The elusive Sam Harvey Holt

[GallowayLass]

That all looks good to me teasie. Heywood and Longsight are about twelve miles apart.

[Lscan]

Wow, that’s given me something to get my teeth into, I know what I’m going to be doing today. I’m also going back to the 1871 Census in Lemington as suggested, to look more in depth at the children. I think I may have found children from a marriage with Mary Ann Morry, (this was at 11.30 last night though) they were born before the 1861 census so hence Sam and Mary were not a family on the 61 census, which is what I’ve been searching for. Thank you all for opening my mind. Looking forward to an exciting day of research.

[cbcarolyn]

well done teasie is he in 2 places at once in 1871 then? Or am I following the thread wrong?

[cbcarolyn]

late to the party on this one and all the hard work done, but wondering if this is all the children in 1881:
Ann Eliz. Holt 21
Saml. Holt 19
Oswald Holt 12 (this is defnitely Oswin)
Wm. Henry Holt 9
Ewd. Arthur Holt 4

Civil Parish: Chorlton on Medlock
County/Island: Lancashire
Country: England
Street address: 7 Elton St
Registration district: Chorlton
ED, institution, or vessel: 34
Piece: 3919
Folio: 58
Page Number: 40

[Katarzyna]

Hi everyone, I’m new to this site never been on any sort of forum before, so please bear with me. I’ve been researching for some years now and as I’m sure we all have, I’ve got a few brick walls. The one I’ve been chipping away at for the longest is Samuel Holt born Heywood Lancashire 1831. I Located his birth, found him on the 41, 51 and 61 Census, all on home turf. Then I lost him until 1900 when he married my widowed great grandmother, in Atherstone Warwickshire. Where had he been for the last thirty years? He didn’t join the forces, I’ve checked newspapers, I found a few convictions but cannot be sure it’s definitely him, and thy were only minor. And although he’s described as a widower on the marriage certificate I can’t find any wedding, and believe me I’ve looked for hours. But the main problem is why would he start calling himself Sam Harvey Holt/e? Was he hiding something, new area new name?
Help, I just don’t know where else to look.
Thanks in anticipation

Are we following the right path - I'm confused. He can't be on two 1871 censuses unless he had two 'wives'.
What info can you give us from his marriage cert at Atherstone to your grandmother - age, his occupation and marriage status, witnesses etc etc
Where were they on the 1901 and 1911 census so we can move backwards instead of forward from early 1800's. Do you have Samuel's birth certificate?
He has gone from whitesmith to travelling salesman. I'm not convinced that Eliza Chambers was is part of the picture. Mary Ann Morry is more convincing.

Edit - I meant Samuel's Baptism not birth cert.

[teasie]

Are we following the right path - I'm confused. He can't be on two 1871 censuses unless he had two 'wives'.

I agree Kat - although I'm the one who suggested them both!

Personally I feel that the Leamington one with the 'wife' Eliza Chambers is more likely due to the children naming their father as Sam[uel] Harvey Holt, but the marriage of a Samuel Holt to Mary Ann Morry in 1853 also needed following through.

Its like waiting for a bus - nothing for ages and then several come at once!

[teasie]

For reference, this is Sam after his marriage in 1890

1891 Atherstone, Warwickshire
Sam Harvey Holt 69 Whitesmith b Manchester
Elizabeth Holt 46 b Deal, Kent
Frederick Wm Phillips 22 stepson
Laura Phillips 15 stepdaughter
Ambrose Ernest Phillips 12 stepson

1901 Warrington, Lancashire
Sam H Holt 60 Whitesmith b Heywood Lancashire
Elizabeth 59 b Deal, Kent

And to recap on what we’ve found:

OPTION 1
1861 in York RG09 3552 92 4
Samuel Holt 28 Whitesmith Journeyman b Hewood Lancashire
Mary Ann Holt wife 27 b Manchester
Ann Holt 4½ (or possibly 4months) b Manchester

1871 in Manchester RG10 Piece 4032 Folio 26 Page 46
Samuel Holt 43 Commercial Traveller b Leeds
Mary Ann Holt 34 wife b Manchester
Anne 11 b Leeds
Samuel 9 b Manchester
Oswin 2 b Manchester

But missing in 1881, Chorlton on Medlock
Ann Eliz. Holt 21 b Manchester
Saml. Holt 19 b Manchester
Oswald Holt 12 (this is defnitely Oswin) b Manchester
Wm. Henry Holt 9 b Manchester
Ewd. Arthur Holt 4 b Manchester

OPTION 2
1871 at Chandas Street, Leamington Priors, Warwick - RG10 Piece 3195 Folio 31 Page 6
Sam Holt 39 Whitesmith born Liverpool
Eliza Holt 37 born Beverley Minster Moorgate (?)
James Harvey Holt 4 b Lichfield, Staffordshire
Sam Chambers Holt 1 born Wakefield

But missing in 1881, Leamington:
Eliza Holt 49 Married Charwoman b Beverley
James H Holt 14 Civil Service GPO born Lichfield (Father named as Samuel Holt, Locksmith on marriage)
Samuel C Holt 11 b Wakefield (Father named as Sam Harvey Holt, Bell Hanger on marriage)
Richard H 9 b Leamington (father named as Samuel H Holt on death cert)


The 1861 in Leeds is very convincing, but I'm really not sure about the 1871 in Manchester - could they be two different families? Edward Arthur's 1876 baptism confirms his father as a traveller

[Janet in Yorkshire]

I agree, ladies, that we would be better working backwards from what is known for definite, rather than trying to work forwards from a potential birth.

Jay

[cbcarolyn]

it is possible he can be on 2 census, especially for the traveller, as wife could have written him down. I have one of mine on 2 census he is boarding in a b&B and also at home. Mine is more obvious as occupation same as a china dealer.

And I suppose it is possible that he had 2 families.

he has the same occupation in both scenarios option 1 1861 he is Whitesmith, he would have to change to a traveller in 1871 to be able to visit other family!

[cbcarolyn]

For reference, this is Sam after his marriage in 1890

1891 Atherstone, Warwickshire
Sam Harvey Holt 69 Whitesmith b Manchester
Elizabeth Holt 46 b Deal, Kent
Frederick Wm Phillips 22 stepson
Laura Phillips 15 stepdaughter
Ambrose Ernest Phillips 12 stepson

1901 Warrington, Lancashire
Sam H Holt 60 Whitesmith b Heywood Lancashire
Elizabeth 59 b Deal, Kent

And to recap on what we’ve found:

OPTION 1
1861 in York RG09 3552 92 4
Samuel Holt 28 Whitesmith Journeyman b Hewood Lancashire
Mary Ann Holt wife 27 b Manchester
Ann Holt 4½ (or possibly 4months) b Manchester

1871 in Manchester RG10 Piece 4032 Folio 26 Page 46
Samuel Holt 43 Commercial Traveller b Leeds
Mary Ann Holt 34 wife b Manchester
Anne 11 b Leeds
Samuel 9 b Manchester
Oswin 2 b Manchester

But missing in 1881, Chorlton on Medlock
Ann Eliz. Holt 21 b Manchester
Saml. Holt 19 b Manchester
Oswald Holt 12 (this is defnitely Oswin) b Manchester
Wm. Henry Holt 9 b Manchester
Ewd. Arthur Holt 4 b Manchester

OPTION 2
1871 at Chandas Street, Leamington Priors, Warwick - RG10 Piece 3195 Folio 31 Page 6
Sam Holt 39 Whitesmith born Liverpool
Eliza Holt 37 born Beverley Minster Moorgate (?)
James Harvey Holt 4 b Lichfield, Staffordshire
Sam Chambers Holt 1 born Wakefield

But missing in 1881, Leamington:
Eliza Holt 49 Married Charwoman b Beverley
James H Holt 14 Civil Service GPO born Lichfield (Father named as Samuel Holt, Locksmith on marriage)
Samuel C Holt 11 b Wakefield (Father named as Sam Harvey Holt, Bell Hanger on marriage)
Richard H 9 b Leamington (father named as Samuel H Holt on death cert)


The 1861 in Leeds is very convincing, but I'm really not sure about the 1871 in Manchester - could they be two different families? Edward Arthur's 1876 baptism confirms his father as a traveller

I think this should be Joseph Henry Holt - not clear but have found a baptism - father traveller

[Katarzyna]

It's very very interesting that father Samuel is missing from both familes for the 1881 census. Also that he is a whitesmith for both families and also for his marriage to his 3rd wife Elizabeth Phillips. I'm getting a bit suspicious here.

[cbcarolyn]

Wow, that’s given me something to get my teeth into, I know what I’m going to be doing today. I’m also going back to the 1871 Census in Lemington as suggested, to look more in depth at the children. I think I may have found children from a marriage with Mary Ann Morry, (this was at 11.30 last night though) they were born before the 1861 census so hence Sam and Mary were not a family on the 61 census, which is what I’ve been searching for. Thank you all for opening my mind. Looking forward to an exciting day of research.

The marriage is looking like it fits with scenario 1 and father is Richard:

Name: Samuel Holt
Gender: Male
Marital status: Single
Age: 21
Birth Date: 1832
Marriage Date: 8 Feb 1853
Marriage Place: Wigan, Lancashire, England
Father: Richard Holt
Spouse: Mary Ann Morry

[cbcarolyn]

maybe not?

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...sePUBJs%3Dtrue

Samuel father deceased, Samuel occupation blacksmith

Guess a blacksmith can convert to whitesmith

[cbcarolyn]

HOLT, JOSEPH HENRY MURRAY
GRO Reference: 1871 S Quarter in MANCHESTER Volume 08D Page 169

[Janet in Yorkshire]

maybe not?

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...sePUBJs%3Dtrue

Samuel father deceased, Samuel occupation blacksmith

Guess a blacksmith can convert to whitesmith

And a traveller

Greater Manchester bp
1854 Ada d/o Samuel & Mary Ann BLACKSMITH (Hulme)
1865 born 1860 Annie d/o Samuel & Mary Ann SMITH
1869 Oswin s/o Samuel & Mary Ann TRAVELLER
1876 Edward Arthur s/o Samuel & Mary Ann TRAVELLER

(also a range of other children)

Traveller could mean an itinerant tradesman as opposed to commercial traveller??

Jay

[cbcarolyn]

There is a death

Name: Mary Ann Holt
Estimated birth year: abt 1834
Registration Year: 1877
Registration Quarter: Oct-Nov-Dec
Age at Death: 43
Registration district: Chorlton
Volume: 8c
Page: 416

Could be her?

[cbcarolyn]

And a traveller

Greater Manchester bp
1854 Ada d/o Samuel & Mary Ann BLACKSMITH (Hulme)
1865 born 1860 Annie d/o Samuel & Mary Ann SMITH
1869 Oswin s/o Samuel & Mary Ann TRAVELLER
1876 Edward Arthur s/o Samuel & Mary Ann TRAVELLER

(also a range of other children)

Traveller could mean an itinerant tradesman as opposed to commercial traveller??

Jay

none of the records state that he is commercial, so I would like to fit in with the fact that he is a travelling tradesman

[Katarzyna]

none of the records state that he is commercial, so I would like to fit in with the fact that he is a travelling tradesman

1871 census he is a Traveller (commercial)
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...c561bf82c571e2

[cbcarolyn]

that's that theory out of the window.

[Janet in Yorkshire]

that's that theory out of the window.

But that's the way to do it!

Jay