Find Ancestors

My grandmothers father was one of 10 children... but I only had names for 8 of them and grandma told us.... and wrote down that the other two were boys who drowed falling through ice on a local pond. In coming to GR I found one of them on someones tree......... Tom Rowe, 1871-1880..... which would make him 9 at time of death.... a sort of 'perfect' age for that sort of accident.

I strongly believe there was a brother ?older/younger who died with him, but have not been able to find anything about him.

Can anyone help with where I can start?

(the family were living in Great Glen Market Harborough and the parents were Ephriam and Mary Rowe)

Thanks
Liz

his death should be at the same time of Tom Rowe if they died together Have you looked on FreeBMD just using the surname and area and Year of death

There only seems to be Tom listed

Deaths Mar 1880

Rowe Tom 8 Mt. Harbro' 7a 11

did blanket search from 1875-1885 and he was the only one listed

Here's the family in 1871:
Leicester Rd., Kibworth Harcourt, Leicestershire
Ephraim Rowe, head, 32, carpenter, born Gt. Glemse, Leics
Mary A., wife, 28, born Middleton, Northamptonshire
Tom, son, 5 weeks, born Kibworth

Yes Shirley, I couldnt see it on free bdm either. Ah, thanks Margaret.... that is helpful to confirm that Tom was infact the eldest child.... I had been wondering if the brother that died was older than him, but from this 1871c it would seem that Tom was indeed the oldest.

mystery continues.

1881 census
Kibworth Beauchamp, Market Harbro', Leicestershire
Ephraim Rowe, head, 38, carpenter, born Great Glen, Leics
Mary Ann, wife, 33, born Middleton, Northamptonshire
Mary, dau, 8
Kate, dau, 2
Sarah, dau, 6 months
Children born Kibworth.

Could this be the other brother?

Births Mar 1877 (>99%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ROWE Fred Mt. Harbro' 7a 11

Thes are the listing of Rowe Births in Market Harborough 171-1881,
I wonder if the first Tom died and they had a second one who drowned. Also the Ada is missing from the 81 census.

Rowe Tom Mt. Harbro' 7a 22

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Births Mar 1871 (>99%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rowe Tom Mt. Harbro' 7a 26

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Births Jun 1873 (>99%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rowe Mary Mt. Harbro' 7a 15

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Births Mar 1875 (>99%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ROWE Ada Mt. Harbro' 7a 19

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Births Mar 1877 (>99%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ROWE Fred Mt. Harbro' 7a 11

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Births Mar 1879 (>99%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rowe Kate Mt.Harbro' 7a 11

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Births Dec 1880 (>99%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ROWE Sarah Mt. Harbro' 7a 14

Yes it looks like the first Tom died and both Ada and Fred died in 1877. That's 4 children that died!

Deaths Mar 1870 (>99%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rowe Tom 0 Mt. Harbro' 7a 15

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deaths Mar 1877 (>99%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ROWE Ada 2 Mt. Harbro' 7a 14
ROWE Fred 0 Mt. Harbro' 7a 15

Mind you, I could be jumping the gun here and the first Tom, Ada and Fred could be a different family. However they seem to be the same family with the births coming approximately every 2 years.

Ah.... right.... you are going quite fast... I keep trying to flick back to my tree and work it all out. Are you saying you think there were two Toms? also..... my grandma said it was two boys who died falling through ice, so I would have thought they were together, that would be more plausable....... but according to their ages (I am assuming that is their ages between the name and Mt. Harborough...... they were just babies and therefore would not have been out on the ice?

what do you think? (thanks so much for helping.... I do find this exciting!!!!)

Liz

Yes, Liz, you're right, that is the age between the name and Mt. Harboro.
Looks like they lost 4 children, but as you say unlikely that 2 were lost by drowning. There were no Rowe deaths between 1881 -91 in Mt. Harboro.

I thought I would add that the parents married in Feb 1870....... so assuming they were 'good' : ) before the marriage, Tom's birth as the first child in March 1871 would be about right.... maybe that Tom did die straight away and the next Tom was born 1873?

hi...... actually....... that is the fact that I am pretty sure IS true....... that it was TWO brothers that died together, falling through ice....... (from my grandmother who only died this last Sept and she had even written it down so I am pretty sure that fact would have been correct)

Hi, Liz, I hate to dispute what your late grandmother told you but could she have been mistaken and some other child went through the ice with young Tom? It's just that there isn't a birth of another brother of Tom other than Fred who had died in 1877, age 0.
I know my grandmother told me a few things that I found out were not true, I'm sure she believed they were.

Just a thought, Liz. Are you in that area? Is there a way of checking old newspapers for a report of the drownings?

OK, trying to work out dates here...... in your post at 18:54 there is a Tom that died in 1870........ which cannot be the Tom in question, as he was born in 1871 (confirmed being aged 5 weeks in the 1871 census with parents). Also, they only married in 1870, so I don't think they would have had a child who died in that year.

I had found a Tom dying in 1880 which was the date that was given on the persons tree I actually found him on on GR. Therefore, I think I will continue assuming that Tom was 1871-1880.

Your finding of a Fred, who was born in 1877 could well fit with this family as the other brother who drowned in 1880 ...... he was march 1877 so would have been exactly 3 years old at death ...... he could easily been out and about with his big brother. What do you think.

Hi...... mmmmm, I guess it could have been a mistake......but it was her fathers siblings (albeit before he himself was born), so I would have thought a fact like that would be right. Infact, I was so excited to find Tom when I joined FR..... as I suddenly knew I had found the evidence really...... to support the history I knew.

I don't live anywhere near.....but am planning to go up there sometime in a few months to go to some of the places our family were in that area....... you might be right about newspaper reports you know. the father was quite an influential man in the village (infact they lived in THE large house in the middle of the village , apparently.....) so maybe there was a newspaper entry. How do I go about that? do you know?

ah yes..... I see.... fred died in the year he was born.

margaretmanson nearly beat me to it, this is the website for information about the harborough mail started in 1864 to date copies kept in these places and details of how to get them?

http://newsplan.liem.org.uk/details.asp?pid={DBC3ED7F-42A7-4C39-8BA1-0955537BF017}&lid=na

Wow Grumpy.... thanks! will try that for sure

thanks
liz
ps (I think my husband would challenge your claim to the 'grumpy' crown, after living with me for the last 48 hours!!!)