roughy101 Posted November 20, 2008 Author Share Posted November 20, 2008 the witnesses are mary gillott and i think cooper corbidge i think ,these registras had no consideration for us people trying to trace them 150yrs later:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUFFEMS Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 the witnesses are mary gillott and i think cooper corbidge i think ,these registras had no consideration for us people trying to trace them 150yrs later:hihi: Cooper Corbidge was a Witness on many marriage certificates. Duffems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devlin Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 on the 1861 census charles is listed as charley jackson ,emma is listed being born chesterfield .on the IGI there is the record of emma wilberham being christened chesterfield 1839 mother sarah wilberham ,no father listed Spent most of last night thinking about this after Lobster had raised it; Firstly..... Ancestry has this birth registered in March 1839 but there is no chrisitan name it says Wilbraham...Female...Chesterfield... Volume X1X page 92. Secondly.... IGI has a christening listed on 30th March 1839 in Chesterfield (as lobster says above) child is Christened Emma and under parents only Sarah is listed the father section is left blank. It may be a cruel twist of coincidence but I think there is possibly something in this. Wilbraham listings are few and far between (with Wilberham and Wilbuham spelt listings being even more frugal) and to have the 2 things above ....followed up in 1856 when Chas and Emma married there being no father listed........................???? Maybe worth a punt to try and obtain this BC but will it tell you anything ?? There is another angle you could consider. If we are on to the right family they can be traced on the early census docs so.... In 1841 Emma Wilbraham (11) is at home in Crich Derbyshire with mother Sarah(45) sister Harriet (20) and sister Eliza (15). Eliza Wilbraham later marries in Belper in 1844 (but there a several men on this list) so ordering her MC will tell you who she married but what will it say about who her father is ??? This is 12 years before Emma marries so maybe it might tell you more or maybe at least one of the siblings "wanted" thier fathers name on ?? mind boggling init !!! I realise this is all expense but I suppose it depends on how bad you want to know Dev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devlin Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 There is another angle you could consider. If we are on to the right family they can be traced on the early census docs so.... In 1841 Emma Wilbraham (11) is at home in Crich Derbyshire with mother Sarah(45) sister Harriet (20) and sister Eliza (15). Eliza Wilbraham later marries in Belper in 1844 (but there a several men on this list) so ordering her MC will tell you who she married but what will it say about who her father is ??? This is 12 years before Emma marries so maybe it might tell you more or maybe at least one of the siblings "wanted" thier fathers name on ?? mind boggling init !!! IGNORE THIS LAST BIT....MY MISTAKE THIS CAN'T POSSIBLY BE HER IF SHE WAS BORN IN 1839.......SHE WOULD HAVE ONLY BEEN 2 AT THE TIME OF THE 1841 CENSUS..............SORRY FOR THE MISLEADING INFO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roughy101 Posted November 21, 2008 Author Share Posted November 21, 2008 Spent most of last night thinking about this after Lobster had raised it; Firstly..... Ancestry has this birth registered in March 1839 but there is no chrisitan name it says Wilbraham...Female...Chesterfield... Volume X1X page 92. Secondly.... IGI has a christening listed on 30th March 1839 in Chesterfield (as lobster says above) child is Christened Emma and under parents only Sarah is listed the father section is left blank. It may be a cruel twist of coincidence but I think there is possibly something in this. Wilbraham listings are few and far between (with Wilberham and Wilbuham spelt listings being even more frugal) and to have the 2 things above ....followed up in 1856 when Chas and Emma married there being no father listed........................???? Maybe worth a punt to try and obtain this BC but will it tell you anything ?? There is another angle you could consider. If we are on to the right family they can be traced on the early census docs so.... In 1841 Emma Wilbraham (11) is at home in Crich Derbyshire with mother Sarah(45) sister Harriet (20) and sister Eliza (15). Eliza Wilbraham later marries in Belper in 1844 (but there a several men on this list) so ordering her MC will tell you who she married but what will it say about who her father is ??? This is 12 years before Emma marries so maybe it might tell you more or maybe at least one of the siblings "wanted" thier fathers name on ?? mind boggling init !!! I realise this is all expense but I suppose it depends on how bad you want to know Dev thanks devlin,just how far do you go,i only sent for charles birth cert to confirm who his father was and noticed mary wilberham the mother not the father,and had no intention of researching the wilberhams,but now iv got the bit between the teeth lol where does it all end bankruptsy:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roughy101 Posted November 21, 2008 Author Share Posted November 21, 2008 Yes..I have seen that too but it's not the same spelling (Wilbraham) and the mother is called Sarah where as on the marriage certificate she is a Mary Ann. However, spellings have evolved and names were used differently too so who knows? The 1861 census entry is definately Charley and Emma... now there is only 1871 missing i found them on the 1871 living at 3 division lane:thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smary Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 I see there is also a spelling of Wilbraham which I found on the 1841 census- sorry I see Devlin has already found this family Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roughy101 Posted November 22, 2008 Author Share Posted November 22, 2008 I see there is also a spelling of Wilbraham which I found on the 1841 census- sorry I see Devlin has already found this familythanks smary,it doesnt matter, :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.