Wilson confusion

[PeteW1959]

I have a family in 1851 (HO107; Piece: 2042; Folio: 884; Page: 27) in Worcester

John Wilson, Head, Mar, 29, Gun Smith, Birmingham
Eleanor Wilson, Wife, Mar, 31, Burnisher, Dudley
Sarah Wilson, Dau, 6, Scholar, Worcester (This has been transcribed on Ancestry as Worcestershire, but it is definitely Worcester itself)
John Wilson, Son, 3, Scholar, Ditto
George Wilson, Son, 10 mnth, Ditto

Eleanor is my relative, her maiden name is Clift and I have the marriage from parish registers. I also have her in 1841 as Elinor.

I have the births of the 3 children from the new GRO search, but Sarah is registered Q3 Birmingham (Vol 16 Page 245), along with one other, Samuel Benjamin Wilson, Q1 1853 Worcester Vol 6c Page 288. All have the mmn as Clift.

There is one other child in the GRO index, Ann Wilson Q4 1846, with mmn Clift, but also registered in Birmingham (Vol 16 Page 339). I can't find a likely death, so if she is John and Eleanor's, where is she in 1851?

Now for the confusing part. I haven't managed to find this family going forward, but using Ancestry suggestions, there is nothing going forward for John snr, but for Eleanor they suggest RG 9; Piece: 2163; Folio: 36; Page: 7

Ellen Wilson, Head, Widow, 43, Leather Case Maker, Worcestershire Dudley
Elizabeth Wilson, Daur, unm, 16, Leather Case Maker, Warwickshire Birmingham
John Wilson, Son, Unm, 13, Satchel Maker?, Worcestershire Worcester
Richard S Wilson, Son, 6, Ditto, Staffordshire Wolverhampton

Ellen fits, if she shortened her name, but the only child that is a precise fit is John. Elizabeth is the same age as Sarah, but her middle name is Eleanor from the GRO and she doesn't fit the place of birth from 1851. I can't find a birth for Richard at all.

So, is this the right family in 1861 (I think it unlikely), so where are they going forward from 1851?

[margaretmarch]

Did you see that someone has put a comment on the 1851 census which refers to Sarah and Elizabeth but doesn't make much sense!

I agree it's a match in parts but not entirely. Can you find the Ellen of 1861 census before that anywhere?

Margaret

[ozgirl]

Ancestry has the marriage of a Richard Samuel Wilson in October 1875, born 1855 in Birmingham to Sophia Kent. His father is John smith, a gun Finisher. I can't find any corresponding birth in GRO for Richard S or Richard Samuel Wilson anywhere. Could he actually be the Samuel Benjamin renamed?

[ozgirl]

Richard and Sophia in 1881 are listed as Willson - have you also tried searching GRO under this spelling?

[ozgirl]

Elizabeth Wilson, mmn Clift b Dec Q 1844 in Birmingham, from GRO - vol 16 page 243.

[ozgirl]

George Wilson age 7 died in Birmingham Mar Q 1858, GRO volume 06D page 107

[PeteW1959]

Margaret, is that 1851 comment on Ancestry? I can't see any comments at all. I've not found Ellen on any other census, nor can I find any likely marriages.

Linda, I had found the marriage of Richard and Sophia, and the census entries for them. The issue with John Wilson as his father is that it is a fairly common name, and there were thousands of gun smiths in the West Midlands.

I hadn't found the death for George, that helps a bit, but the link between the 1851 and 1861 families is still a bit tenuous for me.

[ozgirl]

I do think that the Elizabeth born in 1844 is correct as she was baptised on the same day as John

http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/49...8_316901-00144

Sarah's baptism:

http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/49...&usePUBJs=true


The comment that Margaret mentioned is on this page
http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin...=try&h=8953686

Not saying that it is the same family in 1861, not sure what info you already have

[ozgirl]

Ah - just found Samuel Benjamin died in Birmingham Dec Q 1853 - age says 9, but it is probably months. Vol 06D page 108

[ozgirl]

Ooh - how about this - Richard Wilton, mmn Clift, born Dec Quarter 1854 Wolverhampton, Vol.06B page 311.

Still can't find Elizabeth in 1851, or Sarah in 1861, or death of Sarah. Also death of John as Eleanor is a Widow in 1861.

[PeteW1959]

Now I am even more confused!

Looking at those two baptisms (Elizabeth and John), parents are definitely John and Eleanor Wilson. There is a third baptism at St Philips, Birmingham for Sarah Eleanor Wilson in 1843, parents also John and Eleanor. So initially this looks like the correct family, and Sarah and Elizabeth are different people. Doesn't help with Elizabeth in 1851 or Sarah in 1861 though!

However, the birth reg index I have for John, mmn Clift, is Q3 1848, but the baptism has his DOB as 21 Apr 1847 (transcription is 4th April, but it looks more like 21st on the image). There don't appear to be any births for John anywhere in the West Midlands in 1847. Even if the vicar made a mistake and put 1847 instead of 1848, he should have been registered in Q2, not Q3. I also have a birth reg index for Ann Wilson Q4 1846 Birmingham, mmn Clift, which would make an April 1847 birth for John impossible (unless it was a late reg for Ann and a premature birth for John; unlikely).

I have had a look at the note on the 1851 census, and the submitter has her tree online. If she is right, then I am related to her through Elizabeth's grandparents (my 4x great grandparents), however although she is almost certainly descended from Elizabeth, exactly who Elizabeth's parents are is where the problem lies. There are large parts of her tree she has just copied from mine, including some typos that I have since corrected, so I don't have a lot of confidence that her tree is correct.

I had considered that there might be more than one couple John and Eleanor Wilson (the names are not uncommon), or that there was a male Wilson married a different female Clift, but I can't find anything to support this, not a marriage or any census entries.

There is also the spread of various events across Birmingham, Dudley, Wolverhampton and Worcester. Although nowadays they all more or less run into each other, in the mid 19th Century they were all very distinct places.

I suppose purchasing birth certificates for John and Sarah (and possibly Elizabeth) might help, but as a side branch I can't justify the expense; Eleanor Wilson nee Clift is my 3x Great Aunt.

[JudithM]

Now I am even more confused!


However, the birth reg index I have for John, mmn Clift, is Q3 1848, but the baptism has his DOB as 21 Apr 1847 (transcription is 4th April, but it looks more like 21st on the image). There don't appear to be any births for John anywhere in the West Midlands in 1847. Even if the vicar made a mistake and put 1847 instead of 1848, he should have been registered in Q2, not Q3. I also have a birth reg index for Ann Wilson Q4 1846 Birmingham, mmn Clift, which would make an April 1847 birth for John impossible (unless it was a late reg for Ann and a premature birth for John; unlikely).

John's birth registration was in the April - Jun Quarter of 1848 (GRO label quarters by initial letter of last month in quarter - J for June) so April dob on the baptism register is a possible with just the year miss written.

[PeteW1959]

My mistake, I can't read my own handwriting! Yes, the birth reg is Q2 1848, so it could just be a mistake in the parish register.

[Katarzyna]

Could this be Sarah in 1861?
36, New John Street West, Birmingham, Warwickshire, England
William Eggerton Head Married Male 44 1817 Glass Button Maker Birmingham, Warwickshire, England Transcription
Esther Eggerton Wife Married Female 37 1824 - Birmingham, Warwickshire, England Transcription
Sarah Wilson Lodger Unmarried Female 17 1844 ... Birmingham, Warwickshire, England Transcription
Elizabeth Darwin Niece - Female 11 1850 Scholar Staffordshire, England Transcription
Elizabeth Williams Lodger Widow Female 71 1790 Formerly Servant Whitechapel, Middlesex, England

[PeteW1959]

Thanks Kat, that is almost certainly her. The address on the baptisms for Elizabeth and John in 1849 is New John Street West, so it is in exactly the right area.

Strange thing is that wasn't coming up in searches on Ancestry yesterday. I printed out the search to make notes as I checked each one, and the criteria I used was Sarah Wilson, 1844, Birmingham with exact matches turned off. Today she is top of the list, yesterday she didn't appear in the first 4 pages. Bizarre.