Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Court Session Rolls

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

  • Court Session Rolls

    I have found an entry in the Somerset court session rolls in 1795 (Easter) stating a 'removal order' of the Kick family (Husband, Wife and 4 Children) from Glastonbury St John to Huish.

    What does this mean?

    They were living in the St. John area at the time - why would the courts tell them to move to Huish in Devon around 70 miles away.

    Does anyone have any good ideas?

    Thanks for your help.

  • #2
    The husband had possibly fallen on hard times and either could not work (possibly due to ill health or injury) or had lost his job.
    As a result his family would be requiring help from the parish (poor relief).

    In cases like that the family were returned to the husbands place of settlement (often the parish he was born in or the parish he last worked for more than one year in).
    In this example Huish.
    Cheers
    Guy
    Guy passed away October 2022

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Guy View Post
      The husband had possibly fallen on hard times and either could not work (possibly due to ill health or injury) or had lost his job.
      As a result his family would be requiring help from the parish (poor relief).

      In cases like that the family were returned to the husbands place of settlement (often the parish he was born in or the parish he last worked for more than one year in).
      In this example Huish.
      Cheers
      Guy
      That's interesting to know Guy. One of my families were removed from their village to another 5 miles away in 1817. From what I have managed to find out so far, the last time any ancestors of the family lived in this other village was 1589. Is that a normal thing ?

      Comment


      • #4
        champagnegal

        Removal orders were always to a parish where the "removed" was either born, or had settlement rights.

        The parish authorities didn't make mistakes because if they did, the offended parish would send them right back again!

        So, your family had settlement rights in the village to which they were removed. Look for a corresponding settlement order, which may be years before.

        OC

        Comment


        • #5
          Settlement could be decided because you were born in the parish, or your husband was, or your father worked there.

          My gt x 3 grandfather Robert Chowns was born in Aston Rowant, Oxfordshire. He moved to Farnham Royal in Bucks where he married, then he and his wife and children moved to Stoke Poges. Stoke P promptly "removed and convey'd" him and his wife and children to Aston R and there was a case brought before the magistrates, who decided he could stay in Stoke P.

          I was able to see the witness book which had Robert's replies to questions which told me all about how they'd moved because his father in law had come back but had no work and wasn't paying any rent, and the ceiling fell in, and how much rent he'd paid and how many pigs he kept etc. It was a picture of his life in 1819.
          Robert's wife died young, but he spent over 20 years in a comfy almshouse with just 5 other almspeople, their own chapel, a shilling a week for meat, new boots every year and a patch to grow veggies on.
          ~ with love from Little Nell~
          Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Olde Crone Holden View Post
            champagnegal

            Removal orders were always to a parish where the "removed" was either born, or had settlement rights.

            The parish authorities didn't make mistakes because if they did, the offended parish would send them right back again!

            So, your family had settlement rights in the village to which they were removed. Look for a corresponding settlement order, which may be years before.

            OC
            I understand that OC - but I have a good researched line (done by myself, going to the records office and linking one to another so I know its OK and proven), my ancestor and his father and grandfather all lived in the same parish. His great grandfather and great great grandfather all lived in the village next to the village he was removed from. That's going back to 1660. It is the right family who were removed as the family details are accurate on the removal order. I haven't been able to find a settlement order for the family.

            Is there any other reason he was removed do you think ? - or are they the only reasons ? he was quite a prolific poacher, being caught and fined several times.

            Thanks for replying

            Comment


            • #7
              No, one parish couldn't just get rid of its nuisances by removing them to another parish.

              They would not be allowed to stay in the next parish because they didn't have settlement rights and the parish authorities would not want to be burdened with the cost of keeping them if they didn't belong there.

              I have an early settlement order somewhere - 1660s I think - where a man is complaining bitterly that he has been "toss'd like a stone from parish to parish". He cannot prove a baptism anywhere and in the end, the parish relented and let him stay.

              I also have other removal orders where crafty mum and dad have had all their children baptised in EVERY parish they have passed through, thus giving everyone settlement rights in many parishes.

              OC

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by champagnegal View Post
                I understand that OC - but I have a good researched line (done by myself, going to the records office and linking one to another so I know its OK and proven), my ancestor and his father and grandfather all lived in the same parish. His great grandfather and great great grandfather all lived in the village next to the village he was removed from. That's going back to 1660. It is the right family who were removed as the family details are accurate on the removal order. I haven't been able to find a settlement order for the family.

                Is there any other reason he was removed do you think ? - or are they the only reasons ? he was quite a prolific poacher, being caught and fined several times.

                Thanks for replying
                It is possible he served an apprenticeship in the neighbouring village.
                This would automatically change his parish of settlement.
                Cheers
                Guy
                Guy passed away October 2022

                Comment


                • #9
                  Guy

                  Not sure if I have this right or if I have only imagined it, lol, but I have in my mind that once an apprenticeship was finished, a man could move freely between parishes.

                  Champagnegirl

                  Forgive me if this sounds patronising, it isn't meant to because I made this mistake with the first removal order I ever saw...are you sure you have the "To" and "From" the right way round!?

                  Another suggestion - have you actually found the baptism for your man? If he was baptised in his mother's parish, for instance, he may have lived all his life in his father's parish, but when push comes to shove, you are sent back to your parish of origin, which was where you were baptised. You would have settlement rights in your father's parish, but if as you say he was a nuisance, the parish might try it on by sending him back where he was baptised.

                  Just a thought!

                  OC

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Olde Crone Holden View Post
                    Guy

                    Not sure if I have this right or if I have only imagined it, lol, but I have in my mind that once an apprenticeship was finished, a man could move freely between parishes.

                    Champagnegirl

                    Forgive me if this sounds patronising, it isn't meant to because I made this mistake with the first removal order I ever saw...are you sure you have the "To" and "From" the right way round!?

                    Another suggestion - have you actually found the baptism for your man? If he was baptised in his mother's parish, for instance, he may have lived all his life in his father's parish, but when push comes to shove, you are sent back to your parish of origin, which was where you were baptised. You would have settlement rights in your father's parish, but if as you say he was a nuisance, the parish might try it on by sending him back where he was baptised.

                    Just a thought!

                    OC
                    Thanks Guy, I haven't found any apprenticeship for him at present, but that's one to look for when I go back to Matlock records office.

                    I have found the baptism record for my lad OC, was baptised in Killamarsh, the village his father and grandfather were also baptised in, his great grandad and great great grandad were baptised in Eckington, next village to Killamarsh. Nine out of his 11 children were born and baptised at Killamarsh, the second youngest was born in Eckington (this was after removal order) but baptised in Killamarsh and youngest born and baptised in Norton (where they were sent in removal order).

                    I have now rechecked the removal order OC like you say, just to make sure (and no you are not patronising by any means, thanks so much for thinking about this one) and it is definitely Killamarsh they are going from, to Norton (they actually sidestepped slightly and went to Eckington first !!)

                    I am however definitely going to have a look to see where his wife came from and his mother and grandmother, just to see i that is the case.

                    Thanks for replying

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X