Henry Casley

[allan1962]

On my one & only visit to St Just last June (thought I'd better go whilst I still can , I found a gravestone (see attachment) for a Henry Casley & his three infants sons. I have an idea which Henry Casley it was but am far from sure it is he. I'd really appreciate it if anyone would take the trouble to investigate this & state who they think the Henry is.
Allan.

[Deleted]

I believe this Henry Casley is the son of Thomas Casley and Charity Grenfell who married 24/06/1824.

[sue]

I would say he be 25 December 1826 St Just son of Thomas Casley & Charity/Cherry Grenfell - baptized as Henry Wallish Casley of Carallack.

Sue

[Cornish Terrier]

It appears to me there is only one person this can possibly be:-

Henry Wallish son of Thomas and Cherry Casley of Carrallack miner bp. 25th December 1826 at St Just

St Just 9th October 1853 by Banns
Henry Casley of Carrallack, 26, miner, son of Thomas Casley, miner
Ann Shakerley, 24, spinster, of Kelynack, daughter of Thomas Shakerley, farmer
Witnesses:- Thomas Shakerley, John Tregear

CT

[allan1962]

Thank you for the replies. I also identified the Henry Casley on the headstone as being Henry Wallish Casley baptised 25 Dec 1826.

However I can't find the three infant children who were buried with Henry. Presumably they would have been born sometime between Henry's marriage to Ann Shakerley on 09 Oct 1853 & Henry's death in 1873.

I did find an Anne Casley born Dec Q 1863 in Penzance who is probably the Anne in the 1871 census living with her parents Henry & Ann in St Just. Anne also appears in the 1881 census living with her widowed mother Ann, in the 1891 census living with her husband James Uren, in the 1901 census living with her widowed mother Ann, & in the 1911 census as head of the household. This fits in nicely with the death of Ann Shakerley on 28 May 1904. An obituary for Ann is attached. Anne, of course, is not one of the three infant children buried with Henry Wallish Casley.

[Cornish Terrier]

However I can't find the three infant children who were buried with Henry.

How about these which I just found in FreeBMD:-

Grace Shakerley Casley born March Qtr 1854 Penzance R.D. Vol 5c Page 369
Grace Shakerley Casley died September Qtr 1854 Penzance R.D. Vol 5c Page 191

Grace Shakerly Casley born December Qtr 1854 Penzance R.D. Vol 5c Page 339
Grace Shaterley/Shaterly Casley died March Qtr 1856 Penzance R.D. Vol 5c Page 231

Grace Shakerley Casley born September Qtr 1856 Penzance R.D. Vol 5c Page 322
Grace Shakerly Casley died December Qtr 1856 Penzance R.D. Vol 5c Page 219

The Page Nos for the births suggest some of the Non-Conformist registers which may be either lost or simply not readily available just yet. But the OPC site certainly has the burials:-

Grace Shakerley Casley of Letcha, infant, buried 18th July 1854 St Just
Grace Shakerly Casley of Bosavern, infant, buried 19th March 1856 St Just
Grace Shakerly Casley of Letcha, infant, buried 21st October 1856 St Just

That should help solve part of your problem.

CT

[allan1962]

Thank you so much CT. You have solved my problem.

It can safely be assumed that the inclusion of Shakerley in their names can only mean that these are the three infants buried with Henry Wallish Casley.

I had only searched the OPC database for baptisms with parents Henry & Ann because, as far as I know, parents are not given in other types of BMD online databases. However you’ve demonstrated that to search those can be rewarding.

I don’t know enough about the system to understand your remarks re the Page Numbers of the Non-Conformist registers.

In looking at the images in FreeBMD I’ve found that some of them do not contain Grace Shakerley Casley & have informed FreeBMD accordingly. (I don’t mean re the spelling of Shakerley. The pages do not contain Casley at all. For example, the .jpg image for GSC’s death in Sep 1854 does not show Casley but the .tif image does).

Allan.

[Cornish Terrier]

I don’t know enough about the system to understand your remarks re the Page Numbers of the Non-Conformist registers.

That is just an observation from years of experience with FreeBMD. As you know each entry is coded with a Registration District, Volume and Page (e.g. Penzance 5c 219) and each of those is basically an identifier.

The Registration District is fairly obvious and there are numerous RDs within each County.
The Volume identifies an area which in the example above uses 5c to identify Cornwall. (prior to 1852 this was Volume 9) Devon and I think parts of Somerset will be 5b and so on.
The Page numbers are more complex and I don't know a great deal except that I have seen notes in FreeBMD referring to a 'page range' being expected for a certain area within the greater parameters.

But what I have noticed is that Page Numbers in the 300s generally turn out to be for Non-Conformist Registers. This seems to apply for Cornwall anyway.
Likewise, again for Cornwall, I have noted that generally speaking a Marriage entry where the Page Number is in the 400s or 500s is unlikely to be found in a Parish Register. These page numbers seem to mostly refer to either Non-Conformist registers or to Registry Office marriages.

CT

[allan1962]

Thank you for the explanation CT.
Allan.