A mystery if anyone fancies a go

[PeteW1959]

Richard Hassell born 14 Aug 1806 in Bermondsey, baptised 17 Sep 1806 St Mary Magdalen, Bermondsey

1841 HO107 Piece 1058 Book 3 Folio 11 Page 16

Richard Hassell-34-Stone Mason-
Jane Hassell-28-Dressmaker-
Richard Hassell-9--
George Hassell-6--
Eliza Hassell-4--
Elizabeth Hassell-8 mths--

1851 HO107 Piece 1572 Folio 115 Page 7 & 8

Richard Hassell-Head-Mar-44-Stone Mason-Bermondsey, Surrey, England
Jane Hassell-Wife-Mar-38-Dress Maker-Chatham, Kent, England
Richard Hassell-Son-Unm-19-Stone Mason-Reigate, Surrey, England
Eliza Hassell-Dau-Unm-13-Scholar-Westminster, Middlesex, England
Elizabeth Hassell-Dau-Unm-10-Scholar-Westminster, Middlesex, England
Henry Hassell-Son-Unm-2--Lambeth, Surrey, England

Q3 1853 Deaths Lambeth 1d 205 Richard Hassell
Sep 4th 1853 Burial St Mary Lambeth

1861 RG9 Piece 355 Folio 116 Page 18

Jane Wood-Wife-Mar-48-Collar Maker-Chatham, Kent, England
Richard Hassell-Son-Unm-29-Slotter?-Reigate, Surrey, England
Elizabeth Hassell-Dau-Unm-20-Collar Maker-Lambeth, Surrey, England
Henry Hassell-Son-Unm-10-Scholar-Lambeth, Surrey, England
Edwin Hassell-Son-Unm-9-Scholar-Lambeth, Surrey, England

Is this the right family in 1861? If it is, why is Jane married, and why is she Wood? I can't find the marriage for Richard and Jane so don't know her maiden name (and can't afford to order a birth cert for one of the children), and I can't find Jane re-marrying after Richard's death. If Jane has re-married, where is her husband?

Any ideas?

[JudithM]

Certainly looks like the same family. No idea why Jane became Wood but it seems she was back to being Hassell in 1871.
11 Catherine St Lambeth
Jane Hassell Head widow Head 56 needlewoman
Richard Hassell son 38 labourer (gas works)
Edward Hassell son 18 labourer (candle factory)
though all birthplaces are listed as Lambeth
RG10 piece 668 folio 15 page 26

[JudithM]

and she was still at 11 Catherine St in 1881
Jane Hassell head W 66 G.... (?) collar maker Kent Chatham
Emma Lawson servant unm 15 servant domestic Surrey Lambeth
RG11 piece 598 folio 117 page 21

[stevefraseruk]

Just found this, not what you are after but looks like may be same Richard Hassell

http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?rank=1&new=1&MSAV=1&msT=1&gss=angs-c&gsfn=Richard&gsfn_x=XO&gsln=Hassell&msbdy=1806&msbpn__ftp=Bermondsey%2c+Surrey%2c+England&msbpn=87691&msbpn_PInfo=8-%7c0%7c0%7c3257%7c3251%7c0%7c0%7c0%7c5286%7c87691%7c0%7c&msddy=1853&msdpn__ftp=Lambeth&msgdy=1832&msgpn__ftp=Bermondsey%2c+Surrey%2c+England&msgpn=87691&msgpn_PInfo=8-%7c0%7c0%7c3257%7c3251%7c0%7c0%7c0%7c5286%7c87691%7c0%7c&uidh=ii2&pcat=36&h=588596&recoff=8+9&db=CanturburyPrerogativeCourt&indiv=1&ml_rpos=1

[Elaine ..Spain]

There is a possible marriage in 1858, but only 3 people named in the transcription on FreeBMD

Marriages Dec 1859
Hassell Jane
Jones Mary Ann Jane
Wood Thomas
Chelsea vol. 1a, page 257

Jane gives her place of birth as Chatham. Might be worth searching the parish registers on CityArk to see if you can find a marriage c1830. There are some registers on there for St. Mary the Virgin, Chatham. They are not indexed so it means a long trawl but might be worth it in the end!

http://cityark.medway.gov.uk/query/results/?Mode=Search&PathList=%2FZ4a_Medway_Ancestors%2F%0A&SearchWords=&DateList=

[Elaine ..Spain]

Just found this, not what you are after but looks like may be same Richard Hassell

http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin...iv=1&ml_rpos=1

I think that is a different Richard Hassell - possibly refers to this one who died in 1852

http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&db=DorsetParishRegBurial%2c&rank=0&gsfn=richard&gsln=hassell&sx=&gs1co=3251%2cEngland&gs1pl=5262%2cDorset&year=&yearend=&sbo=0&sbor=&ufr=0&wp=4%3b_80000002%3b_80000003&srchb=r&prox=1&ti=5538&ti.si=0&gss=angs-d&pcat=34&fh=0&h=2537413&recoff=8+9&ml_rpos=1

[Darksecretz]

Thomas WOOD and Jane LASSELL marriage 1859: [her MN was it Fairclough?]

http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&db=LMAmarriages&rank=1&new=1&ssrc=pt_t51124177_p26074879748&MSAV=1&msT=1&gss=angs-d&gsfn=thomas&gsln=wood&msgdy=1859&msgpn__ftp=London%2c+England&msgpn=5274&msgpn_PInfo=7-%7c0%7c0%7c3257%7c3251%7c0%7c0%7c0%7c5274%7c0%7c0%7c&dbOnly=_F00058A6%7c_F00058A6_x%2c_F0005A5D%7c_F0005A5D_x%2c_F0005A49%7c_F0005A49_x&uidh=lg3&pcat=BMD_MARRIAGE&fh=0&h=2215799&recoff=8+9+28&ml_rpos=1

[Darksecretz]

baptism of Jane Faircloth with father Matthew: http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin...iv=1&ml_rpos=2

[Elaine ..Spain]

Good find Julie!

[Darksecretz]

Good find Julie!

ta, struggling to find a Fairclough/Hassell marriage though!

[PeteW1959]

Thanks for your input folks. Sorry for the delay; been to a hospital appointment.

I'm not sure about the Chelsea marriage. It does seem to fit, but there are a few things that make me sceptical.

Firstly Chelsea isn't really the right area; Richard and Jane's first child was born in Reigate, the next two in Westminster, but after that everything else is in Lambeth, including where Jane is in 1881.

Secondly I am not sure that the certificate actually says Hassell. The last 4 letters are 'sell', but the 3rd doesn't really look like an 's'; it is certainly very different to the other 's'.

Thirdly Jane is back to being Hassell in 1881.

However it does seem to tie in to the BMD index, and with the baptism of Jane Fairclough in Chatham it adds more fuel to the fire.

I will look through the Chatham registers, but I am more inclined towards an East End marriage as that is where Richard was born and where they ended up living. There is no other connection to Kent anywhere else in the immediate family, and Richard as stonemason wouldn't have need to go as far as Chatham for work.

[Elaine ..Spain]

Secondly I am not sure that the certificate actually says Hassell. The last 4 letters are 'sell', but the 3rd doesn't really look like an 's'; it is certainly very different to the other 's'.

I think it has been written in old style, using a long 'f' to replace the double 's'

https://help.familysearch.org/publishing/866/105525_f.SAL_Public.html

[Darksecretz]

Secondly I am not sure that the certificate actually says Hassell. The last 4 letters are 'sell', but the 3rd doesn't really look like an 's'; it is certainly very different to the other 's'.

if you compare it with 'Assistant' which is the occupation of the groom bottom right, you will see it looks like Afsitant, I can't remember what the term is but I do know that the 's' can sometimes in old documents look like an 'F'

[Darksecretz]

snap Elaine!

[Darksecretz]

Richard Williams bapt 1832: http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin...v=1&ml_rpos=11

no clues there then!

[Darksecretz]

do you have the baptisms of the other children Pete?

[susan h]

if you compare it with 'Assistant' which is the occupation of the groom bottom right, you will see it looks like Afsitant, I can't remember what the term is but I do know that the 's' can sometimes in old documents look like an 'F'

Yes, I definitely agree with Julie, Pete. Back then a double 'S' was commonly written using the 'long s' which looks like 'f'. Google "long 's'"

[PeteW1959]

Point taken about the 'long s', but there is still the question of why Chelsea, and why does she revert to Hassell in 1881?

I don't have any of the baptisms; I think the last time I looked there were far fewer parish records available; I certainly didn't find Richard jr. which you have just found Julie.

[PeteW1959]

Just looked and found Henry Edward and Elizabeth baptisms

[Darksecretz]

George James' bapt: http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin...iv=1&ml_rpos=4