Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31

Thread: Help finding information on Jane Langstroth b 1809 Ireby, Westmorland

  1. #21
    Christine - see 1851 census, he's listed as resident at 'Ivah' , with Margaret, Thomas, Christopher, Elizabeth, and Sarah Jane King, daughter. It's the last name that made me think its 'my' Christopher, as in is Margaret King....

    However, I accept your comment regarding care to distinguish between the two Christopher's, as the dates are very close. I may have the wrong man.... but the 'king' element of Sarah's name is hard to ignore.

    Kim

  2. #22
    Hi again Christine - yes I saw that, but haven't pursued it further yet... as Sylvia says, the habit of sticking to the same forenames is a nightmare... there's a four year old Alice with Moses in 1841 In Hutton Roof Hall.

  3. #23
    Sylvia - thank you, and I agree, it's all so confusing the use of same names generation after generation. And the two Christopher Langstroth hadn't esapcaped me - I'm worried I might have crossed them over. Care needed, that and a bit of quiet to review them!

  4. #24
    Christine - and Jane/Jenny is at Ivah with Christopher in 1841 ... so the Alice who is with Moses in 1841 but with Christopher in 1851 may be one and the same. I haven't found an Alice belonging to Moses and Jane so far, this is one to look further into.

    Kim

  5. #25
    A large acreage didn't necessarily mean it was a prosperous farm. Many farms in the north were mainly pasture or grazing (too hilly, wet. cold, stony for cultivating and propagating arable crops) and were mainly used for cattle or sheep rearing. Sheep farming in particular relied heavily on wool shearing for income - a once a year event. Small scale spinning yarn and then weaving was an occupation that could be carried out throughout the year to supplement the family income.

    Jay
    Janet in Yorkshire



    Genealogists never die - they just swap places in the family tree

  6. #26
    Thanks Janet - yes I imagine so. However, the census indicates that the family had two servants so I'm assuming there must have been income to support them too. I've no doubt you are right though - tenant farming was doubtless a pretty hard life.

  7. #27
    Servants were ten a penny in Victorian times and were an essential part of most households. Farm servants were also ten a penny and were often hired from the workhouse or were distant relatives.If you imagine a life where there were no labour saving devices like central heating, washing machines, vacuum cleaners and so on, well a human being substituted for those appliances, at a wage of around ten pounds a year.

    OC

  8. #28
    Member Sylvia C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    2,866
    I've seen several cases where a daughter of a household is shown as Servant instead of "Daughter" ........ they seemed to lose their identity as far as whoever gave the information was concerned

    I wouldn't mind betting that these girls, or ones who went to a relative nearby, would not get much more than bed and board!

    Mind you, it could work out well for them in the end ............... one sibling of one of OH's ancestors from that area went to be servant to an unmarried uncle. He died about 30 years later and she inherited his house and money, becoming a "Landed Proprietor" on the next census
    Last edited by Sylvia C; 13-03-17 at 04:48.
    My parents at my brother's wedding, March 1952

    Researching Cadd, Schofield, Cottrell in Lancashire, Buckinghamshire; Taylor, Park in Westmorland; Hayhurst in Yorkshire, Westmorland, Lancashire; Hughes, Roberts in Wales.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Sylvia C View Post
    I've seen several cases where a daughter of a household is shown as Servant instead of "Daughter" ........ they seemed to lose their identity as far as whoever gave the information was concerned

    I wouldn't mind betting that these girls, or ones who went to a relative nearby, would not get much more than bed and board!Mind you, it could work out well for them in the end ............... one sibling of one of OH's ancestors from that area went to be servant to an unmarried uncle. He died about 30 years later and she inherited his house and money, becoming a "Landed Proprietor" on the next census
    Male and female servants living in at the farm were hired yearly. The annual pay was very low, half the agreed wage was deducted for bed and board and the remainder was paid at the END of the year. if you left during the year, the employer could keep the wages as the servant had defaulted their side of the "handshake" contract.
    Even very small farm establishments had servants who worked alongside the master and mistress - as well as the constant stream of washing, cleaning, cooking and baking, there would be daily egg collection and dairy work, with outdoor jobs for a male servant. Animals would have to be attended to every day as well as boundaries inspected and maintained, horses cared for, wood cutting, water drawing, general maintenance etc.

    Jay
    Last edited by Janet in Yorkshire; 13-03-17 at 09:56.
    Janet in Yorkshire



    Genealogists never die - they just swap places in the family tree

  10. #30
    Very interesting, thanks all for the input. For the servants, although hard work, it probably at least meant they were fed and out of the workhouse - but maybe not a lot better for most.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •