|
Post by gandolf on Nov 17, 2008 15:08:09 GMT -5
Am running out of time as have to get off to work, but one "quick " question before I come back to this tonight.
If Andrew's daughter Catherine married John Rosewall, then who is the Catherine Quick who married Thomas Uren in 1786 at St. Ives? I thought she was Andrew's daughter.
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Nov 17, 2008 15:40:09 GMT -5
A correction here. (I guess this was found in FreeBMD with a possible choice of brides?)
St Ives OPR Marriages:-
31 Dec 1843 by Banns Sampson Thomas Noall 22 bachelor Mason of St. Ives (Father: Richard Noall, Shoemaker) Jane Richards 22 spinster of St. Ives (Father: Thomas Richards, Mariner) Witnesses: Thomas Richards, Thomas Williams
CT
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Nov 17, 2008 16:04:16 GMT -5
Gandolf - regarding the question of Thomas UREN and Catherine QUICK married 1786. Short answer - I don't know. I can find no children for them - certainly none at St Ives. There are children at Lelant for Thomas and Catherine UREN but the baptisms for them begin in 1790 (four years after the St Ives marriage) and are all believed to belong to:- Thomas Uren, of Lelant m. Catherine LAITY 21st September 1789 at Crowan I would suggest the 1786 marriage was that of an older Catherine. The name Catherine does not seem to have been common in the Quick family - in fact there are only 26 entries for it in IGI. We know that John and Catherine (nee QUICK) ROSEWALL were baptisng children from 1792 up until 1812 so Catherine could not have been born before about 1764. (That would make her 48 in 1812.) The only other Catherine QUICKs who could have married in 1790 (that I am aware of) were:- 1752 d/o James and Catherine at Towednack (she married Israel QUICK in 1781) 1742 d/o William and Catherine at St Ives (she would have been 48 when married!) That is it my friend which means it most probable that it was the daughter of Andrew who married John ROSEWALL. With the apparent lack of children for Thomas and Catherine UREN it would (as mentioned above) indicate the likelihood of a late marriage for Catherine. That being the case I would suggest she was the 1742 daughter of William and Catherine (nee JACKETT) QUICK. CT - and I look forward to your thoughts on my last postings once you have had time to read and digest it all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2008 2:12:31 GMT -5
CT
I am confused - are you talking about the same William?
Lannanta
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Nov 18, 2008 2:41:09 GMT -5
My apologies Lannanta I don't know what I have done here. I have certainly got myself in a tangle with the mention of William and I am just not sure how I managed it. With paperwork all over the desk and multiple screens open and being worked I have obviously got myself mixed up. You can safely leave William where he was. I know that I was almost going to bring Robert's brother Paul into the equation when it looked like more of a shake up of the two families was likely. That 'could' have been a reason for this Robert naming a son Paul although Paul had died before hes nephew Robert was born. I never really liked that scenario but, as it turned out, young Paul had already been correctly placed under STEVENS. Apart from my blunder with William I am pretty darned sure now that I have the families of both Rbert QUICKs pinned down. Except perhaps for WILMOT. Will try and take another look at this later to make sure I've made no more mistakes. First have a Fire Brigade training session to attend. CT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2008 3:08:38 GMT -5
CT I agree with you that Wilmot was probably buried in the parish of her father, which in this case was on the 19th March 1822 at Towednack, aged 5years 6 months as you say. Does that not suggest that her father retained the fact that he was from Towednack, and therefore had he been in the 1851 census would have said that he was born in Towednack and not St Ives? Suggesting that the Robert in the 1851 census was from St Ives and therefore the husband of Elizabeth Trenerry?? Lannanta PS: Bet you are glad not to be in California at the mo? Or do you fire fighting blokes like the heat?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2008 3:58:39 GMT -5
CT, Gandolf I have tried to find a link with Thomas Trevorrow and his wife Mary nee Uren, the house in which our Robert Quick is at during the 1841 census in Fore Street. Maybe I am missing something. Also, do you remember Billy Noall Quick? There is that Noall name again Lannanta
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Nov 18, 2008 4:59:44 GMT -5
OK guys, will start with the easy one first ;D As was discussed in another thread a few weeks ago, we know exactly where Billy Noal Quick fits in. Billy Noal Quick was christened 18 Jul 1817 at St. Ives, the son of Richard Quick and Elizabeth Daniel Richard Quick was christened 22 Sep 1776, son of Paul Quick (1744 - bef.1780) and Elizabeth Quick (1753 - 1829). (Richard was also a first cousin of the Robert Quick who married Elizabeth Stevens) Paul Quick & Elizabeth Quick were 2nd cousins once removed. After Paul's death, Elizabeth remarried in 1780 to Thomas Noall. It seems that Richard was remembering his step-father (the only father he really knew) by calling his youngest son Billy Noal Quick. Now the interesting part of this, which I don't think was covered last time is the identity of Thomas Noall. If you look at the Noall family I posted this morning, pay close attention to the children of Richard Noall & Mary Harry. Amongst the children is the following: Thomas Noall chr. 26 Dec 1751While I haven't looked into it closely, given the Quick descendancy of the Noall family, together with the Quick propensity for marrying cousins, what are the odds that this Thomas Noall is the same one that married the widowed Elizabeth (nee Quick) Quick as her second husband?
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Nov 18, 2008 5:03:56 GMT -5
A correction here. (I guess this was found in FreeBMD with a possible choice of brides?) St Ives OPR Marriages:- 31 Dec 1843 by Banns Sampson Thomas Noall 22 bachelor Mason of St. Ives (Father: Richard Noall, Shoemaker) Jane Richards 22 spinster of St. Ives (Father: Thomas Richards, Mariner) Witnesses: Thomas Richards, Thomas Williams CT CT, I bow my head in shame. You are right of course. My only excuse was that I was dashing the note off in a hurry and mixed up the first and last names of two different lasses. I did actually mean Jane Richards, and somehow mixed up her name with the lass above her, namely Ann Peake. Mea Culpa. Have modified my earlier post to prevent confusion to anyone at a later date
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Nov 18, 2008 5:10:55 GMT -5
I have tried to find a link with Thomas Trevorrow and his wife Mary nee Uren, the house in which our Robert Quick is at during the 1841 census in Fore Street. Maybe I am missing something. It may be a red herring, but based on the research I did when I thought Catherine Quick married Thomas Uren (CT has removed this from the equation since Thomas actually married Catherine Laity) there is an interesting co-incidence. I have Thomas & Catherine Uren having a son George Uren (chr. 1798 Lelant) who married 1825 at Lelant to Mary Ann Trevorrow (chr. 1796) Doesn't necessarily prove anything other than a connection between the Urens and Trevorrows.
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Nov 18, 2008 5:31:43 GMT -5
Impeccable logic (as usual ). I knew you would have sound reasons for your match up of Catherine Quick to John Rosewall. Suspect my reasons for the mis-match was two fold - having found the slightly earlier Quick-Uren marriage I then didn't look further afield, and secondly having been lost in the wilds of West Penwith for so long I keep forgetting Crowan is just outside to the east. The other reason that I am in favour of your reasoning is that there is already a tie up between the Rosewalls and Quicks (albeit indirectly through the Curnows) and knowing the the Quick family liking for their cousins as spouse material, it is not unreasonable that after a few generations a Quick might decide to match up with a Rosewall again!
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Nov 18, 2008 6:11:52 GMT -5
And now to the big questions from CT...... ;D
CT, I agree whole heartedly with everything here about Sampson Thomas Noall. I had the same problem with him when trying to sort out the Noall family I posted this morning, and came to exactly the same conclusion.
Having done some checking, the census records regarding Gabriel St, St. Ives are also certainly relevant. From a check on google, there is only a handful of houses in that street, probably no more than a dozen or so. A quick check (not detailed analyis) in 1841 suggests around 7-8 families, while 1851 suggests around 13 families. Several of the families from 1841 are still there in 1851.
This would suggest it is highly likely that Arthur & Mary (nee Quick) Rosewall are living in the same home that Elizabeth Quick, Ann Quick and Sampson Noall are living in at the time of the 1841 census. Sampson Noall is in the household both times - quite likely that he didn't move, just had household members change around him.
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Nov 18, 2008 6:23:01 GMT -5
No further comment other than to say, I agree.
Either the baptismal entry has been mis-transcribed (not impossible) or the age old error has occured.
That is, the clerk/minister has asked Robert (it has to be him not Elizabeth) "Mother's name" rather than "child's mother's name" and without thinking Robert has given his own mother's name rather than his wifes.
|
|
|
Post by Cornish Terrier on Nov 18, 2008 6:31:30 GMT -5
Lannanta I have no problem with your thinking here and that scenario has been going through my mind also. But as I mentioned in my note I have still some confusion with the two Roberts and their demise and came to my conclusions based on currently available records. (Plus some arithmetic.) So my decision to 'allocate' burials as I did is still open for debate. And I am sure there is one bloke 'up there' possibly very happy he got a few more years to wander around and another equally sour that he might of got cut off a bit short. ) But there is also another consideration - Although Robert was baptised at Towednack it does not necessarily mean that he was born there. HIs eldest sibling, Ann, was baptised at St Ives but I have seen no record to say exactly where she was born. That is part of my problem here. Haven't seen much news so I guess they must be having what seems to have become an annual event - the pre-winter bushfires!
|
|
|
Post by gandolf on Nov 18, 2008 6:38:40 GMT -5
Again agreed - My only comment is that Sampson Thomas Noall was not just an "uncle" but indeed an actual uncle to Mary Quick. Mary's father Robert Quick and Sampson Noall were half-brothers (sharing same mother) - therefore Sampson was a blood uncle to Mary.
The rest of the note restating the children of the two Robert/Elizabeth families also fits with how I would see it based on all the facts that we now know.
Like Lannanta, I also prefer the association of Wilmot with the Quick/Stevens family because of the prevelance of the name in that branch of the family.
|
|