There are duplicates but thankfully RR stepped in and saved the day before too much damage (duplication) was done.

I am going to have to leave the Stroulger search for the time being. I was too quick to put this one to bed. It seems to have taken on a new life of its own with the missing John and Sarah.

Plus my new found 1st cousin in Oz has raised the spectre of grandfather Charles' wife Alice L Harmes. My cousin says she was illegitimate. Here is what she said in a mail - "our nan Alice was illigitamate and her mothers name was Eliza Pointer but on my mums birth certificate it has Alice down as the mother and it has Alice Mackleworth formally Harmes and father Charles Mackleworth so where does the name Harmes come into it?? I tried to find out if this could have been her birth fathers name but had no luck. So i was then wondering if our nan was married before she married grandad but if she did it must have been a very short marriage because she would have been quite young"

I am going to scour his military records now. They might well cover his marriage to Alice in 1902. I don't think the tools on GR will be particularly revealing.

This birth family of mine are something else :-S

Caroline is Caroline Laura Casey on her Baptism. Can see her and Thomas on 1911 census, but on 1901 she may be shown as Sarah, with no sign of Thomas! More research required.

Have just seen your new thread on Find Ancesters about the Mackelworths. Would strongly suggest that you post a link to this thread, as people will start to duplicate the research already done.

Andy

Andy you are a star! I can see that Stroulger name being corrupted a few times as well!! It looks like Caroline has got a new middle name too - Laura is new to me. The other 'C' I believe stands for Cassie. And I am sure Thomas Robert is shown as Thomas Reynolds Stroulger on a certificate I have. It's a long time since I looked at them.

Just to get you started.....

This is probably the marriage for Thomas and Caroline... and it look like different spelling will turn up here as well!!

Surname First name(s) District Vol Page

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marriages Dec 1899 (>99%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Boyce Caroline Laura C Poplar 1c 1216
Stoulger Thomas Robert Poplar 1c 1216


Andy

Hi again

I would suggest future threads on the 'Find Ancestors' board as more people are likely to see them. The general rule is 'one thread per family' so starting a new thread for your Strougler line is fine. You can put further updates about the Mackleworths on this thread.

Andy

Further to the missing John and Sarah - what can I do to find them? Any suggestions as to where to look or what to look for? What has been found has exceeded all expectations but it leaves a real loose end.

I might drop in on this thread and update with little bits. I have just noticed that Sarah Jnr (nee Gibbs) was from Essex - I live in Essex now....

I shall be starting a new thread on my birth mother Margaret Stroulger. I have her father, Thomas, and mother Caroline. She was apparently one of 15. I have her two husbands, and four other children. I have her death. It's the going back I need to complete her tree. While I am here, is General Chat the right place to post these threads?

I was particulary struck by Andy's incisive contribution. The things he dug up seemed to cut right across where I thought it might be going and elicited surprises and dare I say shocks.

The South Africa stuff blew me away. I don't know why. I just supposed that with my grandfather being in the Army that he spent most of his time, if not all, in the UK. Then I found out he could have been in Zulu (a bit late I know). It never occurred to me that he would have served overseas. But then I am new to this so I forgive myself for being so parochial.

Then Andy turned up with the census stuff which I didn't expect at all because it wasn't military which I had asked for, and it just snowballed. And now I have a family tree that goes back over 250 years when I expected no more than to be given a few military facts for the the turn of the 19/20th century.

So thank you too, Andy, for your amazing contribution. You found the death of two very key people John and Sarah Jnr. who took over the household when the Snrs disappeared. And left us with a puzzle as to their whereabouts. Always leave 'em wanting more!

A very good thread to work on. Excellent feedback from Mick, which is always appreciated. Have had a further look for John and Sarah Snr as well , but like Rose and Kucinta can find nothing. They either changed name or went abroad for some reason.

Andy

Rose and Andy did what I'd call the 'research', I came late to the thread and simply helped with some basic work in passing on images of an original source.

I too, am totally baffled by the disappearance of John and Sarah 'sr' from the records, I wondered if they'd emigrated, perhaps planning to send for some of the children later, but don't know how to pursue this, as it's pre the passenger lists of 1890 onwards.

Plus I suppose they might have been getting on a bit to emigrate, but could find absolutely no trace of a death for either of them in England and Wales.

Certainly by 1881 John and Sarah 'jr' seemed to be providing a home for some of their siblings.

Mick I think I may be more of a 'dog-eared' researcher than a "dogged" one :-D who knew there could be so many variations on that name :-D i think I will be muttering it in my sleep tonight.

For myself can I just add it was a pleasure to 'work with' Andy and Kucinta, ( they did most of the work I just tinkered on the edges) . Good fun!

oh before I forget re 'senior' John and Sarah, I trawled through the 1891 and 1901 Bethnal Green workhouse records, just in case they were inmates and had been mistranscribed, but no sign.

For those of you who have researched all the stuff in this thread, my heartfelt and sincere thanks. You gave me more than I thought was possible. What started out as a one dimensional request (grandfather's military connection) has turned into a wholesale investigation into my natural father's side of the family.

On my tree, going back from me, I have details of my father, my grandfather (Charles the original subject), my great grandfather, my great great grandfather and yes, even my great great great grandfather. The earliest record that I can include with any certainty is 1755. I could have gone back to 1722 I think it was but the link could not be proven beyond what I thought was reasonable.

The biggest eye opener for me and a salutary lesson for family research were the variants in the search name. I thought Mackleworth was sufficiently rare that I would have little problem in finding good connections. How wrong I was. Here is a list of what I and other researchers on this forum found -

Mackelworth, Mackelsworth, Macklesworth, Mackelwrouth, Mackelworath, Macclesworth, Mackelrath, Mackleroth. I think there were others too.

On my grandfather's application form to join the East Surrey rgt. he wrote his name with four different spellings. Ok so he wasn't an academic.

I think the thing that confounded me most was the inconsistency in the official records. RamblingRose, who I have come to know as a stalwart and dogged researcher (thank you Rose) found in the 1891 census Rosetta Mackelsworth. She reproduced the transcript for me. I had the transcript, or rather I had A transcript. The spelling was Macklesworth. I had the original too - Mackelsworth. So even with the original and its transcript I had a different spelling.

For anyone who fancies a challenge, we never did find out why John and Sarah Mackelworth Snr. disappeared from the census records. They were there in 1861 and 1871 but in 1881, another John and Sarah Mackelworth show up as head/wife of household. No death record anywhere for the Snr couple.

I shall be going through the military stuff of my grandfather Charles and try to make sense of it all. I shall start by putting everything in chronological order and try to tell a story.

Thank you everyone for your tireless efforts on behalf of myself and the new members of my family I never knew I had. There are two on here that may well pop in and ask questions the way I did.

Andy et al

First cousin in Oz now confirms her mother's (Ivy) year of birth as 1925. I am being gracious and treating it as a typo by my cousin...... ;-)

Andy - they are who I have come to call, John and Sarah Junior. It is the older John and Sarah in the 1861 and 1871 census records (censii?) that have mysteriously disappeared.

But those death records are a very welcome addition. Thank you vm.

And I note yet another variation in the spelling, this time with an 's'

Thank you for the Mundia link RR. I shall peruse it tomorrow.
Kucinta - many many thanks - I have files 29739 to 29771 inclusive, 33 files in all. They all look good (from the thumbnails). I opened the first one and it was fine. Thannk you again.
Andy - I am checking them out as we speak.

Many many thanks to you all again. If you hear a thump, it's my jaw hitting the desk again!! :-D

mick