Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: 1851 or 1861

  1. #1

    1851 or 1861

    Could somebody help me find a Mary Secker bn 1844/45 in Thornhill/ Whitley W yorks
    in the 1851 - 1861 census I know she married in 1864. but other than that I dont seem to be having any luck, a variation of the the name could be sacker? any help would be
    welcome

  2. #2
    Member Jen~Ealogy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Mancunian in the smoke
    Posts
    4,667
    Blog Entries
    4
    Hi Colin, looked on 1851 so far and the closest I could get was the following family, which may or may not be correct........

    1851 HO107/2325 F396 P16 Address or district Whitley
    Civil Whitley Lower
    Eccles. Whitley Lower
    Reg dist. Dewsbury
    Sub reg. Soothill
    Vessell 1a

    Head William Secker 56 1795 Mirfield Hand Loom Weaver
    Wife Ann 53 1798 Kirkheaton
    Dau Sarah 21 1830 Whitley Factory Girl Woollen
    Dau Mary A 17 1834 Whitley " " "
    Son Charles 16 1835 Whitley " boy "
    Dau Emma 12 1839 Whitley " Girl "
    Son Benjamin 10 1841 Whitley Coal Miner
    Grandson Henry 1 1850 Whitley
    Grandson George Nk 1851 Whitley
    Jen
    Avatar: One of my paintings.

    Researching: Brandon.London/M/cr. Tyson.France/Mcr.


  3. #3
    Thanks jen but this Mary Secker is about 10 yrs out.I know she married a James Armitage in 1864, and lived in Mirfield after her marrage. but before that she she does not appear. I suppose if i got her marrage certificate that could give her parents,

  4. #4
    Member Jen~Ealogy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Mancunian in the smoke
    Posts
    4,667
    Blog Entries
    4
    Yes that might be the way you will have to go Colin.
    Jen
    Avatar: One of my paintings.

    Researching: Brandon.London/M/cr. Tyson.France/Mcr.


  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by colin edmundson View Post
    Thanks jen but this Mary Secker is about 10 yrs out.I know she married a James Armitage in 1864, and lived in Mirfield after her marrage. but before that she she does not appear. I suppose if i got her marrage certificate that could give her parents,
    I'd think that buying the marriage certificate is your only safe route. You can't even cheat and get a parish register copy, because the YorksBMD site doesn't seem to have done any Dewsbury-area transcriptions yet. Certificates are pricey at £9.25 each, but that's better than chasing down a wrong route just because you "knew" something and didn't get it checked against to the documentation. Many of us have made that mistake to a greater or lesser extent.

    When you're looking in 1861, don't forget to check which "pieces" were irrevocably water-damaged. I notice that some of the 1851 folios are damaged, too, even if they are (partly) legible.

    Christine
    Researching: BENNETT (Leics/Birmingham-ish) - incl. Leonard BENNETT in Detroit & Florida ; WARR/WOR, STRATFORD & GARDNER/GARNAR (Oxon); CHRISTMAS, RUSSELL, PAFOOT/PAFFORD (Hants); BIGWOOD, HAYLER/HAILOR (Sussex); LANCASTER (Beds, Berks, Wilts) - plus - COCKS (Spitalfields, Liverpool, Plymouth); RUSE/ROWSE, TREMEER, WADLIN(G)/WADLETON (Devonport, E Cornwall); GOULD (S Devon); CHAPMAN, HALL/HOLE, HORN (N Devon); BARRON, SCANTLEBURY (Mevagissey)...

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    London
    Posts
    56
    Hi
    Possible this marriage is on the Record Search pilot site, but Mary has been mistranscribed?
    24 December 1864 Thornhill
    James Armitage, 20, Single, father John Armitage
    +
    Mary Lecker, 20, Single, no father given

  7. #7
    Thanks Jonny
    I will look into that? As I said earlier the name could be mistranscribed in the census.

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
  •