|
Post by mimosa on Aug 26, 2014 11:43:38 GMT -5
Hi there I'm new to the forum. I think these Benallacks will link up with mine.
I have
Stephen Benallack was christened on 13th July 1795 at Probus. He had brothers John Francis and George Francis and a sister Jane. Stephen married Amy Francis on 17 March 1822 at St Austell, Cornwall, with the husband's name spelt "Stephn Benallack". Stephen was a cordwainer.
Can anyone take me back any further. I think this Stephens father was also called Stephen who married Mary Hockey. Can anyone help me to fill in the gaps between your Stephen and mine??
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 26, 2014 21:04:10 GMT -5
Welcome to the site and I hope we will be able to help. I don't have time immediately but I will make an attempt to find some answers for you later tonight.. CT
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 27, 2014 5:36:21 GMT -5
Well, we are not off to a very good start at all!! My guess is that you got the above information from IGI/FamilySearch! This marriage DID NOT take place at St Austell on March 17th 1822. It actually took place at ST ENODER on 8th April 1822. Stephen Benallack was 'of St Austell' and Amy Francis was 'of St Enoder' so they married in Amy's home Parish. The date you have refers to the date of the first Banns being read at St Austell - 17th March, 24th March and 31st March. In 1851 and 1861 Stephen and Amy can be found at St Keyne and from these two records we learn that Stephen Benallack was born at Probus and Amy Francis born at St Austell both about 1794 or 1795. That Amy was resident at St Enoder in 1822 indicates either the family had moved there or that she was employed in that Parish. Another interesting point is that on the marriage record Stephen Benallack was recorded as a 'shoe maker' yet by 1830 when three children were baptized he was a 'farmer'. He was still a 'farmer' in 1841 but in 1851 and 1861 Stephen is recorded as 'yeoman'. Now, I have established the following:- Amy daughter of Richard and Elizabeth Francis was baptized at St Austell 16th June 1794 (Richard FRANCIS of St Austle married Elizabeth WELLINGTON at Luxulyan 17th September 1782) Stephen son of Stephen and Mary Benallack was baptized at Probus 13th July 1795 (Stephen BENALLACK, yeoman, married Mary HOCKIN at Probus 17th April 1786) NOTE - When Stephen Benallack and Mary Hockin were married one of the witnesses was JOHN BENALLACK. No doubt John was a relative and he was probably either father or brother to Stephen. You should also note that Stephen was born nine years after his parents were married - that may be an important factor in determining the parents of the elder Stephen Benallack. I suggest that you establish the names and baptism details for the children of Stephen and Mary (Hockin) Benallack and then search for possible burials for Stephen and Mary. There might be a chance that they lived long enough to appear in at least the 1841 Census so you should check that as well. The names of children, and the order they appeared, along with possible burial dates will hopefully lead to the correct parents. CT
|
|
twendy1
Noweth
Some of my cornish names are ARUNDELL, GRENVILLE, ERISEY,TRESTEANE,PAWLEY,USTICKE,BENALLACK
Posts: 1
|
Post by twendy1 on Nov 30, 2016 3:53:24 GMT -5
I think you'll find that this is the answer. Margaret USTICKE bap 16 Feb 1660 dau of John & Margaret SHEARME at St Just in Penwith Margaret married (1) on 5 Nov 1689 at St Just Thomas WOOLCOCK who died 18 Dec 1696 at St J. Children Hugh 4 Jan 1691, Honour c 1694 died 18 Oct 1694, Margaret 18 Dec 1696 all at St J. Married( 2) Christopher PENBERTHY bap 17 Feb 1658 son of Isaac & Ann EDWARDS on 4 Feb 1699 St Just. 1 child Sibella bap Jan 1700 St J . Margaret PENBERTHY (nee USTICKE) was buried 4 March 1717 at St J. Christopher PENBERTHY was buried 11 July 1728 at St Just. Regards......twendy1
|
|
|
Post by mimosa on Nov 30, 2016 4:27:03 GMT -5
Hi twendy1 - your cornish names are the same as mine. Presumably if you have got as far as these guys 12. Margaret de Courtenay+ Sir Theobald Grenville 13. Sir William Grenville+ Philippa Bonville 14. Thomas Grenville+ Elizabeth Georges You have found the royal connection
|
|
|
Post by tbennett54 on Jan 20, 2018 7:03:01 GMT -5
The Will of Mr Stephen Benallack of Probus, written 23 Apr 1716, proved 24 July 1716, mentions: wife, Elizabeth Benallack; eldest son, Stephen Benallack (executor); son, Robert; son, John; daughter, Catharine; daughter, Mary; daughter, Allice; servant, John Harry (?Harvy); Will. Ward & John Slade.
This means that John Benallack, who was baptised on 13 Nov 1686 in Ladock, son of Stephen, was not buried in 1687. I actually can't find that burial anywhere. But I think there must have been another Stephen Benallack in Ladock at the same time. The deceased son John must be his. This is borne out by another will, that of John Bennallack, who is buried on 24 June 1685 in Ladock, and whose will, not dated, proved 24 Jul 1685, mentions: brother, Henry Benallack; sister, Duglis? Ronold; sister, Mary Caron; brother, Stephen Benallack; brother Matthew's children; John Allen and William Allen; brother, Matthew Benallack; mother (not named); wife (not named, executor); witnessed by Thomas Allen, Blanch Benallack, Elizabeth Hawken.
Clearly this John - whose bequests are minor, things like one shilling - is from a much less well to-do family than that of the various "gents" such as Stephen above. He is certainly not the same John Benallack who married Margery Ustick. Where he fits is something of a mystery which may not be solvable.
Incidentally I strongly suspect but cannot prove that the Ladock Benallacks connect to those in St Agnes. One of the earliest recorded one there seems to be Henry, buried in 1692, who had children baptised at Perranzabuloe between 1665 and 1676/77 including my ancestor Francis.
|
|
|
Post by lisab on Jan 20, 2018 18:42:42 GMT -5
John Benallack you mention firstly was buried 18 Nov 1687 at Ladock born to Stephen and Elizabeth.
Burial: Parish: Ladock Date: 18-Nov 1687 Name: John BENALLACK ye son of Stephen Benallack
Refer to my previous list of there children which I have listed again below:
Stephen Robert John - Buried 1687 Catharine married William Vercoe Mary married Bennett Retallack Alice Alice married John Bassett Elizabeth married John Hawkey Jacob buried 17 Jan 1720
The other John you mention was the above Stephens great uncle his wife was Elizabeth Corin married 6 Feb 1676 at Gulval. He was buried 24 Jun 1685 at Ladock and was Yeoman so these are all of the same family. His father also Stephen was buried 2 Jan 1685 at Ladock based on his will. His wife was Katheren Scawen buried at Ladock 6 Mar 1688.
|
|
|
Post by lisab on Jan 20, 2018 18:44:54 GMT -5
Stephen who married Elizabeth and John who married Margery Ustick are brothers.
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Jan 21, 2018 6:56:52 GMT -5
'lisab' - I'm afraid I have to agree with tbennett54 in this matter!
There is NO John Benallack buried at Ladock in 1687 at all. There is one buried 24th June 1685 with this entry appearing in the Parish Register. Another John Benallack was apparently buried at Ladock in 1689 with that information accredited to the Bishops Transcripts but definitely NO John Benallack buried in 1687.
Very difficult to read but I have to also disagree with you about the January 1685 burial you claim as another Stephen Benallack. The OPC transcript has this as Anne Benallack, widow and although I cannot clearly make out the forename it does definitely say 'widow'.
I have to query your source on this as I believe you have misinterpreted a baptism. The Ladock Parish Register shows that John son of Stephen Benallack was baptized at Ladock 13th November 1686. (The BTs show the date as 18th November 1686 which is curiously similar to the date you claim as a burial!)
I don't have access to the BTs but I am looking directly at images of the original Ladock Parish Register to confirm this information.
This burial could not be for Stephen - Administration of his estate was granted to his son John 9th April 1684, almost 12 months before that burial!! He must therefore be the Steven Benallack buried at Ladock 22nd March 1683/4.
John Benallack, presumably son of the above Stephen, left a Will which appears to be undated. This Will was proved at Ladock 24th July 1685 so his is the burial 24th June 1685 at Ladock.
The Stephen Benallack apparently buried at Ladock in 1689 was possibly son of the above Stephen and brother to John - Administration of his estate was dated 2nd March 1690/1.
CT
|
|
|
Post by lisab on Jan 21, 2018 14:05:40 GMT -5
The 1687 Bural for John Benallack brother of my ancester Alice was initally given to me by the OPC while researching my direct line, it can also be seen here under the Ladock transcrips along with John 1685 and John 1689: www.ladock.com/Deaths.htmlThe January 1685 for Stephen was based on his will so this may be a little out. I had was electrocic copy of the will but this was lost some years ago. But I am willing to be advised on the correct date of burial for Stephen senior. The 13th November 1686 is correct for the baptism of John son of Stephen, as is 24th June 1685 at Ladock for John son of Stephen and Katherine. I have the wife of Stephen 1689/90 as Mary - widow buried 11 Jan 1698/1699 at Ladock. This can also be seen on OPC www.cornwall-opc-database.org/search-database/burials/index.php?year_from=&year_to=&parish=&forename1=mary&surname1=Benallack+&t=burials&bf=SearchI am pretty sure the Ann Benallack - widow buried 7 Jan 1686 was the mother of Stephen senior.
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Jan 22, 2018 1:05:40 GMT -5
Well it is no wonder you have things a little messed up! You have been dealing with a transcript ...... and this particular transcript is screwed up so much it is utterly unbelievable! For example - a burial for Michael son of Mary Buddill shown in this transcript as 16th May 1687 actually took place on 19th May 1686! And the very next entry which is for the burial of Peter son of Francis Buddell on 21st June 1687 is non-existent - in fact Peter son of Francis Buddell was BAPTISED on 21st June 1686 at Ladock! I think the best thing you could do would be, initially, take the advice given here about the accuracy of the information you have been working from and use the solutions as a guide. But more important than that is that you have a look at the images of the events for yourself. The Ladock Parish Registers can be viewed online at FamilySearch and you can even download images if you want. Ladock Parish Registers 1662-1900 LDS Film 1595834 Items 10-20 Images 576-1163 Following is the link for the page showing the burials from 1684-1689:- www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:S3HY-6S67-G74?i=628&cc=1769414&cat=225764If you have a look at the image and compare the information to your transcript you will get a much better picture of what I am trying to say. To save you searching for the corresponding baptisms the link for 1686 events is:- www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:S3HY-6S67-P9Y?i=582&cc=1769414&cat=225764Once you have seen this genuine and legitimate information I think you will change your thinking a little and take into account the information provided in recent posts. If you have any trouble viewing these images please let me know and I will help you out. CT
|
|