Stantonetal - Stanton Genealogy

Exploring the Stanton family tree in the UK and beyond

Notes


Matches 651 to 700 of 895

      «Prev «1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next»

 #   Notes   Linked to 
651 11/11
Unable to locate Jane ROLLS on the 1861 census or beyond.

03/11
1841 census "Jane E" is named as "Ellen" which must have been her middle name. 
ROLLS, Jane Ellen (I958)
 
652 11/11
Unable to locate Richard ROLLS on 1891 census or beyond.

03/11
In the 1861 census Richard and his family is living at 5 Augusta Place. Next door at 6 Augusta Place is John Jenkins ROLLS and his family. Possibly an older brother to Richard? The two houses are next door to the "Royal Victoria and Great Western Hotel". Modern day Weymouth still has these buildings, the hotel is now a bar/restaurant known as "The New Vic". The two houses the ROLLS lived in appear to be just to the South, the entrance to No.5 now being the entrance to a restaurant known as "Panorama". 
ROLLS, Richard (I952)
 
653 11/11
Unable to locate Thomas and Francis marriage in BMD searches. 
Family F39
 
654 At least one living or private individual is linked to this note - Details withheld. Living (I558)
 
655 12/06
Possible Richard died 9 Feb 1724. Burial of that date just states "son" of Richard Woods. (GTurner research 12/06) 
WOODS, Richard (I696)
 
656 12/10
After Stella's aunt Mary Ann Stanton died, Stella married Mary's widower Harold Jay. (G Turner email)
 
PAYNTER, Stella (I1154)
 
657 12/10
Aunty Eva loved animals, she had dogs (chows), cats, rabbits, chickens & a parrot in her 3 bedroom house! (G Turner email) 
STANTON, Eva Louisa (I180)
 
658 12/10
Dorothy is the last descendent listed on the website royalist.info
http://www.royalist.info/execute/tree?person=5416

03/07
From Ruth Jenkins:
Dorothy's father was the second son of George, 4th Earl Of Huntingdon and his wife Dorothy Port., brother of the 3rd Earl Henry Hastings, son of 2nd Earl Francis Hastings abd his wife Katherine Pole Her first husband was Sir John Ryves 
HASTINGS, Dorothy (I490)
 
659 12/10
Email from Becky Murray:
The information I believe I have unearthed on Ellen (sister to Timothy junior) is startling and incredibly tragic. I started by looking for her again on the 1871 Census and I found her, surprisingly quickly this time, as a patient in a hospital in Bristol. So far, so anodyne; but when I looked up the details for the hospital, I stumbled on a terribly sad story. Ellen CULLINANE, aged 27, a charwoman, was a patient at the Bristol 'Lock' Hospital (see below). Her exact location was as follows:

Address: Park Hill, Lower (Lock Hospital)
District: Bristol, St Augustine
Parish: St Michael

Unfortunately the Bristol Lock Hospital treated, exclusively, woman suffering from Venereal Diseases (VDs). The reputation of this lock hospital, and others like it around the country, was that most of its patients were 'common prostitutes'. As well as medical care, the patients were "placed in healthful moral condition" during their stay there. Ellen was one of only fourteen patients there in 1871. The women give as their occupations a variety of jobs including washerwoman, general servant, cigar packer and even an umbrella maker. By the 1880s entry to the hospital was on a voluntary basis but this was probably not the case at the time Ellen was a patient (the lock hospitals got their name from earlier, medieval, institutions in which lepers were "kept in restraint").

The Bristol "Old Park Lock Hospital" was founded in 1870 (with places for sixteen patients); by the following year Ellen was listed there. The governors, writing in 1881 stated that it had been founded "to relieve suffering, restore the sick and help the fallen to virtuous lives"; they also however considered these diseases to be "diseases incident to an immoral life". Sadly, whether or not Ellen had fallen into a life of prostitution, she would by the standards of the time, still have been considered to have 'fallen' simply by having contracted a VD whilst unmarried.

The Bristol Lock Hospital was probably built as a direct consequence of the passing of the Contagious Diseases Acts of 1864, 1866 and 1869. Prostitution was perceived as a growing phenomena in the mid 1800s and the government was alarmed about the rise of VDs amongst the armed forces (by 1864 one in three sick cases in the army was due to VD). A government committee was set up to recommend solutions. The findings and recommendations of the committee led to the passing of the Contagious Diseases Acts (the two subsequent acts increased the remit and powers of the original 1864 act). The acts were rushed in with little debate and in fact critics of the acts noted that a separate contagious diseases act relating to animals was put through parliament at the same time as a way of 'burying' the nature of the'VD' acts.

The Contagious Diseases Acts gave powers to the police to arrest women suspected of being prostitutes in certain specified garrison and port towns and to bring them before a magistrate. The women were then required to sign papers consenting to internal medical examinations. Any woman who refused could appeal to a judge to prove their innocence but would be well aware that she could face prison if found guilty. Those who were examined and found to have a VD were sent to a lock hospital (provided at state expense) until cured; the 1869 act extended the length of time a woman could be held up to a year. In effect the acts regulated prostitution by removing diseased women from the streets. No action at all however was taken against the male clients of the prostitutes.

Those who signed the consent forms, even if found not to be diseased, had de facto acknowledged themselves to be prostitutes and were thereafter subject to further regular examinations (as often as fortnightly). In other words, although the acts did not legislate to register/formalise woman as prostitutes, this was the effect. A woman once labelled would find it extremely difficult to move back into mainstream life and in fact some studies suggest this was the case since the average age of prostitutes rose following the acts; prior to the acts many young working class women had resorted to prostitution as a temporary solution to a period of poverty.

The unfairness of the acts seem obvious in the modern context but it took almost two decades of protest before the acts were suspended in 1883 and repealed in 1886. Their abolition was considered a major feminist triumph.

In 1886, the Old Park Lock Hospital closed. The institution changed its name to the "Voluntary Lock Hospital" and moved to 87 Ashley Road, opening in 1887. In 1904 it had fifty five patients.

Ellen's death was registered in Bristol in December 1879. She was only 34 years of age. 
CULLINANE, Ellen (I1133)
 
660 12/10
Len was blind and tuned pianos for a living (G Turner email) 
PAYNTER, Len (I1153)
 
661 12/10
Unable to locate Harriet SIMMONS in the 1871 or 1891 census. There is a possible Harriet SIMMONS in the 1881 census, working at a cook in the household of a Mr Lowe in Bath. This Harriet is recorded as "b1837 Taunton, Somerset". I wonder if this could be a mis translation onto the census page of "Paulton". Especially since she appears working in service at a Bath household some 20 years earlier in the 1861 census. 
SIMMONS, Harriet (I1758)
 
662 12/11

Ann's sister Fanny QUINTON is recorded in the 1901 census living with "Frederick James WHEELER". She is described as his "Aunt".

Checking the BMD Index reveals Ann QUINTON, married a "Henry WHEELER":

BMD Search result details
Civil Registration event: Marriage
Name: QUINTON, Anne
Registration District: Alderbury
County: Wiltshire
Year of Registration: 1856
Quarter of Registration: Jul-Aug-Sep
Spouse's last name: Not available before 1912
Volume No: 5A
Page No: 301

Married one of:
COLLINS, William
WHEELER, Henry
WHEELER, Henry Francis

1881 census (RG10 piece 1956 folio 13 page 17) has Ann and Henry with their family. However, birth year for Ann seems too early... 1826. Transcription error? She would have been much younger than her husband as his birth is recorded as c1822, perhaps this is the reason her age was transcribed wrongly?

The marriage certificate will finally confirm whether we have the correct Ann here. And what the nature of the relationship between "Aunt" Fanny and nephew Frederick is on the 1901 census - is this the correct Fanny?

Searching for Ann's brother Charles reveals:
1871 census has a "Charles QUINTON; bc1843, Downton, Wilts" a visitor at the household of Ann and William BAILEY. Ann BAILEY; bc1841; Downton, Wilts" looks suspiciously like Charles sister Ann. If this is the case then the previous data regarding Ann being married to Henry WHEELER, and therefore the relevance of the 1901 census for "WHEELER, Frederick James" being suspect.
Only marriage certificates will resolve this question.

Review of the BMD Index provides:
BMD Search result details
Civil Registration event: Marriage
Name: QUINTON, Ann
Registration District: Alderbury
County: Wiltshire
Year of Registration: 1864
Quarter of Registration: Oct-Nov-Dec
Spouse's last name: Not available before 1912
Volume No: 5A
Page No: 387

Married either of:
BAILEY, William
BLAKE, George 
QUINTON, Ann (I1813)
 
663 12/11
1841 census has John and family, also living with them is "David REEVES, bc1771, Wiltshire". Pure conjecture, but perhaps this is a pointer to Deborah's family?

1861 census records that John has his grandson "James A R QUINTON" living with him, along with two of his daughters, Eliza and Ann, both unmarried. Unclear at this stage who the parents of James A R are.

1871 census records as above, with Eliza (unmarried) but without Ann. Would perhaps suggest that James is Eliza's son.

1881 census records John and Eliza, along with a lodger "William POOR", similar age to Eliza.
Unable to locate "Eliza QUINTON" on the 1891 census. However, there is a William POOR, bc1834 Hampshire, married to an Eliza, bc1840, Warwickshire. They are living "in huts" in Brecknockshire. Unable to tell if these are relevant records. 
QUINTON, John (I1809)
 
664 12/11
1851 census (HO107 piece 1669 folio 220 page 32) has "William PATTEN; bc1832, Salisbury", aged 19, unmarried, a lodger (in the household of "John HARRISON" at Browns Court in Southampton, working as a Costermonger. 
PATTEN, William (I916)
 
665 12/11
1851 census has "Martha PATTEN; bc1834, Salisbury, Wiltshire". She is recorded visiting an "Eliza HILLIER" at 3 John Street in Southampton (her sister Mary Ann would later live at number 6 which was uninhabited in 1851). Interestingly the next census page has living at number 8, "Richard JOCEYLYN" from Fisherton Anger.

Unable to locate "Martha PATTEN; bc1854" in the 1861 census or beyond. There are a couple of "Martha PATTENs" around Yeovil, however, these were also there on the 1851 census when we found Martha in Southampton, so can probably be discounted. 
PATTEN, Martha (I918)
 
666 12/11
1861 census has birthplace transcribed as "Sutton" though this looks more like "Southton" and I suspect it is actually "Southampton"

Unable to locate "Frederick HOWELL, bc1860" in the 1871 or 1881 census.

There is a "Death" recorded for a "Frederick HOWELL" in Southampton in 1863, no birth date is recorded with this reference however so will need the certificate in order to check relevance.

1881 (RG11 piece 5640 folio 66 page 16) throws up a vague possibility at sea with the Royal Navy. But no detail about him other than his name and rank.

1901 census (RG13 piece 1059 folio 112 page 33)
and
1891 census (RG12 piece 919 folio 81 page 13)
...have a "Frederick C HOWELL; bc1860, Southampton" with his family - wife Louisa, and children, Frederick(bc1887), Charlotte (bc1889)... and (in 1901) "Teresa (bc1895)". Possible that this could be the correct "Frederick HOWELL" though he has been missing from the census for many years it seems. If so perhaps his youngest daughter's naming was in memory of his grandmother Teresa? I don't know how common the name "Teresa" was at that time in Hampshire?

1911 census
Unable to reliably locate either Frederick HOWELL or wife Louisa, or children Frederick or Charlotte in the 1911 census.
However, Teresa bc1895, reappears in the 1911 census as a servant in a "MATTHEWMAN" household in Southampton... RG14PN5959 RG78PN273A RD99 SD1 ED25 SN94 
HOWELL, Frederick (I1791)
 
667 12/11
1861 census records Francis, single, living at Marine Parade in Southampton. 
QUINTON, Francis (I1793)
 
668 12/11
1861 census records that John has his grandson "James A R QUINTON" living with him, along with two of his daughters, Eliza and Ann, both unmarried. Unclear at this stage who the parents of James A R are.

1871 census records as above, with Eliza (unmarried) but without Ann. Would perhaps suggest that James is Eliza's son.

1881 census records John and Eliza, along with a lodger "William POOR", similar age to Eliza.

Unable to locate "Eliza QUINTON" on the 1891 census. However, there is a William POOR, bc1834 Hampshire, married to an Eliza, bc1840, Warwickshire. They are living "in huts" in Brecknockshire. Unable to tell if these are relevant records.

Unable to locate either and "Eliza QUINTON" or an "Eliza POOR" on the 1901 census or beyond. 
QUINTON, Eliza (I1811)
 
669 12/11
1871 census (RG10 piece 2003 folio 13 page 18) records a possible "Jane SMITH; bc1849, Weymouth" working as a servant in the household of William VOWLEY at Royal York Terrace, Weymouth. Unable to locate any other Jane SMITH of similar age born Weymouth.

Unable to locate "Jane SMITH; bc1849, Weymouth" in the 1881 census or beyond. 
SMITH, Jane H (I708)
 
670 12/11
1871 census has a "Charles QUINTON; bc1843, Downton, Wilts" a visitor at the household of Ann and William BAILEY. Ann BAILEY; bc1841; Downton, Wilts" looks suspiciously like Charles sister Ann. If this is the case then the previous data regarding Ann being married to Henry WHEELER, and therefore the relevance of the 1901 census for "WHEELER, Frederick James" being suspect.
Only marriage certificates will resolve this question.

Review of the BMD Index provides:
BMD Search result details
Civil Registration event: Marriage
Name: QUINTON, Ann
Registration District: Alderbury
County: Wiltshire
Year of Registration: 1864
Quarter of Registration: Oct-Nov-Dec
Spouse's last name: Not available before 1912
Volume No: 5A
Page No: 387

Married either of:
BAILEY, William
BLAKE, George 
QUINTON, Charles (I1814)
 
671 12/11
1881 census (RG11 piece 3640 folio 122 page 37) records "William SMITH; bc1856, Weymouth" living with his wife "Georgina" and son "William" at 1 Churchill Street, Toxteth Park, Liverpool. A commerical traveller (London).
The 1891 census show this family then living at 57 Allington Street, close by where Charles and Martha (William's parents also live). This is taken therefore to be the correct William SMITH.

By 1911 William has remarried to "Edith", though still has his son Sydney living with him. The reason for remarrying is not yet clear. 
SMITH, William (I711)
 
672 12/11
1881 census has "James". 1891 census has "Alfred James". Unsure which is his proper name. 
SMITH, Alfred James (I1781)
 
673 12/11
1881 census records Charles and Martha living at "West side of Canning Dock being part of... Strand Street." 
LANGSHAW, Martha (I395)
 
674 12/11
1901 census (RG13 piece 3421 folio 61 page 4) records "Louisa SMITH; bc1853, Weymouth; Single" living at Asylum For The Blind, Hardman Street Liverpool. Uncertain if this is the correct Louisa.
1911 census (RG14PN12385 RG78PN705 RD264 SD1 ED8 SN129) records "Louisa SMITH; bc1856, Weymouth; Single; Boarding House Keeper" living at 11 Cornwall Road Dorchester Dorset.
These are the only records for a "Louisa SMITH, bc1853, Weymouth". 
SMITH, Louisa H (I710)
 
675 12/11
1901 census records "Frederick James WHEELER" living with his family along with "Fanny QUINTON" his mother Ann's sister.

1881 census (RG10 piece 1956 folio 13 page 17) has Ann and Henry WHEELER with their family. However, birth year for Ann seems too early... 1826. Transcription error? She would have been much younger than her husband as his birth is recorded as c1822, perhaps this is the reason her age was transcribed wrongly?

The marriage certificate will finally confirm whether we have the correct Ann here. And what the nature of the relationship between "Aunt" Fanny and nephew Frederick is on the 1901 census - is this the correct Fanny? 
WHEELER, Frederick James (I1817)
 
676 12/11
1901 census records "George QUINTON; bc1872" living with wife "Rose; bc1880, Southampton" and two children "Francis" and "Rosa".

1911 census records "George QUINTON; bc1872" living with wife "Rose; bc1878, Southampton" and two children "Francis" and "Rosina".

The problem is, the 1911 census records that George and Rose have been married just 5 years. And that Rose has not bore any children. This would suggest that perhaps George married two different women both called "Rose". Or perhaps Rose was living in the household in 1901 shortly after his first wife's death (since there is a small gap between Rosina's birth and the 1901 census) and the transcriber mistook her for his wife. 
QUINTON, George (I1798)
 
677 12/11
1911 census records "Kate WILLIAMS; Married 6yrs" had born three children, all living, all of whom are with her on the 1911 census. 
QUINTON, Frances Kate (I1802)
 
678 12/11
1911 census records that Eliza had bore 3 children, all still living. 
?, Eliza (I1828)
 
679 12/11
1911 census records William living 2 doors down from brother George in Flats, Britannia Road, Southampton. 
QUINTON, William (I1801)
 
680 12/11
According to the census record the Adelaide Arms is only two doors down from the Waverley Arms - which still exists on Abbostbury Road. 
SMITH, Robert Langshaw (I393)
 
681 12/11
BMD Index has:
BMD Search result details:
Civil Registration event: Marriage
Name: STANTON, Rebecca Teresa
Registration District: Southampton
County: Hampshire
Year of Registration: 1861
Quarter of Registration: Oct-Nov-Dec
Spouse's last name: Not available before 1912
Volume No: 2C
Page No: 48

She married either:
CARD, William or QUINTON, Francis

This is the only record for a "Rebecca STANTON" in Southampton between 1860 and 1890, and the only record for a marriage in 1861 of a "Rebecca STANTON" anywhere. This must be our Rebecca.

1871 & 1881 census provides the record for "Rebecca T QUINTON" and husband Francis, in Southampton. It records Rebecca's birthplace as "Weymouth, Dorset", not Ireland. However, I suspect this is incorrect as she is recorded as born in Ireland along with her elder sister and brother in the 1851 census when we presume the family had recently arrived.
1891 census reconfirms "Cork, Ireland".

1911 census records that Rebecca bore 13 children, 11 of them still living. 
STANTON, Rebecca Teresa (I319)
 
682 12/11
BMD index provides only one "Fanny QUINTON" born anywhere between 1825-1845, in Q1 1838, Alderbury, Wiltshire (the parent parish for Redlynch, Downton).

1861 census (RG09 piece 1313 folio 4 page 6) records a "Fanny QUINTON, bRedlynch, Wiltshire", single, a general domestic, in the household of "Robert EWARD" (rector) in Weston, Winterslow, Wiltshire. The curate who is also listed on the census return is "George N FREELING, bc1830", Robert EWARD's "nephew".

1871 census (RG10 piece 95 folio 66 page 4) has "Fanny QUINBON, bc1836, Redlynch, Wiltshire", single, a general domestic, in the household of "Mary FREELING" in London.

1881 census (RG11 piece 45 folio 56 page 49) has "Fanny QUINTON, bc1838, Bawton, Wiltshire", single, a lady's maid, in the household of "Mary FREELING" in Kensington, London.

1891 census (RG12 piece 1486 folio 62 page 8) has "Fanny QUINTON, bc1838, Wiltshire", single, a housekeeper in the household of "Joseph ABBOTT" (rector) in Wrentham, Suffolk.

1901 census (RG13 piece 1951 folio 127 page 9) has "Fanny QUINTON, bc1836, Redlynch, Wiltshire", widow, living on own means, in the household of "Frederick James WHEELER". She is recorded as Frederick's "Aunt". Further research reveals him to be the son of Fanny's younger sister Ann.

[1881 census (RG10 piece 1956 folio 13 page 17) has Ann and Henry WHEELER with their family. However, birth year for Ann seems too early... 1826. Transcription error? She would have been much younger than her husband as his birth is recorded as c1822, perhaps this is the reason her age was transcribed wrongly?
The marriage certificate will finally confirm whether we have the correct Ann here. And what the nature of the relationship between "Aunt" Fanny and nephew Frederick is on the 1901 census - is this the correct Fanny?]

Unable to locate "Fanny QUINTON; bc1838" in the 1911 census.
 
QUINTON, Fanny (I1812)
 
683 12/11
By the 1871 census Frederick was living with his (maternal) grandmother Mary HEATH. Unable to locate either of his parents on the same 1871 census.

Fred is recorded on the 1891 census living with his mother Jane, and "daughter" Ethel. The census record appears to suggest that Ethel is Frederick's daughter. But the earlier 1881 census suggests Ethel is Jane's daughter, (i.e. Fred's sister). Then looking at the 1911 census Jane is listed as have had 2 children, each still alive, but her present marriage (presumably her marriage to John SIMMONS) lasted 3 years - so perhaps John died in c1863? If so perhaps Ethel was her daughter, born some years after Fred, and apparently after the death of her husband John.

09/04
The 1861 Census - Paulton Parish - 2 - Res: Brittens - Piece 1679 - Folio 174 - Page 26 - Schedule 140

John Simmons Head M 24 Coal Miner Paulton
Jane Simmons Wife M 22 Paulton
Fredrick Simmons Son 1 Paulton

The 1871 Census - Paulton Parish - Res: Pithay - Piece 2470 - Folio 55 - Page 6 - Schedule 222

Mary Heath Head W 74 Paulton
Fred Simons Gson 10 Scholar Paulton

The 1881 Census - Paulton Parish - Res: Near Church - Piece 2427 - Folio 133 - Page 20

Mary Heath Head W 87 Widow Paulton
Jane Simmons Daur W 40 Paulton
Frederic Simmons Gson U 21 Boot Rivetter Paulton
Ethis Simmons Gdaur 2 Paulton
William Allward Lodger U 18 Boot Rivetter Bath

The 1891 Census - Paulton Parish - 1 - 3 rooms - Piece 1926 - Folio 67 - Page 3 - Schedule 12

Fred Simmons Head S 30 Shoemaker Empd Paulton
Jane Simmons S 52 Paulton
Ethel Simmons Daur 12 High Littleton
Emily Bush Boarder S 62 High Littleton 
SIMMONS, Frederick (I427)
 
684 12/11
Interestingly Fanny's first son has the middle name "Rands". I wonder whether this is perhaps Fanny's maiden name? Indeed further research proved it was. The 1891 census has her working as a servant in a "WOOD" household in Toxteth.
The 1911 census records that Fanny had bore 4 children, all living.

She can also be found in the 1881 census (RG11 piece 3652 folio 58 page 50) with her parents Charles RANDS and Edith, and siblings in Toxteth. 
RANDS, Fanny Agnes (I1775)
 
685 12/11
Interestingly Richard's first son has the middle name "Rands". I wonder whether this is perhaps Fanny's maiden name? 
SMITH, Richard Rands (I1776)
 
686 12/11
Is a "Sole Collector" a fisherman? 
SMITH, Charles Hammond (I394)
 
687 12/11
It seems "Town Ditches" is the area of Southampton officially known as "Canal Walk".
A chapter in the book "Anglo Jewry since 1066"
http://www.manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/uploads/docs/kushner%20chapter%208.pdf

It was tucked away ‘back of the walls’, the seedy, seamy side of a seafaring centre. Canal Walk reeked of danger - and, indeed, of unindentifiable smells - a darkened, bumpy, narrow street packed with tiny tumbledown stores: butchers, drapers, twine-sellers, a homemade-sweets shop, a stewed-eel-and-pie shop, a primitive amusement arcade. Many of the places were run by immigrants, especially
European Jews. It was a subculture straight out of a Dickens novel, the kind of street that mothers forbade their children to visit. If you did go there, the word about town was that you had better make sure that the fingers on your wallet were your own."
Is a quote from Mark Lewisohn’s Funny Peculiar: The True Story of Benny Hill (2002) and describing an area in Southampton popularly known as the Ditches. (Benny Hill's father had a shop here, and Tommy Cooper grew up nearby!) 
HOWELL, William (I1836)
 
688 12/11
Living with James SMITH in 1911 is his grandaughter "TAYLOR, May Granddaughter F 9 bc1902 Islington Middlesex". It is unclear at this time who's daughter this is. Possibly Florence? Or perhaps Flossie? By 1911 census, three of James and Caroline's children had died. Judging by the names that still exist in the 1911 census, the dead must include one of William, Florence or Flossie since only 6 children were now living. 
SMITH, James (I569)
 
689 12/11
Margaret doesn't appear with the family on the 1851 census. 
HOWELL, Margaret (I1842)
 
690 12/11
Marriage Cert ordered.

07/11
Unable to locate "James" STANTON on 1901 census, however, there is a "J" STANTON, right age, right location, right kind of work... There are no other STANTON's suitable in Southampton so I'm certain this is the correct record for our James Richard. "RG13 piece 1056 folio 48 page 27". He is boarding with another family. Many of the STANTON children appear to have been dispersed like this after their mother died.

12/09
James is listed at 33 Cumberland Street in Southampton, along with his wife Emily and his young family. The house is listed as having 4 rooms, shared between 6 since James' father William was living with them by this stage. They both worked as labourers at Southampton docks. 
STANTON, James Richard (I181)
 
691 12/11
Mortimer Road is in "Itchen" which is across the river from Southampton. 
QUINTON, George (I1798)
 
692 12/11
Possible marriage record for Jane STANTON:
BMD Marriages has:
Name: STANTON, Jane
Registration District: Southampton
County: Hampshire
Year of Registration: 1858
Quarter of Registration: Apr-May-Jun
Spouse's last name: Not available before 1912
Volume No: 2C
Page No: 58
This Jane STANTON married either "HOWELL, Frederick" or a "MANGES, Herr Carl"

The 1861 census has Jane recorded twice consecutively in the census record.
"Jane HOWELL; bc1839, Weymouth, Dorset; lodger" with "Frederick HOWELL bc1861, Sutton or Southton, Dorset; lodger".
and
"Jane HOWELL; bc1839, Ireland" with son "Frederick HOWELL bc1861, Ireland (ditto mother)".
On both Jane is recorded as a "Seamans Wife" and "Married".

In addition they are living in the "Houndswell Buildings".

In all I think this is sufficient evidence to suggest this is the correct "Jane STANTON" and for recording above source material here for Jane beyond just the 1851 census record.

A marriage record would complete the evidence, this has been orderd...
The marriage certificate confirms that Jane STANTON married William HOWELL. See Sources.

The 1871 census (or beyond) does not record a "Jane HOWELL". However, in (RG10 piece 1189 folio 92 page 15) Bevois Street, Southampton, there is a "Catherine BOOTH; bc1840, Cork, Ireland", married to a "George BOOTH; bc1836, Sussex". Nothing odd there, except that their children are listed as "Eliza HOWELL; bc1858; Southampton" and "Frederick HOWELL; bc1861, Southampton". Perhaps these were Jane's children and either were adopted by Catherine and George BOOTH (for whatever reason), or... "Jane" is actually "Catherine" - the birth date and place seem to match too well...

BMD does not have a "Death" record for "Jane HOWELL" in Southampton. However, there is a "Death" recorded for a "Frederick HOWELL" in Southampton in 1863, no birth date is recorded with this reference however so will need the certificate in order to check relevance.

1881 census has Catherine (b Ireland) and George BOOTH running a pub in St Mary's Southampton, (RG11 piece 1208 folio 125 page 30). No children are recorded.

1891 census has Catherine (b Ireland) and George BOOTH in Stanford Street Southampton, (RG12 piece 918 folio 111 page 3). No children are recorded.

1901 census reveals this Catherine BOOTH to have the middle initial "J" (RG12 piece 918 folio 111 page 3). No children are recorded.

1911 census reveals this Catherine BOOTH to have the middle name "Jane" (RG14PN5962 RG78PN273A RD99 SD1 ED28 SN68)
It also records that Catherine and George BOOTH have been married for 46 years but had no children (perhaps this just means no children "together". As they were married in 1865, perhaps Frederick HOWELL had died between the 1861 census and 1865, and Jane had remarried as "Catherine Jane" BOOTH?

A further marriage record from 1865 for "Catherine Jane HOWELL" to George BOOTH would appear to settle the question:
BMD Search result details
Civil Registration event: Marriage
Name: HOWELL, Catherine Jane
Registration District: Southampton
County: Hampshire
Year of Registration: 1865
Quarter of Registration: Jan-Feb-Mar
Spouse's last name: Not available before 1912
Volume No: 2C
Page No: 30
Certificate not yet ordered.

08/11
Unable to locate "Jane STANTON bc1836, Ireland" on the 1861 or beyond. 
STANTON, Jane (I316)
 
693 12/11
The 1851 census records Hester's husband John GAY as a widower. 
GREEN, Hester (I431)
 
694 12/11
The 1901 census has Robert's grandaughter "Eva B SMITH, b.c.1893; Chard, Somerset" living with the family. Unclear who's daughter this may have been.

09/05
Gravestone inscription:
In everloving memory
of
Robert Langshaw Smith
The beloved husband of
Sarah Smith
who fell asleep in Jesus
March 20th 1905 Aged 64 years
Goid hath called the patient sufferer
All thy pain and sufferings o'er
Though we mourn for thee our dear one
Thou are not lost but gone before

Also of Sarah Ann his wife
died March 8th 1926
Aged 80 years

Robert Langshaw Smith started at Portland Prison as an Assistant Warder in1866, became a Warder in 1874 and a Principal Warder in 1884, retiring due to ill health in 1887.

09/04
Information on Smith family from email from Brian Wollaston August 04
Hello Mark,

I have found your interests in the Stanton and Bown families through the S&DFHS website.

James Stanton and Mary Ann Bown are my 2 x gt grand parents through Sarah Ann Stanton, a sister to William John Stanton who I presume is your ancestor..

I have for some time been trying to find Mary Ann Bown's father's death/burial as information about him is a bit sparse. Also I cannot find him in the 1841 census. I would like to have some confirmation of his age to see if the one I have found being baptised in Fleet in 1791 is really him. If it is, then there could be an interesting link as his mother's maiden name was Lovell.

Do you have any info on that side of the family?

You may wish to have a look at my web site at www.wollastonb.co.uk

Best wishes

Brian Wollaston

Data from... http://www.wollastonb.co.uk/

More data on Fletcher and Maxfield ancestory is available on Brians website. 
SMITH, Robert Langshaw (I393)
 
695 12/11
The 1911 census records that Caroline bore 9 children. 6 of whom were still alive by 1911 census. 
?, Caroline (I1780)
 
696 12/11
The 1911 census records that Catherine had bore 2 children, both still living. 
?, Catherine (I1764)
 
697 12/11
The 1911 census records that Ellen had bore 4 children. 3 of whom were still living. 
?, Ellen (I1787)
 
698 12/11
The 1911 census records that Sarah (now a widow) bore 7 children. 5 of whom were still living. The census also suggests that her daughter Laura was also living with her at this time along with her husband Ernest PRESCOTT. Also living in the household as a "boarder" is Marinia SCHUMACKER, aged just 1 year, born Weymouth. There is no indication as to who her parents might have been.
07/11
Unable to locate Sarah "STANTON" on the 1851 census.

06/06
British Isles VRI CD has:
STANTON, Sarah Ann Christening
Gender: Female
Christening Date: 25 Aug 1844 Recorded in: Weymouth, Dorset, England
Collection: Holy Trinity
Father: James STANTON
Mother: Mary Ann
Source: FHL Film 1239253 Dates: 1836 - 1847

05/06
Free BMD has Sarah Ann Stanton's birth recorded in Weymouth in Sep 1844

09/05
Gravestone inscription:
Also of Sarah Ann his wife
died March 8th 1926
Aged 80 years

09/05 Mervyn
I have found Sarah Ann Smith (née Stanton and daughter of Mary Ann Bown-Stanton) on the 1881 Census. She reads as follows:
1881. 5, Dorset Place, Wyke Regis, Dorset.
Sarah Ann Smith, married, 37, Warders wife, b. Weymouth
Sarah M. Smith, u/m, 15, Dressmaker's apprentice, b. Weymouth
Robert L. Smith, u/m, 14, Carpenter's apprentice, b. Weymouth
Annie B. Smith, 8, Scholar, b. Weymouth
Ernest, J.S. Smith, 5, " , b. Weymouth
Laura A. Smith, 1, b. Weymouth
Mary Kerridge, widow, 74, Lodger, Annuitant b. Southampton
Sarah's husband, Robert Langshaw Smith wasn't included, and she is marked as 'Head' of the household, but there is a Robert Smith (amongst a 100+ other 'Smiths' on this Census) who appears as a Prison Officer, aged 40, b. Weymouth, resident (for Census purposes) at "Her Majesty's Convict Prison, Portland". 
STANTON, Sarah Ann (I298)
 
699 12/11
The 1911 census suggests that Laura was living with her mother Sarah at this time along with her husband Ernest PRESCOTT. This is assumed from the name Laura Agnes/ (Laura A in previous records), birth year and birth place which all match.
The census also records that Laura had bore no children. 
SMITH, Laura Agnes (I532)
 
700 12/11
The 4th son Frank has the middle name "Langshaw" which is a reuse of Richard's mother's maiden name. 
SMITH, Frank Langshaw (I1779)
 

      «Prev «1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next»