You are here

Elizabeth Lawrinson - born 1807 or 1812?

21 posts / 0 new
Last post
Gwebb1
Elizabeth Lawrinson - born 1807 or 1812?

As many of you will know (Bert!), my Elizabeth Lawrinson married William Gordon in Liverpool in 1827 but her birth has eluded me.  I recently came to the conclusion she had been born in Warrington in 1807 and that her parents were John Lawrinson and Margaret Clarke.  D.o.b tallied with death certificate and census dates but It didn't explain why the 1851 census says she was born in Upholland and who Sarah Lawrinson (married name Martindale) was who reported her death in 1858.

A look at her burial record, howver, has given me more doubts as this says her parents were William and Margaret!  The widowed Margaret was living with Sarah Martindale on the 1841 census and when she died in 1848 but William and Margaret do not appear to have had a daughter called Sarah and thier daughter called Elizabeth was born in 1812 which means that, if this was my Elizabeth, she would have been 15 years old when she married the 25 year old mariner called William Gordon!  Is this a likely scenario?  Still doesn't solve the Upholland puzzle  and and 1812 doesn't match with Elizabeth's death certificate or census entries.

Just so I don't waste people's time: I know William was a tailor, that he probably (incorrect name recorded) married Margaret Johnson in 1795 and that they had 6 children between 1797 and 1812 (Elizabeth appears to have been their last child - significant?).  My last reference for William is in the 1829 Gore's Directory when he was a tailor at 59 Rose Place.

Can anyone see a way to resolve my dilemma?  As always, any ideas would be much appreciated.

Glen

bertieone

It is possible a 15 year old married, however, Margaret who is living with Sarah, 1841 census, is recorded as 80 years old.

Rounding down, could be 84. I know being pedantic with ages on census forms is not always the correct way to proceed, but if correct Margaret would have been around 51 ish in 1812 when having Elizabeth, not impossible but unlikely. An earlier birth is more likely, both Sarah and Elizabeth declare Up Holland as place of birth, is it possible their church of baptism is yet to come online or not received one?

Bert

MaryA
MaryA's picture

I'm assuming you have checked Online Parish Clerk which says

Transcribing of Up Holland records is now underway with primary attention being paid to records that are not available anywhere else. See the Resources link for further details. Burials from 1619 are a key priority.

https://www.lan-opc.org.uk/Upholland/stthomas/index.html

Having said that they do appear to have Baptisms transcribed for the time in question, however no Elizabeths.  Maybe you could think a little further out, if the mother originated in say Wigan or even Ormskirk, she may have gone home for the birth and perhaps also the baptism.

MaryA

Member 6532

Gwebb1

Sorry, Mary - your post came through while I was typing mine!  Yes, I have checked the link you mention several times over the years of trying to unravel this knot of a problem but without any luck so far.  Good news more are going on-line though, especially as we can't investigate anything in person yet!

As I say in my last post, it is the burial record that states William and Margaret were Elizabeth's parents that really puzzles me as prior to seeing this document I had assumed Sarah and Elizabeth were related to W and M but not their daughters.

G.

Gwebb1

Yes - I know what you mean about the dates.  Margaret died in 1848 and the death certifcate says she was 90, giving her a d.o.b. of 1758.  One of her children's baptism records says her father was Thomas Johnson and the birth of the Margaret Johnson baptised in Tarleton Chapel, father Thomas, was 1765 - another bit of inconsistency but could mean Margaret was 47 when Elizabeth was born, which is perhaps more likely than 51.

William and Margaret's children were born 1797, 1799, 1801, 1802, 1810 (son who died same year as he was born) and then Elizabeth in 1812 so there was quite a gap before the last 2.  All baptism records say William was a tailor and all children were baptised at St Nicholas's.  I have followed up the 1st 3 children and am convinced I am looking at the right William and Margaret for Sarah (witnesses at each other's weddings etc) and so presumeably for Elizabeth.

Problem is that if William and Margaret had 2 more children between 1802 and 1810, perhaps in Upholland, why would they call a subsequent daughter Elizabeth when an older one was still alive?  As you say, Bert, perhaps the baptisms for Elizabeth and Sarah were not recorded for some reason or I have just not found them yet but there must be some link with Elizabeth and Sarah and tailor William and Margaret from Liverpool that I am not seeing.

Glen

MaryA
MaryA's picture

Don't forget the other possibility of the grandparents bringing up the child as their own.  It would explain why two Elizabeths.

MaryA

Member 6532

Gwebb1

Hi all.  I've continued to look at this line for the last week and I am coming to the idea that Elizabeth was indeed born about 1806/7 rather than in 1812.  The earlier date would be consistent with her death certificate and census records and given that her eldest sister was born in 1797 and did not marry until 1818, the Elizabeth born in 1812 could well have been William and Margaret's grandchild born out of wedlock as mary suggested.

I also found a baptism record for a William Birch, who was the son of Elizabeth's sister, Mary Ann.  This child was baptised in Upholland in 1825 although the baptism record shows the family was still living in Liverpool and I am thinking that something similar coulld have happened when Elizabeth and Sarah were baptised - they were taken to Upholland for the ceremony for some reason rather than actually being brought up there.  There is also a gap in the timeline between when Mary Ann was born in 1802 and when Elizabeth's brother was born in 1810 and the births of Elizabeth and Sarah would fill this gap.  I still cannot find the ecords though!

Several of the Liverpool Lawrinsons seem to have been buried in Walton-on-the -Hil Cemetery.  Is there any way I can see the burial records for this cemetery online so I could check if any were buried in the same grave?

C.

MaryA
MaryA's picture

Is there any way I can see the burial records for this cemetery online so I could check if any were buried in the same grave?

Give me names and dates and I have a copy of some burial records which I'll check for you/

MaryA

Member 6532

MaryA
MaryA's picture

There is only a rough book and there are no instructions.  On the index page Lawrinson has a 9 beside the name, however as to whether "9" is the page it's on or the Grave Number I can't tell, but the entry for the two of them is indeed on Page 9, which could be just coincidence that there is also a Grave number 9.

Image: 

MaryA

Member 6532

MaryA
MaryA's picture

Here is the plan with Grave No. 9, I can't guarantee that it's where the Register refers to.

Image: 

MaryA

Member 6532

Gwebb1

Brilliant find, Mary!  I had been wondering if the Wm Lawrinson who died in 1832 was Margaret's husband as he had been a tailor and I couldn't find him in the Trade Directories after 1829.  The 1832 death would give a d.o.b of about 1770 and I was wondering if the May1773 birth in W. Derby is the correct one.  His parents would have been George and Ellen  and Wm and Margaret called at least one of their daughters Ellen.

After Bert so cleverly tracked down the marriage between Wm and Margaret in 1795 even though the surname was recorded as 'Rawlinson', I found a record announcing the banns (surname still spelt incorrectly) and this states that at the time of his marriage Wm was resident in Low Hill and that he had been 'resident there all his life'.   Incidently, the record also says Margaret had been resident in Low Hill 'these 3 months past, which fits in with her having come from Tarleton.

Would West Derby and Low Hill correlate?

Other people who were buried in Walton are the married daughters of Wm and Margaret: Mary Ann Birch (died 1838); Jane Houghton  (died 1869) and possibly Ellen Birch (died abt 1860) and Sarah Martindale, who I think might have died in 1863 but whose husband was buried at Anfield in 1865.

Thanks for your help as always, folks.

G

MaryA
MaryA's picture

Yes Low Hill is on the edge of West Derby, I would class them as the same place.  Be back when I've checked out the other names, I'm assuming these are the names they would have died under, not maiden names for the ladies. 

MaryA

Member 6532

MaryA
MaryA's picture

Looking for the name Birch, index says "9", so I looked back at Page 9 which is the clip in my post #9 - no Birches on the page, so it does make me think it might be Grave Number 9, still can't promise, however I realised I had clipped too small and have redone it.  I have no idea if EVE ELLEN is connected with the Lawrinsons.  I'm sorry but these books have no sort of explanation.  

Looking for Jane Houghton has clarified that the number beside the name in the index is actually the page number, and it doesn't relate to the grave number.

Unfortunately no Jane Houghton's in the list.

Image: 

MaryA

Member 6532

MaryA
MaryA's picture

The only Birch, possibly your Mary Ann's child, I've clipped the image just enough to show who was above in the ledger, can't tell if there might be any connection with the baby.

 

Image: 

MaryA

Member 6532

MaryA
MaryA's picture

No Martindales in the list.

MaryA

Member 6532

Gwebb1

Happy Easter, everyone.  Thanks again, Mary, for your input on this one - it really is much appreciated.  Do the texts you are looking at have an official name (e.g. Sexton's Records) and does this cemetery still exist?

I was a bit confused though by what you say in post 14. How did looking for Jane Houghton clarify that the number beside names in the index refers to a page number and not a grave if Jane Houghton was not in the record?  Also, is the 'baby of Mary Ann' the Birch entry you saw in the index with a 9 by it?  Sorry if I'm being dense - perhaps I have had too much/too little wine and choc!

G

MaryA
MaryA's picture

First off I looked for Jane Houghton, not finding her but finding other Houghtons gave me numbers in the index and I found them on those pages.

This church, St Marys Walton on the Hill, does indeed still exist and was the main Parish Church for Walton and the surrounding areas before Liverpool was built up.  There are graves in various "compounds" around the church however they are not easy to find, being very overgrown and in some cases damaged.

The book I have is a copy of a rough book, very old, which somebody in the Parish obviously attempted to compile at some time before my living memory.  I don't think they were ever official records.  This book is available at the Liverpool Archives where I must have scanned it.  There is no title page on the book, unless I inadvertently missed it, however I have a page near the end that might give some information.

St Mary's Church, Walton

Report by G.F. Roach

1. I visited the church on 2nd March 1973 and had a discussion with the Rector

2. I was supplied with copies of

  • (a) Plan of the Scheme
  • (b) List of Monumental Inscriptions
  • (c) Recommendations of Headstones to be retained.

3. A study of the M.I.'s shows that the selection under (c) above has been carefully made and that a good representation would be given by this retention: I therefore agree with the proposals of the Rector.

4. I have reservations about the method of recording the M.I.'s.  I understand that this was done by staff of the Liverpool Authority.  One must accept the list at this stage, but I should like to speak to them at the next meeting of the Committee.

5. I recommend that copies of the list of M.I.'s are lodged at :-

  1. The Church
  2. The Diocese
  3. Liverpool Picton Library.  Local History Section (Liv. Rec. Office)
  4. Lancashire Record Office, Preston
  5. Library of the Society of Genealogists, London

G,R.

So sorry, I can tell you no more, and unless you go through the minutes of any Committee Meetings at about that time, I am not sure whether you will find more.  I don't know who G.F. Roach is.

MaryA

Member 6532

Gwebb1

Fascinating details.  We met a guy once at Anfield Cemetery who had saved a load of old burial books from being burnt and he was a mine of information - perhaps he was doing something similar to G.F. Roach.

I'm getting a bit confused by the Cemetery names.  From what you say, Mary, could a record show someone as been buried in Walton-on-the-Hill but but they would not in be in St Mary's?

Also, this bit of my research began when I was following up the death of Elizabeth Lawrinson/Gordon, who was buried in St Mary's Cemetery - is that the same Cemetery as Wm and Margaret are buried in? 

G.

MaryA
MaryA's picture

Unfortunately there are a few St Mary's although the one in Kirkdale I don't believe had a graveyard so should be able to be discounted.

I think the one up Brownlow Hill where a lot of burials from the Workhouse took place was also I believe St Marys.

But if you are talking about St Marys, Walton on the Hill then this is the one we are talking about.

We met a guy once at Anfield Cemetery who had saved a load of old burial books from being burnt

These burial books are now the ones I believe I have in my possession.  Some have been indexed by Kathy (Katie as she was known on the old forum) and many waiting for the same, we have volunteers to do this but they need taking around and giving out, just not possible at present, also needing to be scanned and the only place I know with a large enough scanner is the Liverpool Record Office.  Still a difficult job since the stack of them are approximately two foot six - three foot high. 

MaryA

Member 6532

Gwebb1

What a small world!  The guy my husband and I met lived not too far from the cemetery.  We had only approached him to enquire about how to find a particular section of the cemetery and ended up going back to his house where we spent the afternoon and he looked up all sorts of things for us.  He was a mine of information and seemed to have his very own reference library -  a bit like you seem to have!

G

MaryA
MaryA's picture

Sounds like the same guy, he is getting on a bit now and wanted the records looked after.  What a palaver we had (a friend and I) trying to get these down from the landing upstairs, but hopefully at some point when they are dealt with we hope the Record Office will look after them.

MaryA

Member 6532