*Archive?* Adoption 1869

Completed discussions and topics. All topics are locked on archive. Please contact a forum moderator if you'd like a thread reactivated.

Moderators: grangers14, admin, Northern Lass

User avatar
snoopysue
Posts: 3947
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 7:12 pm
Primary Surname Interests: Fellows Jinks Wearing Jeavons Jensen Barker Skidmore Beardmore Woodall
Primary Geographical Research Areas: Staffordshire, Worcestershire, Warwickshire, Denmark
Location: Denmark
Contact:

*Archive?* Adoption 1869

Post by snoopysue »

I have a child who on the 1881 census is down as adopted daughter. This is the only census where she's down as adopted. In dec 1869 I have found a christening record on ancestry for her christening, it says the parents are Solomon and Jemima Eades (who are her adoptive parents) and that she was born in 1869. I've tried checking close family members to see if I can find possible birth parents with no luck. According to most census records she was born in staffordshire, whereas she lived the rest of her life in the Middlesborough area Co Durham.
Is there a way to find out if she is adopted, and if so who her birth parents would be?
Snoopysue

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority.
User avatar
linell
Posts: 5054
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:50 am
Primary Surname Interests: Stringer Worton Haynes Mason Reading Pratt Willetts Hackett Brown Darby
Primary Geographical Research Areas: Black Country
Location: Stafford

Re: Adoption 1869

Post by linell »

Sue there was no legal adoption until 1927, poor kids were passed around and given out to all sorts of unsuitable people, have you read about the 'Baby Farms!!'

HTH Linell.
User avatar
snoopysue
Posts: 3947
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 7:12 pm
Primary Surname Interests: Fellows Jinks Wearing Jeavons Jensen Barker Skidmore Beardmore Woodall
Primary Geographical Research Areas: Staffordshire, Worcestershire, Warwickshire, Denmark
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: Adoption 1869

Post by snoopysue »

linell wrote:Sue there was no legal adoption until 1927, poor kids were passed around and given out to all sorts of unsuitable people, have you read about the 'Baby Farms!!'

HTH Linell.


Thanks Linell, Baby farms ring a bell, but I don't know much about them!
I would think my girl, would have been okay though, as the christening record indicates that they must have adopted her early on. I get the feeling that family was important to them, as so many of them worked in the family business. She never married, but at least until 1911 she lived with her sister and family.
Snoopysue

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority.
User avatar
BC Wench
Posts: 3333
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 6:59 pm
Primary Surname Interests: PARGETER, BELCHER, CARELESS, DANDO, LANGDELL, ROWLEY, BRADLEY
Primary Geographical Research Areas: Staffordshire, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Adoption 1869

Post by BC Wench »

Hello Sue,

As Linell says, there was no legal adoption until 1927. I've had a look on the IGI and Ancestry for your Sarah Davies Eades and I think it's possible that one of the two daughers of Solomon and Jemima (Hannah and Phoebe) could have been Sarah's mother. Is there any connection with the surname Davies? Could this have been Sarah's father's surname?

Just some thoughts for you to knock around with.
Researching: PARGETER, BELCHER, BRADLEY, DANDO, ROWLEY, ROWSELL
User avatar
snoopysue
Posts: 3947
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 7:12 pm
Primary Surname Interests: Fellows Jinks Wearing Jeavons Jensen Barker Skidmore Beardmore Woodall
Primary Geographical Research Areas: Staffordshire, Worcestershire, Warwickshire, Denmark
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: Adoption 1869

Post by snoopysue »

BC Wench wrote:Hello Sue,

As Linell says, there was no legal adoption until 1927. I've had a look on the IGI and Ancestry for your Sarah Davies Eades and I think it's possible that one of the two daughers of Solomon and Jemima (Hannah and Phoebe) could have been Sarah's mother. Is there any connection with the surname Davies? Could this have been Sarah's father's surname?

Just some thoughts for you to knock around with.


Thanks, I hadn't considered that - it could be the answer! Both the older girls would have been old enough, and both of them married after Sarah's birth. Sarah lived with her elder sister (Hannah Jobling) and her family in 1901 and 1911(she's down as Aunt, which isn't quite right!) before that she lived with her parents. Maybe she was actually living with her mother! If that's the case, I would expect the family to be less than open about it, partly to do with the times in which they lived, but also because there were several prebytarian ministers in the family!

I've also speulated that Davies could be the father, but have found no sign of him. Sarah is down on several cenus as being born in Newcastle under Lyme, which would tie up with a daughter being sent away to give birth in secret.
I've found no sign of her being married, as a father on marriage certificate would help. I've been unable to find a birth certificate either in Staffordshire or Co Durham/Yorkshire (i've looked under Eades and Davies Eades as well as Davies - but there are so many Davis' so it's impossible to know which one is correct). On the christening record on ancestry it gives her birth year as 1869, the same year as her christening - this sort of matches with the census they vary up to about 2 years. But I've noticed that on other records the birth year is the sane as the christening year, so I'm a little sceptical about that!

Thanks Barb, that gave me something to think about!
Snoopysue

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority.
User avatar
BC Wench
Posts: 3333
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 6:59 pm
Primary Surname Interests: PARGETER, BELCHER, CARELESS, DANDO, LANGDELL, ROWLEY, BRADLEY
Primary Geographical Research Areas: Staffordshire, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Adoption 1869

Post by BC Wench »

I'm pleased Sue that you didn't take offence of me saying that Sarah Davies Eades may have been illegitimate, some would have. I suppose you're right about the family not being open about the birth because of having presbyterian ministers.

I have found these possible births on the UKBMD web site

EADES Sarah 1868 Wednesbury West Midlands Sandwell Register Office WED/46/189
EADES Sarah 1870 Oldbury West Midlands Sandwell Register Office OLD/44/475

BUT, even though Civil Registration commenced in 1837, it was not compulsory to register births before 1875.
Researching: PARGETER, BELCHER, BRADLEY, DANDO, ROWLEY, ROWSELL
cid
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 7:02 pm
Primary Surname Interests: capewell read willetts russon garratt summers roberts
Primary Geographical Research Areas: the black country

Re: Adoption 1869

Post by cid »

Have you discounted this one Snoops? I have a Sarah Ann who is sometimes down as Sarah Jane.

The register office there is pretty good, It may be worth an e-mail????

Births 1869

Davis Sarah Jane Newcastle L. 6b 60
User avatar
gardener
Posts: 3273
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:49 pm
Primary Surname Interests: Rose, Wolloxall, Wallis(ace), Downs
Primary Geographical Research Areas: Netherton, Dudley, Bewdley
Location: Iceland
Contact:

Re: Adoption 1869

Post by gardener »

Is it worth looking at the baptismal entry? In case there is a note about her origin?
"The present is the key to the past" - Charles Lyell
User avatar
snoopysue
Posts: 3947
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 7:12 pm
Primary Surname Interests: Fellows Jinks Wearing Jeavons Jensen Barker Skidmore Beardmore Woodall
Primary Geographical Research Areas: Staffordshire, Worcestershire, Warwickshire, Denmark
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: Adoption 1869

Post by snoopysue »

BC Wench wrote:I'm pleased Sue that you didn't take offence of me saying that Sarah Davies Eades may have been illegitimate, some would have. I suppose you're right about the family not being open about the birth because of having presbyterian ministers.


I can't be offended, too many of the Jeavons of the family were either born before the parents got married, or came suspiciously soon afterwards! Sarah's adoptive mother was a Jeavons.
I'm sure it happened more than you'd have thourght!

It's a good idea about looking the baptism up, but the record on ancestry just says Middlesborough, doesn't give a church.

The Sarah Jane entry is also interesting as on one of the census' she's down as Sarah J Eades - I thourght it was a mistake, as it's the only entry I've found with that initial - all the others have either D or no middle initial.

So there's a bit to think about there! Thanks :-)
Snoopysue

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority.
cid
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 7:02 pm
Primary Surname Interests: capewell read willetts russon garratt summers roberts
Primary Geographical Research Areas: the black country

Re: Adoption 1869

Post by cid »

Any help??

Sarah Davies Eades

England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975
residence: York, England
parents: Solomon Eades, Jemima

record title: England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975
name: Sarah Davies Eades
gender: Female
baptism/christening date: 03 Dec 1869
baptism/christening place: Middlesborough Circuit Primitive Methodist, Middlesbrough, York, England father's name: Solomon Eades
mother's name: Jemima
indexing project (batch) number: C16348-1
system origin: England-ODM
source film number: 1546295
User avatar
snoopysue
Posts: 3947
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 7:12 pm
Primary Surname Interests: Fellows Jinks Wearing Jeavons Jensen Barker Skidmore Beardmore Woodall
Primary Geographical Research Areas: Staffordshire, Worcestershire, Warwickshire, Denmark
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: Adoption 1869

Post by snoopysue »

cid wrote:Any help??

Sarah Davies Eades

England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975
residence: York, England
parents: Solomon Eades, Jemima

record title: England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975
name: Sarah Davies Eades
gender: Female
baptism/christening date: 03 Dec 1869
baptism/christening place: Middlesborough Circuit Primitive Methodist, Middlesbrough, York, England father's name: Solomon Eades
mother's name: Jemima
indexing project (batch) number: C16348-1
system origin: England-ODM
source film number: 1546295


That's the one! Is that from IGI?
Snoopysue

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority.
cid
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 7:02 pm
Primary Surname Interests: capewell read willetts russon garratt summers roberts
Primary Geographical Research Areas: the black country

Re: Adoption 1869

Post by cid »

Yes, sorry I forgot to say where I got it from. Can't quite get to grips with the new site :? :? .
Think Mark has access to some Primitive records????
User avatar
snoopysue
Posts: 3947
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 7:12 pm
Primary Surname Interests: Fellows Jinks Wearing Jeavons Jensen Barker Skidmore Beardmore Woodall
Primary Geographical Research Areas: Staffordshire, Worcestershire, Warwickshire, Denmark
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: Adoption 1869

Post by snoopysue »

I'm not up on the various religions, but would Methodist equate to Presbytarian? Sarah's brother and nephew became presbytarian ministers.
Snoopysue

Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority.
cid
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 7:02 pm
Primary Surname Interests: capewell read willetts russon garratt summers roberts
Primary Geographical Research Areas: the black country

Re: Adoption 1869

Post by cid »

snoopysue wrote:I'm not up on the various religions, but would Methodist equate to Presbytarian? Sarah's brother and nephew became presbytarian ministers.


Sorry, I have no idea :oops:
Maths girl
Posts: 3561
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 2:23 pm
Primary Surname Interests: Gladders Hackett Shakespeare Allport
Primary Geographical Research Areas: Staffordshire Durham
Location: Leicestershire

Re: Adoption 1869

Post by Maths girl »

snoopysue wrote:I'm not up on the various religions, but would Methodist equate to Presbytarian? Sarah's brother and nephew became presbytarian ministers.


Methodist and Presbyterian don't actually equate -- according to Wikipedia -- Presbyterian is another name for the Church of Scotland and most Presbyterians in England originally had a Scottish connection -- Having said that they were both not the Church of England -- and if someone who was Presbyterian where there wasn't a local church wanted a Christening but not Church of England it might have been the best option.

Also -- if she was without a father the minister at the Methodist Church might have been the only one prepared to do the christening

Some churches refused to baptise unless the parents were Church goers etc -- I suspect some ministers/vicars might have held strong views about Christening illegitimate children!
Locked

Return to “Archived General Discussion”