Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Quite complicated will - mystery nephew?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Quite complicated will - mystery nephew?

    Thanks for looking!

    This is quite complicated, and starts with the will of Hastings Garner of Packington, who died 14 November 1848.

    Nephew Francis Garner, son of Thomas Garner, Farmer of Packington.

    Nephew John Garner, son of Nathaniel Garner.

    Nephews John Garner of Yoxall Staff, and Francis William Garner of Colton, Staff, sons of late brother John Garner.

    Brother Thomas Garner and his wife Elizabeth Garner.

    Sister Ruth Elton, deceased.

    Nephew Hastings Garner.

    Sister Martha Sutton, widow.

    Sister Elizabeth Garner wife of the said Nathaniel Garner.

    ----------------------------

    OK... Hastings Garner was buried in Packington 17 November 1848, aged 80.

    Found his christening in 1768, son of Hastings and Ruth.

    Hastings and Ruth also had the following children (who survived infancy):

    John - mentioned in Hastings' will. Check.
    Thomas - mentioned in Hastings' will. Check. and his wife was Elizabeth. Check.
    Ruth - mentioned in Hastings' will. Check. Married William Elton and died in 1832. Check.
    Mary - married John Hatchett and had a son Hastings Hatchett mentioned in the will. Check
    Martha - married a Mr Sutton. Mentioned in the will. Check.
    Elizabeth - married Nathaniel Garner, as mentioned in the will. Check. Had a son John Garner also mentioned in the will. Check.
    Edward, died in 1836. Don't know what happened in between, but no mention in the will to him or his family.


    So, all the points have been covered apart from the nephew, Francis Garner, son of Thomas Garner, Farmer, of Packington.

    I have found this Francis Garner who married Elizabeth Elton who was actually the daughter of the sister Ruth Garner.

    So, would Francis still be considered as nephew? He was married to his niece... and the fact that it didn't say "Son of my brother Thomas Garner.." as in the other cases makes me think this is all ok.



    *Phew - just writing it down makes it make more sense*. I think! ;)

    Remembering: Cuthbert Gregory 1889 - 1916, George Arnold Connelly 1886 - 1917, Thomas Lowe Davenport 1890 - 1917, Roland Davenport Farmer 1885 - 1916, William Davenport Sheffield 1879 - 1915, Cuthbert Gregory 1918 - 1944

  • #2
    I also think that I have a possible family for Francis Garner, son of Thomas Garner...

    Thomas Garner and Mary Salte had children in 1793, 1794, 1798, 1802, 1804, 1806 and 1808. All of whom were born in Willesley, Derbyshire but christened in Packington.

    There is a gap between 1794 and 1798 where Francis could fit in.

    Another thing, one of their sons was Henry Salte Garner and one of the witnesses at Francis Garner and Elizabeth Elton's wedding was Henry S Garner. (The wedding was 1819 so pre civil reg.)

    Remembering: Cuthbert Gregory 1889 - 1916, George Arnold Connelly 1886 - 1917, Thomas Lowe Davenport 1890 - 1917, Roland Davenport Farmer 1885 - 1916, William Davenport Sheffield 1879 - 1915, Cuthbert Gregory 1918 - 1944

    Comment


    • #3
      I have the following children for the "Thomas" Garner

      William, Thomas, Rachael, Catherine, Henry Salte, Hastings and Mary.
      (William being the oldest 1793, Mary the youngest 1808)

      I have just downloaded the death duty register from TNA and it only mentions the following children:

      William, Thomas, Rachael, John, Catherine

      even more now

      Remembering: Cuthbert Gregory 1889 - 1916, George Arnold Connelly 1886 - 1917, Thomas Lowe Davenport 1890 - 1917, Roland Davenport Farmer 1885 - 1916, William Davenport Sheffield 1879 - 1915, Cuthbert Gregory 1918 - 1944

      Comment


      • #4
        Wow, Tom! My head is spinning

        I think you are working through it by writing it down. I just wanted to say this:

        1. Just because someone is not mentioned in a will doesn't mean they were 'cast out of the family' or were not part of the family. They may have had some financial help before the testator died.

        2. Relationships are not always described accurately. I have a will in which the testator describes nephews and neices who were the great nephews and neices of his deceased wife - no relation to the testator at all but he still called them so.

        Anne

        Comment


        • #5
          I may have some answers concerning your post of 09-08-08. 1792. Thomas of John and Elizabeth Garner Baptized April 22nd. Buried; William Garner April 21st, 1792.

          To the best of my knowledge and research, I am a direct descendant of the Garner family you are yourself researching. Please feel free to contact me anytime, and we can compare notes. Just maybe we are related. Who knows? Kind of exciting isn't it?
          Last edited by RichardGarner; 02-02-11, 02:31. Reason: Grammer correction

          Comment


          • #6
            Tom, I have uploaded my Gedcom to this site. Garnerfamilytree. when you have time, please feel free to peruse and see what you think. Thanks for listening.

            Ricard Garner

            Comment

            Working...
            X