Unfortunate surnames

eHow published a list of the most unfortunate surnames which set me to thinking who were the most unfortunately named people in Sussex.

    

A Mary Horney was baptised in 1662 in Broadwater, the daughter of William and Elizabeth Horney whilst Icklesham was the burial place for an Abraham Cundick in 1759.

     

There are a fair number of Pricketts in Sussex including Effie Beech Prickett, daughter of Theophilus Prickett, who was baptised in 1888 in Wartling.  She was probably quite glad to marry Robert Widdicombe in 1912.

    

I wonder if Mary Ann Spearshott ever regretted her marriage in 1840 to William Titt. The family later emigrated to America where their grandson Charles took the step of changing his surname to Tea.

   

The parish of Findon must have been relieved when a slut was saved by a priest when in 1623  Frances Slutt married Richard Preist.

 

Of eHow's list of less than fortunate surnames I can find some examples in Sussex; there was Benjamin Bottom whose son John was baptised in Frant in 1848, then there was Dick Balls born in 1815 in Hastings whilst the excellently named Kingsley Bryce Speakerman Smellie was baptised in Eastbourne in 1898.  

I have not been able to find any Cockermouth's in Sussex but there was an Ann Cock baptised in Chichester in 1742 and an Elizabeth Cocklet baptised in Kirdford in 1592.  David and Jane Boggs daughter Mary was baptised in 1825 in Midhurst and there are quite a few members of the Willy family from Stephen Willy baptised in 1613 in Hooe to Joseph Willy baptised in Eastbourne in 1892.

There were the Sick sisters from Middlesex who attended school in Hove in 1871 and there was Robert Nipple and his wife who were in Brighton workhouse when their son Henry was baptised in 1855.  

Finally my favourite name so far that of Gamaliel Glasscock who was buried in Willingdon in 1629.  Not only does he have one of eHow's unfortunate surnames but he was given the forename of a 1st century expert in Jewish Law!

What is your favourite unfortunate surname?

Who do you think you are?

WDYTYA? this week featured Nigel Havers and his Hamblion ancestors in Colchester, Essex.  No Sussex connection but I was intrigued to know what happened to Jeremiah Hamblion. 

For those who didn't watch the programme Jeremiah was the younger brother of Henry Hamblion, Nigel Havers 3 x great grandfather and from the sounds of it not the most pleasant person. Henry and Jeremiah were running a hackney cab business which was proving very successful and they were able to expand, purchasing some rather smart carriages for their customers.  But WDYTYA found two stories about Jeremiah in local papers; in one he had objected to his own cab being overtaken and whooped at the overtaking horse as it went by, causing it to bolt, whilst in the second he deliberately drove his carriage too close to a market stall injuring the pregnant woman manning it.  Possibly because of Jeremiah's behaviour, Henry and Jeremiah ended their business partnership in 1850.  Having gone it alone Henry moved into the inn keeping business but due to various misfortunes he later became bankrupt and died aged 56 in 1871.  His younger brother was not mentioned again on the programme.

I found that Jeremiah also went into the inn keeping business, running the Bull Inn and from 1856 the Angel Hotel in the Colchester High Street where he described himself as an importer of wines and spirits.  

He had further run-ins with the law including one in 1854 when he brought an action against a policeman whom he claimed had been drunk and falsely accused him of committing a nuisance in the street. The case was dismissed as it was felt that Jeremiah was getting revenge on the policeman who'd given evidence against him in a previous case.  To be fair to Jeremiah many of his appearances in court were the result of him chasing those who owned him money such as a case in 1857 when he took a Lieutenant Bridges to court for failure to pay £1.15s for the hire of a horse.

Although Henry and Jeremiah had ended their business partnership it seems likely they remained on good terms with each other.   They were in the same industry and in 1854 Henry and his wife Elizabeth named their new son after his uncle Jeremiah. Jeremiah and his wife Mary do not appear to have had any children.

Many of Jeremiah's problems may have been the result of alcoholism because on the 19th May 1859 Jeremiah died of delirium tremens; he had become dependent on alcohol and his body could not cope with a sudden withdrawal. He was only 42 years old,

According to the probate index Jeremiah left an estate valued at under £1,000.  This was a good inheritance for his wife; the website Measuring Worth shows that it was worth up to £82,000 (based on the increase in inflation) or nearly £2,000,000 based on the differing  economic power of the £1,000.  However Mary does not appear to have been left very well off.  In 1861 she was running a tobacconist business in Colchester but by 1871 she was a servant, working as a domestic cook at a farm in Tendring.  She died in 1892 aged about 80 years.

Improved coverage of Sussex on FamilySearch

FamilySearch have improved their coverage of Sussex parish registers with the addition of over 400,000 baptism, marriage and burial records taken from parish registers.  These are index entries only with no access to the original image.

A list of the parishes covered can be found here and it looks as if more will be added at some time in the future (but no indication when).

I did a quick comparison with the Sussex Family History Group (SFHG) database with a search for my own surname and, although results cannot be directly compared because of the differences and idiosyncrasies between the databases, I found only 78 results on the FamilySearch database (48 if limited to exact spelling) but got results in 121 categories on the SFHG database which includes 125 events in Horsham alone (94 if limited to exact spelling).  If you are a member of the SFHG you will get much better results from their database but you may find the FamilySearch database a much friendlier interface.

I searched the FamilySearch Sussex database for several known events (within the parishes and time periods listed as covered) without finding them - expanding the search to All Collections found the baptisms as part of other databases but there was no sign of the burial records.  It suggests that the Sussex database on FamilySearch does not have complete coverage of events within the parishes & periods they claim.  Hopefully this will improve soon.

Bastards of Uckfield

Bastardy was a problem for every parish, partly from a moral viewpoint but largely for financial reasons.  Mothers without a husband to support them and their child were likely to rely on the parish for assistance so if the parish could they would pass unmarried pregnant single women on to another parish or encourage the father of their child to marry them.  There were various established procedures for handling the problem of illegitimacy.

A study of baptisms in Uckfield between 1700 and 1850 finds nearly 3,000 baptisms of which only 201 were for illegitimate children - just 7%. Of those 201 the priest has recorded the fathers name in 54 cases and a further 13 children are given a middle name which is probably their fathers name so for these children it might be possible to identify their fathers.

The number of illegitimate births is not evenly spread over the 150 years, there was just one illegitimate child baptised in the first decade of the 18th century and none in the second but this figure rose over the years with nearly 40% of the illegitimate births occurring between 1840 and 1850.  This doesn't mean that illegitimacy was on the increase, as the graph below shows the birth rate was also increasing sharply.

Where paperwork has survived there can be more information about the parents and the illegitimate child.  In the case of Mary Smith two examination documents survive, one taken when she was pregnant and the other after the birth of her child.  From these and other sources it is possible to determine what happened to Mary and her daughter baptised in 1767.

At the age of 17 years Mary Smith was meeting the appropriately named John Brown for assignations in Shermanreed Wood near Uckfield;  not surprisingly she soon found herself pregnant and deserted.  Nothing is mentioned of what happened to John Brown but by the 9th February 1767 (the date of the second examination) he was a huckster 'late of the parish of Uckfield'.

It is possible that his name wasn't John Brown as when his daughter was baptised on the 25th January 1767 at Holy Cross in Uckfield she was named Mary Barham Smith.

Mary Smith (senior) had been baptised on the 21st May 1749 in Uckfield, the fourth child born to Richard Smith and Sarah (nee Marten).  She went on to marry John Weaver in 1769 when Mary was a few years old and they had two children, Lucy baptised in 1769 (five months after their marriage) and John baptised in 1770, both in nearby Isfield.  Mary died in 1789 and her husband John in 1821, both are buried in Isfield.

Mary's daughter Mary Barham went on to have an illegitimate child herself, William Barham Smith, who was baptised in Uckfield on the 28th October 1787 before she married John Funnel just over a year later, on the 1st December 1788.  It appears that John and Mary had a large family baptised in the parishes of Maresfield and Fletching.

The Keep

Just a few weeks ago the East Sussex record office closed the doors of its home at the Maltings in Lewes and we have to wait until at least November for the new archive to open at the Keep near Falmer.  I was lucky enough to have a look around the new archive today and below are a few photos of what is to come.

There is car parking for about 40 cars (visitors will have to pay to park), there are good links to the bus services (bus stops to the far left of the photo) and Falmer station (there is a footpath from the archive to Falmer station)

The front entrance is very functional but I believe there is some more work to be done here.  The large white space (which is largely hidden behind the sapling) is designed as a large projection screen although this will only be in use on special occasions.

The reception desk.  Where you will be able to apply for your new East Sussex record office users card (no Carn tickets here!).  The first searchroom can be accessed without a users card but you will need one to get access to original documents.

Lockers and somewhere to hang your coats.  There are also toilets here - and for anyone who has used the new Kent History and Library Centre you'll be pleased to hear there is a ladies and a gents!

A communal area where you can eat your sandwiches and buy hot drinks from vending machines (not yet in place).  To the left of this space are the meeting rooms where events and displays will happen whilst to the right are the search rooms.

The first search room, accessible to everyone with open access books, computers for digitised materials (which includes much of the parish registers).

To the right of this room is the new library of the Sussex Family History Group.  When it is staffed we will be offering help and advice to researchers.

The secure searchroom.  To get here you'll need the East Sussex record office card and you'll be able to view original documents, photographs, maps and so on  - and there is so much space!

A section the users will not get to see - part of the 6 miles of shelving storing all that material in an ideal temperature controlled environment.

I am given to understand that the opening date is still planned for early November.  I can't wait!

End of an era

Today saw the doors close on the East Sussex Record Office at the Maltings in Lewes.

The record office has been based there for over twenty years but it has long since outgrown its facilities.  

The research room was in the attic, a cold and draughty room with poor access for anyone with mobility problems.  There was not enough space to store all the material so in addition to the Maltings there are several other storage units; to get material stored off site often meant a wait of several weeks.

It did tend to lead to a friendly atmosphere as cramped facilities meant anyone enjoying a eureka moment or suffering the reverse could not help but share it with their neighbours.

Although some of the microfilm readers will survive the move to the Keep there is less need for them now that many parish registers are available in digital format.

But it wasn't all bad at the Maltings.  Step outside the door and you were in the shadow of Lewes Castle, a short walk away from the high street with its wide range of shops and surrounded by breathtaking scenery.

I won't miss the cold of the Maltings, the lack of space or delays waiting for off site material but I'll miss visiting Lewes and I do wonder what sort of atmosphere the much larger Keep will generate?

Wordless Wednesday: Alfriston

1953

 2012