|
|
Post by Isambard on Aug 8, 2012 19:24:42 GMT -5
G'day all! I don't think of raised this query before, but I'm sure I'll be reminded, if it's a case of failing memory or inadequate search. ;D I've been searching for sometime for the death of William T. Dunstan of Canons Town, reported according to family records to have occured in 1889 in a farming accident. Background: From the 1871 census: 113,Canonstown,1,James Dunstan,Head,M,50,,Road Surveyor,Truro Cornwall,, ,,,Mary Dunstan,Wife,M,,49,,Towednack Cornwall,, ,,,Mary T Dunstan,Dau,U,,18,,Ludgvan Cornwall,, ,,,Susan Dunstan,Dau,U,,13,Scholar,\- Middlesex,, ,,,William T Dunstan,Son,,8,,Scholar,Ludgvan Cornwall,, ,,,Mary Dunstan,Mother,W,,76,,Ludgvan Cornwall,, From the 1881 census: 106,Canonstown,1,James Dunstan,Head,M,60,,Farmer Of 9a & Road Surveyor,Truro Cornwall,, ,,,Mary Dunstan,Wife,M,,59,,Towednack Cornwall,, ,,,Mary T. Dunstan,Dau,U,,28,,Lelant Cornwall,, ,,,William Dunstan,Son,U,18,,Farmers Son,London Middlesex I believe birthplaces for Susan (Susanna) and William T. were transposed in the 1871 census. In the 1861 census Susan (Susanna) is listed as born Lugvan. Free BMD lists a William Dunstan, birth Dec 1861, St. Giles, vol 1b pg 388. This is consistent with a family recorded birthdate for William T. Dunstan of 22 Jan 1862, and may in fact be a baptism date (not found on Cornwall OPC). Another family record lists 1889 as William T. Dunstan's death date. Family lore has it that he died in a farming accident. I'm still looking for a record of his death. Anyone like to jump in ?  |
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 9, 2012 2:43:08 GMT -5
Depends how cold the water is!!!! ;D We have been perplexed by this puzzle before but it is always good to check the bottom of the clothes basket!  Might end up finding one of those missing socks! ;D After reading your message I had another look at the known details of the family and I think there are probably two things that now appear obvious to me:- 1. The 1861 birth in the December Qtr 1861 is highly unlikely to be your William 2. After searching FreeBMD again I think that either the entry is missing from FreeBMD OR William was not in England when he died. *** more to follow *** *** I had to take a break there to ban a member who has just joined and immediately began ADVERTISING!  *** Back to something a little more pleasant! Regarding point 1. - Looking at the previous children of James and Mary Dunstan shows a bit of a pattern. Mary Thomas born 22nd December 1852 (bp. 16th February 1853) James baptised 15th June 1855 but buried 20th June age 3 weeks - thus born about the start of June Susanna baptised 6th September 1857 age 8 weeks - thus born around mid June James baptised 1st May 1859 age 3 weeks - born April Andrew Thomas born 29th January 1861 (bp. 14th April) There is about two and a half years between Mary Thomas and the first James and thereafter the gap between children is two years, two years and 18 months. A birth registered in the December Qtr of 1861 would mean that William T would have been born sometime between the end of September and the last week of December. And that would mean his birth occurred less than twelve months after Andrew.  Based on the evolving pattern I would find that most unusual. The next thing we need to look at is the birth information you have. Some time back you gave me a birth date for William of 22nd January 1862 and indicated the information came from a 'family member'. Information has also come from a 'family member' suggesting that William died in 1889. SO - assuming there is some truth involved we are looking at information from a 'family member' about events that occurred more than 120 years ago for a person who apparently died aged about 16 or 17.  I think there is enough there to suggest we should be more than a little cautious in our acceptance of such details. Next point to consider is that in 1871 William is clearly recorded in the Census as 'William T'. This 'could' have been an error given he was just 'William' in 1881 but I am inclined to think not. Mary was 'Mary T' in 1871 and Susanna was 'Susan' and we know Mary was baptised as 'Mary Thomas' and Susan as 'Susanna'. This suggests that each of the children baptised with a second name was recorded as such in 1871. Of course in 1881 Mary was again 'Mary T' with William simply recorded as 'William'.  The December 1861 birth at St Giles is for 'William Dunstan' which I think is another reason to think that perhaps it is not the son of James and Mary. BUT - I do have another potential candidate whose birth registration would be a close match for the 1871 Census information. William Thomas DUNSTON December Qtr 1863 Bethnal Green R.D. Technically he would be 7 and 17 in the 1871 and 1881 Census but in all other respects I think he is a more likely possibility. But no matter how I look at this I cannot find a possible Death recorded in FreeBMD and that is what makes me consider the possibility that he did not die in England. That does not put us any closer to the answer but at least it might be something more to think about. CT |
|
|
|
Post by Isambard on Aug 10, 2012 12:57:36 GMT -5
CT, What a great analogy- searching in the bottom of the clothes basket. It does seem like that. The "family records" are from Susie Josephine Quick's "Daily Bread", a little book recording birthdays and such. The front of the book is marked "From Ernest to Cousin Susie 19/1/95". Ernest was Ernest Trethowan, in Australia. The book contains many names and dates of relatives and friends, in all cases listing a complete birthday, including these names/dates: John Glasson Quick -Jan 15 1843 Mary Dunstan - Jan 22 1822 Willie J. Dunstan - Jan 22 1862 - died 1889 James Dunstan - March 10 1821 Willie J. (T.?) Dunstan's death is the only such entry and it's interesting that only the year is shown. Willie was Susie's uncle - he lived with his parents James Dunstan and Mary Thomas (Susie's grandparents) in 1881. Susie, living on the farm in Towednack, would have been about seven at the time of his death. Susie was about 13 when she received the little book in 1895, by then living with her parents and her Dunstan grandparents in Canon's Town. It's surprising that a specific death date wouldn't have been entered, unless the entry was made some time after the book was received, when memories of details had faded, or perhaps the specific information about Willies death (at age of 17 or 18) was unknown, or not talked about - perhaps he died while seeking his fortune in Australia? ;D Another mystery - was Willie in fact born in "Middlesex", or perhaps Bethnal Green? James Dunstan and family were censused in Canon's Town from 1841 through 1901. In 1863, if that was when Willie was born, the family would have also included Mary, James's wife, Susan (Susanna), James (1859), Andrew (1861) and Mary Nicholas Ould, James's mother. Since James Dunstan was a road surveyor, did his work take him and his family to London for a spell? Now to continue looking for those missing socks! |
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 10, 2012 17:00:34 GMT -5
Right now it seems like the socks had a good wash before they went missing!  I reckon if they hadn't been washed we would had a sniff by now! ;D Well then - Susie received the book in 1895 which is a good six years after William supposedly died. So just who was it that entered the information about William? I would be inclined to think that it may have been Susie herself who entered the information which might explain the sparse details about William. As for his birthplace - well from 1837 to 1889 the Bethnal Green Registration District (suggesting Bethnal Green itself) was in the County of Middlesex so the 1863 birth is certainly a possibility. The only other thing I can offer at the moment is that I have checked the Death Indexes for South Australia, New South Wales and Victoria but found no sign of William. CT |
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 10, 2012 17:05:27 GMT -5
Re - Ernest Trethowan
Could you tell me a little about him please? I cannot seem to find him anywhere so would appreciate some knowledge of how he is related to Susie and also where he was in Australia.
If I know a little more about him it might possibly lead to something more about William.
CT
|
|
|
|
Post by Isambard on Aug 10, 2012 20:54:29 GMT -5
Re - Ernest Trethowan Could you tell me a little about him please? I cannot seem to find him anywhere so would appreciate some knowledge of how he is related to Susie and also where he was in Australia. If I know a little more about him it might possibly lead to something more about William. CT Lost socks in Ballarat? ;D James Dunstan b 1794 St. Austell Mary Nicholas Ould b 1794 Polgrean, Ludgvan Susanna Randall Dunstan b 1816 Rose an Grouse, Ludgvan Mary Randall Dunstan b 1819 Lemon Row, Truro James Dunstan b 1821 Truro. (Susie Josephine Quick's maternal grandfather) Mary Randall Dunstan married Richard Grubb (b 1818 Penryn) 1840, Uny Lelant. Eight children, including Susan Grubb b 1848 Ludgvan Susan Grubb married John Saville Trethowan (b 1844 Constantine ) 1871, Victoria State. Twelve children, including Ernest Trethowan b 1881 Ballarat Therefore Ernest was a 2nd cousin of Susie. You will recall my interest in identifying people in photos from the Quick family album. One of those photos was of John Saville Trethowan as a baby, in a Ballarat studio. Another was of an elegant young woman in black, also taken in Ballarat - and still as yet unidentified.  |
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 11, 2012 7:42:16 GMT -5
Thanks for the updated information which I have been pursuing in my Australian records. But I have to inform you that the information above is not correct! John and Susan Trethowan did not have a son named Ernest amongst there eleven children. Ernest Hedley Ashmore Trethowan was born at Ballarat in 1882 son of Thomas and Emily Trethowan Thomas Trethowan married Emily Grubb in 1879 presumably at Ballarat!  I have not finished working on this yet but I believe it probable that Thomas Trethowan was a brother to John Saville Trethowan. Emily Grubb was a younger sister to Susan. Bottom line is that Ernest Trethowan was still a second cousin to Susie. I have pretty much completed working on the Australian side of the Grubb family and now I have gone across to the Grubb spouses to gather extra information on them. And just now I found a connection to the Curnow and Daniel families via Selina Margaret Peake who was the wife of Thomas Grubb, second son of Richard and Mary Jane (Dunstan) Grubb. And Robert Grubb, son of Thomas and Selina, married Emily Alice Quick in 1901 with her parents being Richard Major Quick and Mary Ann Howe. Best I keep working while I am running hot!  CT |
|
|
|
Post by Isambard on Aug 11, 2012 9:10:17 GMT -5
Darn, I've mixed up some socks! The baby in the photo was Frederick John Saville Trethowan b. 1872 Ballarat, and not Ernest. And yes, I wrongly attributed Ernest to John Saville Trethowan and Susan Grubb, as if they didn't have enough offspring. I was missing Emily Grubb's marriage to Thomas Trethowan (John Saville Trethowan's brother), and their children, including Ernest. |
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 11, 2012 13:55:12 GMT -5
My mum used to sow some coloured thread into the toes of socks so that they would not get mixed up. Red for one pair, blue for another and so on! Now then - if you need the family of Thomas Trethowan then let me know and I will give you what details I have. I have just spent about 12 hours working on the families and have now got them all back to Cornwall I think. I will have a rest for a while now so just let me know what you need for the Trethowans and other connected families. No closer to locating William T Dunstan but finding lots of other good stuff! CT |
|
|
|
Post by Isambard on Aug 11, 2012 16:41:37 GMT -5
THanks CT. When you've a moment let me have the progeny of Thomas Trethowan and Emily Grubb. Otherwise I have enough of the Trethowans in Constantine and Aus to satisfy me, for the mo. |
|
|
|
Post by Isambard on Aug 11, 2012 16:42:31 GMT -5
THanks CT. When you've a moment let me have the progeny of Thomas Trethowan and Emily Grubb. Otherwise I have enough of the Trethowans in Constantine and Aus to satisfy me, for the mo. |
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 11, 2012 18:50:59 GMT -5
Well that should be easy ................. there appears to have been but one child! Ernest Hedley Ashmore Trethowan born 1882 Ballarat and died 1952 at Fitzroy age 71. I can find no record of any marriage for him but I did just find the marriage of his uncle James along with at least seven children. Looks like more data entry for me after I get some sleep! I also found a little on the Saville family if you don't have it. CT |
|
|
|
Post by Isambard on Aug 29, 2012 17:29:20 GMT -5
Depends how cold the water is!!!! ;D We have been perplexed by this puzzle before but it is always good to check the bottom of the clothes basket! Might end up finding one of those missing socks! ;D After reading your message I had another look at the known details of the family and I think there are probably two things that now appear obvious to me:- 1. The 1861 birth in the December Qtr 1861 is highly unlikely to be your William 2. After searching FreeBMD again I think that either the entry is missing from FreeBMD OR William was not in England when he died. *** more to follow *** *** I had to take a break there to ban a member who has just joined and immediately began ADVERTISING! *** Back to something a little more pleasant! Regarding point 1. - Looking at the previous children of James and Mary Dunstan shows a bit of a pattern. Mary Thomas born 22nd December 1852 (bp. 16th February 1853) James baptised 15th June 1855 but buried 20th June age 3 weeks - thus born about the start of June Susanna baptised 6th September 1857 age 8 weeks - thus born around mid June James baptised 1st May 1859 age 3 weeks - born April Andrew Thomas born 29th January 1861 (bp. 14th April) There is about two and a half years between Mary Thomas and the first James and thereafter the gap between children is two years, two years and 18 months. A birth registered in the December Qtr of 1861 would mean that William T would have been born sometime between the end of September and the last week of December. And that would mean his birth occurred less than twelve months after Andrew. Based on the evolving pattern I would find that most unusual. The next thing we need to look at is the birth information you have. Some time back you gave me a birth date for William of 22nd January 1862 and indicated the information came from a 'family member'. Information has also come from a 'family member' suggesting that William died in 1889. SO - assuming there is some truth involved we are looking at information from a 'family member' about events that occurred more than 120 years ago for a person who apparently died aged about 16 or 17. I think there is enough there to suggest we should be more than a little cautious in our acceptance of such details. Next point to consider is that in 1871 William is clearly recorded in the Census as 'William T'. This 'could' have been an error given he was just 'William' in 1881 but I am inclined to think not. Mary was 'Mary T' in 1871 and Susanna was 'Susan' and we know Mary was baptised as 'Mary Thomas' and Susan as 'Susanna'. This suggests that each of the children baptised with a second name was recorded as such in 1871. Of course in 1881 Mary was again 'Mary T' with William simply recorded as 'William'. The December 1861 birth at St Giles is for 'William Dunstan' which I think is another reason to think that perhaps it is not the son of James and Mary. BUT - I do have another potential candidate whose birth registration would be a close match for the 1871 Census information. William Thomas DUNSTON December Qtr 1863 Bethnal Green R.D. Technically he would be 7 and 17 in the 1871 and 1881 Census but in all other respects I think he is a more likely possibility. But no matter how I look at this I cannot find a possible Death recorded in FreeBMD and that is what makes me consider the possibility that he did not die in England. That does not put us any closer to the answer but at least it might be something more to think about. CT Darn! £9.25 spent and I have a fine copy of a birth registration for William Thomas Dunston b. 1 October 1863 in Bethnal Green, except his father was William Dunston, Silk Weaver, and his mother Elizabeth (can't read), hence not my William T. Oh well, maybe I'll help the British economy another boost by giving the December 1861 St. Giles William a throw. |
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Aug 30, 2012 0:30:25 GMT -5
Well ... that surprises me.  I would have thought we had him there. I have just searched FreeBMD again searching for variants and can now see just two possibilities - given, of course, that his name made the Index! There is the birth at St Giles you have already mentioned but there is one more that in some respects might be more likely. Remember that Andrew Thomas Dunstan was born in January 1861 and there was a minimum of two years between each child up until then. In those circumstances, although not impossible, I would think it less than likely for another child to be born in 1861. We also have a birth date of January 1862 but I am certainly now suspicious of the accuracy. And then of course there are the two Census entries showing him as age 8 and then 18 respectively indicating a birth in 1862/3. But that one other option I can find is:- William DUNSTONE June Qtr 1864 Vol 1b Page 252 ISLINGTON CT |
|
|
|
Post by sue on Aug 30, 2012 4:03:21 GMT -5
The British economy needs more help than your wildest imagination! ;D It's been a year or two since I ordered any certificates. As I understand it, there are 2 routes - the national GRO & the local authority. Usually I ordered from the national central GRO, & felt very flat on the couple of occasions where it turned out to be some totally unrelated person. However, when I ordered certificates from the local authority, I had the option to specify a few more details e.g. for birth, parents' names; for marriage, name of spouse. The local authority then looked at the entry to see if it was a reasonable match for me - and as it wasn't, they simply sent me a letter/email explaining this, and demurred from taking my money! This wasn't a special favour, it was their standard practice. Maybe not all the U.K. local authorities provide this service, but might be worth trying this alternate route....... (same £9.25 price). Sue |
|
Might end up finding one of those missing socks! ;D
***
I reckon if they hadn't been washed we would had a sniff by now! ;D
I would have thought we had him there. 
