The marriage entries for St Stephen’s Church, Birmingham show that Florence Ann Yeomans (eldest daughter of James Yeomans and Mary Ann Johnson) married Alfred Hickman in 1898. But did she?

Alfred was recorded as a bicycle maker, as was his father, Joseph Hickman. One of the witnesses was Joseph Hickman – but this can not be his father, who was noted as ‘deceased’. Presumably it is a brother or other relation. The other witness was Sarah Smith.

Alfred or Albert?

Florence signs her name but her husband makes only his mark – nothing unusual for the time. However, careful examination shows that in place of Alfred’s signature is “The mark of Albert Hickman” – not Alfred. So which name is correct? You would imagine the official name, right? The one recorded in all the indexes as being Florence’s husband. But I’m not so sure. You see, I’m having a very hard time finding ‘Alfred’ after 1898 – maybe it’s because he was actually named Albert.

Shortly after their marriage, Florence died. She appears to have died either during or soon after the birth of her first child, who was also given the name Florence Ann. So using his wife’s name as a reference when searching the 1901 census for Albert/Alfred is not an option. Neither is using their daughter’s name since she also died soon after birth.

However, I did come across a baptismal record for Florence Ann Hickman that seemed to definitely be a match. This child was born 28 April 1898 and baptised at St James’, Ashted in the ‘County of Birmingham’ on 1 June 1898.

Brother Joseph?

The parents of little Florence were recorded here as Joseph and Sarah Hickman (shoemaker). Could this be the Joseph and Sarah Smith who signed Florence’s marriage record? My imagination conjured up possible scenarios… ‘Joseph is clearly a brother. He and Sarah Smith must have married soon after Florence and ‘Alfred’, and took on her tiny infant as their own when Florence died since the grieving father would be ‘unable’ to do so himself. Or perhaps they had simply taken the ‘sickly’ child to be baptised as quickly as possible and their names were mistakenly recorded as the parents..?’

But there was a snag:

There was another death of an infant Florence Ann Hickman! This hadn’t come up earlier as I had restricted the search for Florence Ann Hickman deaths to only in Birmingham. Opening up the search for births showed that Joseph and Sarah WERE the true parents of the Florence Ann baptised in Ashted (part of Aston registration district). 

Using the maiden name of the ‘other mother’, I was able to find the marriage record of Joseph and Sarah – her maiden name was Holt.

So what I had imagined was proved incorrect. Joseph did not marry the other witness ‘Sarah Smith’ soon after Florence and ‘Alfred’ married (he had actually married a different Sarah 7 years previous). Nor did he nobly take on his brother’s child and baptise her as his own.

But were they at least brothers? It still seems very likely. Joseph’s father’s name was also Joseph Hickman (deceased) but no profession was given. Tracking Joseph and Sarah Hickman down in the 1901 and 1911 censuses using Joseph’s occupation of ‘shoemaker’ supported the age given on his marriage record (an estimated birth year of c1868) and gave his birthplace as Birmingham. A search for a birth with those details gave me:

And a search for other children with the mother’s maiden name of Preston gave me:

Not Alfred BUT an Albert. And the birth year matches the age given when ‘Alfred’ married.

At this point, I believe it’s very likely that Alfred was in fact Albert, and he and Joseph were brothers, but the search continues…

Evidence supporting:

• the name Albert mentioned on the Alfred marriage record;
• both fathers named Joseph and deceased;
• matching ages on marriage records;
• Joseph as witness on Alfred/Albert marriage (matching signature to his own marriage record);
• Joseph also had a child named Florence Ann (seemingly in honour of Alfred/Albert’s wife)

Side note: The father Joseph Hickman appears to have been ‘boarding’ with a Theodosia Johnson on the 1881 census (daughter Emily H Johnson appears to be his – they married later that year in November)

Contradictory evidence:

• The brothers from the above GRO search image, Albert and Henry, appear as the ‘children’ of Joseph Taylor and Mary Ann Hickman in the 1881 census (boarding with Robert Taylor in 1891)

The post Call Me Al appeared first on Geneageek.

I’ve recently designed my own colourful family trees (see more about that here). The information held is minimal but besides looking pretty on the wall, it’s a useful way to see what gaps still need filling (particularly for those like me who absorb information best visually). For various reasons, there are a few question marks on the Richards family tree, mainly to do with death dates. I can live with that (for now) – I’d rather be as accurate as possible. But what really bothers me is the missing name on the Johnson branch.  This is a ‘brick wall’ I’m determined to break down and will start by consolidating all I know about Mary Ann.

Who was the mother of Mary Ann Johnson?

Mary Ann Johnson married James Yeomans at St Jude’s Church, Birmingham on 9 March 1874. They were both single and residing on Hill Street at the time of their marriage – the same street on which St Jude’s was situated. The area was one of the poorest parts of Birmingham at the time so they were likely not well off. Unfortunately, the church building of St Jude’s was demolished in 1971.

(Note that the year in the heading is 1875 but the full date gives 1874. All four entries on this page had the same issue. The preceding and following pages of the St Jude’s parish register were checked to confirm the year was in fact 1874.)

The marriage record tells us that Mary Ann’s father was a shoemaker named John Johnson. The witnesses at their marriage were George Yeomans and Eliza Millard.

The couple were to have 9 children between 1877 and 1900: Florence Ann, John Joseph, Julia, Catherine Ellen, Sarah Emily, Alfred Thomas, James Arthur, Leah and William Edward.

Mary Ann appears with her husband and children living at the back of 20 Barn Street (house 1) in the 1881 census. Boarding with them is 20-year-old iron plate worker, Thomas Johnson. She gives her age as 26 which gives us an approximate birth year of 1855 and birth place of Birmingham.

The 1891 census reiterates the same birth information. This time they are living in Court 40 (house 7) Hospital Street.

The birth place of their daughter Florence (in both censuses) indicates that Mary Ann spent some time at Bilston, Staffordshire – long enough to give birth there at least.

When her daughter Leah was born in 1897, the family were residing at 41 New John Street.

Mary Ann died in 1900 at the age of 41. Her death was registered at Birmingham in the September quarter of 1900 (Jul-Aug-Sep). The 1939 register gives her youngest son’s birth date as 5 March 1900 so she seems to have died within months of William Edward being born.

So the bare facts we have of Mary Ann as we begin our ‘brick wall’ demolition are:

• born c1855 in Birmingham
• father John Johnson (a shoemaker)
• married James Yeomans in 1874 at St Jude’s in Birmingham
• gave birth to first daughter in Bilston, Staffordshire (1875)
• died in 1900 soon after youngest son was born

I’ll get my sledgehammer…

The post Stonewall Johnson appeared first on Geneageek.

Leah Yeomans birth date on the 1939 register is listed as 5 Jan 1896. However, on her official birth certificate, the year of birth is recorded as 1897. Since you would imagine a birth certificate to be more accurate, I’ve always recorded her year of birth as 1897. But as I was going through the records again, I wondered which was more accurate. Human error needs to be considered in both cases here.

It was only minutes later that I came across another example within the same family.

The marriage certificate of Leah Yeomans’ parents lists their year of marriage as 1874.
Today, I found an image of the original marriage entry from the parish records that shows the year may actually be 1875.

In this case, the confusion stems from the year in the title being 1875 and the year within the entry as 1874. The other 3 entries on the image all have the same anomaly (both being recorded as 1875 and 1874). Fortunately I was able to see the previous & following pages and it seems to be an error only on this particular page – the title year should actually read 1874.

My decision is to record Leah Yeomans birth year as 1897 (since the year is repeated 3 times within the entry, it’s less likely to be a mistake) and her parents’ marriage as 1874.

The post Certified Muddle appeared first on Geneageek.

My convict ancestors have been mentioned on this blog a few times, but unfortunately I haven’t really been able to find out much about their lives before they were transported to Australia. Since George WHITE is a fairly common name, the possible matches I find are hard to verify as being ‘my guy’, but I still like to cast my net out every now and then and see if I catch anything new.

It was while doing this that I came across another George WHITE of similar age in the Warwickshire criminal records.  He is not related to me since the record is dated 1837 whereas my George WHITE was transported in 1834, but I was curious to know more.

21 year old, George WHITE was trialled for larceny at the Warwickshire ‘County Adjourned Session’ on the 14th March, 1837.  His ‘degree of instruction’ was recorded as N, which he meant he could neither read nor write [more info].  He was found guilty for this ‘mystery theft’ and imprisoned for 6 months.

I consulted the British Newspaper Archives and found a mention in the Leamington Spa Courier, printed 4 days after his conviction:

George White, for stealing one leg and one shoulder of mutton, at the George in the Tree, in the parish of Balsall, the property of John Hemmings.  The prisoner had stolen the property out of the prosecutor’s shop, late one night, and when he was pursued he threw it away and escaped. – Six calendar months, house of correction, hard labour.

Leamington Spa Courier, 18 March 1837, p3

I managed to find an interesting mention of the George-in-the-Tree pub in the Dictionary of Pub Names:

The pub was once the Royal Oak, with a signboard showing Charles II hiding in the tree. A licensee with little feeling for history is said to have had the head of Charles replaced by that of George III (then the reigning monarch) when the signboard needed repainting.  A different local story is that the pub (and sign) had become the George, but after a gale one night the signboard was found to have disappeared.  Only when a large elm tree across the road shed its leaves later in the year was the board discovered in its branches…

Hopefully this other George White eventually managed to find a better life for himself too.

The post George in the Gaol appeared first on Geneageek.