PDA

View Full Version : Another Family that don't want to be found!



Sherbertrose
27-02-13, 11:07
I am trying to hatch, match and dispatch the siblings of the direct ancestors in my tree - the easy ones have been dealt with. This now leaves those not so easy.

The lady I am presently trying to 'track' is Maria Staniforth born 1831 Crowle Lincolnshire. She is on the 1841 and 51 census returns in Crowle but then the trail goes cold. The most likely explanation is that she married. There are no marriages in Lincolnshire which jump out at me, however, there is a marriage in Rotherham 1854 to John Bentley. It is possible that she could have married in Rotherham as her nephew (hubbys Great Grandfather married in Rotherham). There is a Maria Bentley living in Kimberworth, Rotherham (1871 census)born right date, right place. She is recorded as married and is living with her children Tom, Rebecca, Alfred and Mary - all children recorded as being born in Rotherham.

http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=uki1871&indiv=try&h=9316718

The problem is I can not find the family on any other census, neither do the children seem to have had there births registered in Rotherham and as there is no sign of Maria's husband he does not offer any option for further investigation. It is possible that Bentley is badly transcribed but despite various attempts I have not found them. I know there are people out there who are genius when it come to finding bad transcriptions so I would appreciate your best efforts on this one!!

I have to nip to the shops so if I do not respond directly I will be back soon.

Many thanks in anticipation.

Sandra

Elaine ..Spain
27-02-13, 11:21
1881 - what about this one
Maria Bintcliffe! born right time, right place.
Has a daughter Mary E Pepper which would be the same age as the Mary E Bentley in 1871
There is also an Alfred in the household whose details match up with the 1871 census

Marriages Dec 1880
BENTCLIFFE /Bentliffe Mary Elizabeth
Pepper William
Rotherham 9c 833

http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=uki1881&indiv=try&h=25747467

AntonyM
27-02-13, 11:30
Maria BINTCLIFFE , b abt 1835 in Crowle, Lincs is living in Kimberworth in 1881 with her son Alfred (19). She is a widow. Looks like daughter Mary E is living with her aged 17 and married to William Pepper, 23. (Class: RG11; Piece: 4678; Folio: 50; Page: 33; GSU roll: 1342131.)


William PEPPER and Mary Elizabeth BENTLIFFE married in Rotherham Oct-Dec 1880 (vol 9c p833).

(Elaine beat me to it...)

AntonyM
27-02-13, 11:35
There is a birth reg for Alfred BINTCLIFFE Jul-Sep 1861 in Rotherham (vol 9c p 431) so the spelling is fairly consistent - it may be BENTLEY that is the error.

Elaine ..Spain
27-02-13, 11:39
Following William and Mary Pepper forward to 1891 - the Bently name appears again, although Ancestry have mistranscribed it as Betty

http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=uki1891&indiv=try&h=6105751

Household
William Pepper 35
Mary E Pepper 27
Frank Pepper 7
Rebecca Pepper 6
William Pepper 2
William Betty 66 - should be William Bently, b 1825, Barnsley, Yorkshire (uncle)
William Jarvis 24
Charles Foster 20

Elaine ..Spain
27-02-13, 11:56
Possible death for Maria

Maria Bintcliffe - age at death 73 (therefore born c 1834)
Rotherham 9c 382

Possible 1901 census
http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=uki1901&indiv=try&h=28232766
- recorded on Ancestry as Maria Binkliffe, born c 1835 Crawle, Linconshire

Possible 1891 census
http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=uki1891&indiv=try&h=6176619
- recorded on Ancestry as Maria Bentcliffe, born c 1835 Yorkshire - living in Thorpe Hesley (same as 1881 and 1901 census)

AntonyM
27-02-13, 12:06
Elaine seems to have found the evidence that this is the right family - but why the Bentley/Bentcliffe/Bentliffe/Bintcliffe variance will take some working out. I suspect that husband John was originally a BINTCLIFFE and changed the family name to BENTLEY but for some reason, both variants (in multiple spellings) continued to be used.

Details of John BENTLEY from the 1854 marriage certificate (age and father's details) may help to sort it out.

Sherbertrose
27-02-13, 13:18
Many thanks for all your contributions - sorry I have been away from the lap top rather longer than anticipated. Just having lunch then I will follow up all your findings.

Sandra

Elaine ..Spain
27-02-13, 13:23
Thought I had added this one as well - must have forgot!

Probably 1861 census
http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=uki1861&indiv=try&h=11652472

Household shown as:
John Bencliff 26
Mareah Bencliff 29
Rebeca Bencliff 2

- interestingly there is another Bencliff family on the same page, living next door, so could well be related family.

.. and then working back to 1841, this looks like a possible - transcribed on Ancestry as John Bintileff - but a correction added by an Ancestry member to John Bintcliff
http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=uki1841&indiv=try&h=12666317

Sherbertrose
27-02-13, 14:00
I have looked at all your findings and think there is a good case for the name variations. On the 1851 census there is a John Bintcliff- living in Thorpe Hesley (a neighboring village to Kimberworth). There is also a brother William born 1826 which is consistent with the 1891 census which shows William as the uncle of Mary. Can anyone find the family in 1861 and a death for John?

Sandra

Sherbertrose
27-02-13, 14:02
Sorry Elaine I suspect this answers one question! I was busy investigating!

Sandra

Elaine ..Spain
27-02-13, 14:17
... and a death for John?

.. not exactly a death for John, but an entry in the Criminal Registers on Ancestry which could be him.
http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&db=CriminalRegisters%2c&rank=0&gsfn=john&gsln=b*iffe&sx=&gs1co=3251%2cEngland&gs1pl=1%2cAll+Counties&year=&yearend=&sbo=1&sbor=&ufr=0&wp=4%3b_80000002%3b_80000003&srchb=r&prox=1&ti=5538&ti.si=0&gss=angs-d&o_iid=21417&o_lid=21417&o_sch=Web+Property&offerid=0%3a21318%3a0&pcat=36&fh=2&h=73168&recoff=10+11

Elaine ..Spain
27-02-13, 14:20
There are various newspaper reports on the case - he is described as John Bentcliffe, aged 29, collier - which would make him born c.1836.

Sherbertrose
27-02-13, 14:27
I think this is probably him - it is certainly consistent with the 1851 census which shows him being born c1835 and man slaughter with a twenty year sentence would certainly take him out of the equation for a while. I wonder what he did? May have to investigate this one further out of curiosity!

Sandra

AntonyM
27-02-13, 15:45
He was part of a gang of poachers who killed a gamekeeper. Reading the newspaper reports, he and his associates were incredibly lucky not to be hanged. Even the judge makes clear his surprise that the jury returned a verdict of Manslaughter !

Sherbertrose
27-02-13, 16:23
I know he is not a direct ancestor - only the husband of the sister of a direct ancestor but it is interesting to have someone really 'naughty'. I have one or two drunk and disorderly and petty thieves but this is a different league. I did have a bigamist but I think she got away with it!!

Sandra

margaretmarch
27-02-13, 16:48
I know he is not a direct ancestor - only the husband of the sister of a direct ancestor but it is interesting to have someone really 'naughty'. I have one or two drunk and disorderly and petty thieves but this is a different league. I did have a bigamist but I think she got away with it!!

Sandra

Well bigamy is not such a heinous crime as it was often done due to lack of funds for divorce rather than defrauding someone or being a rotter!
Margaret

Katherine
27-02-13, 19:12
Hi Sherbertrose,
Not sure if this may be of use to you with the 'Staniforth' family & there is a couple of Bentley's on their too.

http://www.red1st.com/axholme/browsemedia.php?mediasearch=STANIFORTH&mediatypeID=headstones&tree=Axholme&tnggallery=
Katherine

Sherbertrose
27-02-13, 19:30
Hi Katherine,

Thank you for trying to help. I have used this site on a number of occasions, however, the contributions are from the public and as such are not always accurate or reliable.

Sandra