|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Sept 1, 2010 5:50:22 GMT -5
Now who the heck is he?? From my records the earliest possible Michael Curnow was the son of Thomas and Mary baptised in 1752 all the rest having died. He has no sister named Mary, his mother supposedly died in 1773 and he married Blanch Edwards in 1774. And then we get into the Renoden family!
|
|
|
Post by sue on Sept 1, 2010 7:57:48 GMT -5
Good question!! How about, son and mother-who-used-to-be-a-Renoden-now-deceased-as-of-last-year, hence them not pursuing this appeal which was lying on court files... ? As you say, 1752 Michael is the only adult Michael Curnow chappie around in Towednack 1774 that we can think of..... And what was it about anyway? I can't see any earlier court reference to it, but it must be there & I'm missing it. Sue .......
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Sept 1, 2010 13:33:04 GMT -5
Could be ....... but then there is the problem of identifying which Jane and Roger Renoden. The most likely might be Roger (who married Mary Quick) and his mother Jane except for the fact that father John Renoden was still kicking. More information required I think.
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Sept 2, 2010 2:21:34 GMT -5
Sue - I have been looking at the problem of the QS record again along with the rest of this discussion. I mentioned in an earlier post that Mary Curnow (nee Renoden) was supposed to have been buried 6th April 1773 at Towednack which made it a little awkward for her to have been involved with son Michael in that dispute with her kin. However - I decided to look at that burial again (originally provided by Rick Parsons) and I now think that it must be incorrect. As you may recall I recently assigned this particular burial to Mary (nee Stevens) Curnow given 6th April 1773 was the same date that daughter Jane was baptised. The burial is more likely Mary Stevens as there were no further children from the marriage. That then means that Mary (nee Renoden) was probably still alive at the time of the 'dispute' so she and son Michael may well be the 'parties of the first part'. I awoke earlier today with the sudden thought that this dispute may have something to do with Michael Curnow RENODEN son of JANE. But the date of judgement was 12 months before the baptism of young MCR. On the other hand - Jane (his mother) appears likely to have been the daughter of John and Jane Renoden in which case the Roger may have been her brother. In fact I seem to be able to find only two possible Jane Renodens who could have been the mother of Michae. One was baptised at Morvah in 1742 but buried in 1744 although I do need to check on her 'replacement' Jenifer for whom I need to find a baptism. The other, and more likely, was baptised at Towednack 14th October 1749 daughter of John and Jane (nee Berriman) Renoden. BTW - the Collins English Dictionary offers the following:- Distrain v.t. to seize goods, esp. to enforce payment of debt. Based on that there was certainly some funny business going on. Investigating further. CT
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Sept 2, 2010 3:56:12 GMT -5
I am not quite sure how much help this will be ..... but I have a copy of the Will of John Renoden of Towednack written 19th February 1786 and proved 19th May 1798. The top part of each page of this copy is very dark and difficult to read although only the second page is a problem as it is only the Preamble affected on page one. So there is one, and possibly two, bequests that I cannot decipher. Those mentioned in the Will are:- son John daughter Janedaughter Wellmett wife of William Thomas daughter Sarah wife of Matthew Eddy of Zennor daughter Cathrine wife of Mathew Baragwanath (unreadable section) sons Thomas and Roger named executors But here is the interesting part! Although the youngest living child, Thomas, was then aged 27 John Renoden named two TRUSTEES. And those Trustees were Matthew BARAGWANATH and MICHAEL CURNOW. The family is:- John RENODEN married Jane BERRIMAN 29th December 1748 Towednack Jane bp. 14th October 1749 Roger bp. 6th October 1750 (married Mary QUICK) John bp. 9th February 1751 (married Jane OSBORN) Wilmot bp. 22nd January 1754 (married William THOMAS) Sarah bp. 28th December 1755 (married Matthew EDDY) Catherine bp. 28th December 1757 (married Matthew BARAGWANATH) Thomas bp. 1st August 1759 (married Alice CURNOW) William (1761-1762) William (1763-1763) Margaret (1765-1769) Eldest daughter Jane is the one I suspect of being the mother of Michael Curnow Renoden. CT
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Sept 2, 2010 4:35:18 GMT -5
Another little twist - David EDDY married Jane RENOWDEN 12th February 1795 at Zennor. It looks like Jane was almost certainly the mother of Michael Curnow Renoden and daughter of John and Jane.
|
|
|
Post by sue on Sept 2, 2010 7:55:28 GMT -5
This is very interesting work.
Jane's father (seems fairly certain) John Renoden's will not being proved for so long after 26 May 1786 burial in Towednack, and what with Michael Curnow being a "trustee", usually only needed for young children, which John's weren't - very interesting.
If - and I know burial ages can be inaccurate - Michael Curnow Renoden's age at Towednack burial is correct, 55 at 30 Sep 1829, indeed he was not baptized till 1775 but he was born late 1773/4. If that is correct he was a wee baby at the time Michael & Mary Curnow did not pursue their appeal against Jane & Roger's enforcement of the debt owing to them, the Renodens.
From the joint baptisms 15 October 1775 of Jane Renoden's child Michael & Michael & Blanch's son Thomas, the naming of the 1st daughter of Michael Curnow Renoden 1805 Blanch, Michael Renoden later becoming "officially" a Curnow, the "trustee" role for Michael (he who was married to Blanch), and perhaps also the fact that when older Michael Curnow Renoden became a farmer rather than labourer per occupation declared at offsprings' baptisms, it is possible to my mind that Michael & Blanch brought Michael Renoden up at least in part as theirs. Although I see from the marriage of Jane Renoden to David Eddy of Zennor that mother didn't marry till she was 45, and son Michael Curnow Renoden was "of age", 20/21.
A link back to the money owed per the court records 1774 .... total theorising, but perhaps for getting Jane pregnant?? Jane is the 1st named Renoden party, rather than the male party, presumed brother Roger...... Michael's new wife Blanch may have said drop it, sort it all out locally with less humiliating publicity.....
Sue
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Sept 2, 2010 9:15:52 GMT -5
It would be helpful to be able to read the top part of the second page of that Will. I can pick out what appears to be 'her sister' but nothing that is really helpful. But there are certainly suggestive links to Michael Curnow Renoden which would be interesting to get sorted out. I also have the Wills of Thomas and Roger Renoden (sons of John) but neither seems to mention sister Jane and there is certainly no mention of Michael Curnow Renoden. Thomas died in 1798 and mentions his wife Allis and then:- Richard Baragwanath son of Matthew and Catherine Matthew Baragawnath son of Matthew and Catherine Brother Roger Renoden. Roger wrote his Will in 1817 and it was proved in 1818. Wife Mary Renoden Sister Sally Eddy the widow of the late Matthew Eddy Brother John Renoden Matthew Baragwanath (And then some interesting bequests) Welmott the daughter of Israel Quick gets Two Pounds Nancy the daughter of james Quick also Two Pounds Alice the daughter of James Quick gets Twelve Pounds Residual legatee and Executor os Richard Baragwanath son of the late Matthew Baragwanath. I cannot see how Wilmot daughter of Israel Quick might be related and now I am not so sure about Nancy and Alice. I had thought that these last two were sisters of Roger's wife Mary but Alice was married to John Quick and he was still alive. Looks like another can of worms has been opened! Roger's wife Mary was the daughter of James Quick and Catherine Trewhella and a re-check of the information gives me no reason to question that conclusion. Aha! - Ann and Alice Quick are probably daughters of James and Elizabeth Quick with Elizabeth having been another sister to Mary Renoden (nee Quick). But that still does not explain Wilmot daughter of Israel Quick. Oh yes it does!!! Catherine Quick (sister to Mary Renoden) married Israel Quick at Towednack in 1781 and daughter Wilmot was baptised in 1789. That solves that problem! Or does it? Wilmot married Charles Richards in 1815 according to current conclusions so why would she not be named as such. CT
|
|
|
Post by sue on Sept 4, 2010 4:55:32 GMT -5
I at last have this One-Name-Study all in place on my spreadsheet, and am going for perfection by typing in the details of the more recent few! Might then appreciate it being given the once-over.
Doing this I found an extra "early" Michael, apparently bachelor, bptzd Ludgvan 5 Aug 1781 buried there 29 Oct 1862 "of Penzance", landowner & proprietor of houses. Relieved he didn't have children.
I notice there is a CRO will for an Elizabeth Curnow 1852 widow of Towednack Lady Downs. I wonder if that is nee Elizabeth Maddern, 2nd wife of Michael 1751-1838?
I'm thinking of doing a next One-Name Study on Hannibals.....!! Nothing like avoiding my William & Thomases! ;D
Thanks for all your work on Michael.
Sue
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Sept 5, 2010 2:02:04 GMT -5
Sue - somehow I forgot to get back to this note last night! That might be the widow of Michael but I am not sure. I have just found an Elizabeth at Towednack in the 1851 Census. She is indexed as CURNEN age age 72, farmer's widow, born Zennor. But she is at Embla and not Lady Downs ...... not a great problem as they are not that far apart. Michael Curnow 1781-1862 was the son of Hannibal and Margaret which you probably know. But my database indicates that I have never been able to find the marriage for Hannibal and Margaret! Must look into that.
|
|