Find Ancestors
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
1851 or 1861 Look up please
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
N | Report | 15 Jun 2006 19:24 |
|
Please see below thank you |
|||
|
N | Report | 15 Jun 2006 19:25 |
|
This might be to difficult, as i have limited information at the moment. I have a Henry Maudley aged 27 yrs in 1868, he would have been born around 1841ish. His father was a William Maudley a shoemaker. They should be in stoke on trent, maybe newcastle under lyme. Thank you |
|||
|
Unknown | Report | 15 Jun 2006 19:28 |
|
These are the only results for Henry Maudley on Ancestry Search Results - England & Wales, FreeBMD Marriage Index: 1837-1983 All ResultsViewing 1-3 of 3 View Record Name Year of Registration Quarter of Registration Spouse's Surname District County View Image William Henry Maud_Ley 1880 Oct-Nov-Dec Blackburn Lancashire George Henry Maudley 1893 Jul-Aug-Sep Lichfield Staffordshire Henry Maudley 1868 Oct-Nov-Dec Newcastle Under Lyme Staffordshire Are you sure its Maudley and not Maudsley? nell |
|||
|
N | Report | 15 Jun 2006 19:31 |
|
Hi Nell, that was quick, lol, thank you, on the cert it says maudley, but it could be mandley, i suppose, in 1868 did they write the u as an n, ? it defo looks like a ' u' though? |
|||
|
GlitterBaby | Report | 15 Jun 2006 19:34 |
|
Name: Henry Maudley Year of Registration: 1868 Quarter of Registration: Oct-Nov-Dec District: Newcastle Under Lyme County: Staffordshire Volume: 6b Page: 128 Joseph Brown, Eliza Clorley, Emma Hulme I presume this is how you worked out his age and possible location Maureen |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
N | Report | 15 Jun 2006 19:35 |
|
Oh forgot to say have the marriage cert, so in 1871 Henry would be living with an Emma who is his wife and maybe children? not sure if that helps , oh and William had died by 1868. Thank :-) yes Maureen, lol, it came to today, my fault for not putting it in early, soz |
|||
|
N | Report | 15 Jun 2006 19:41 |
|
After you making me think, which is always a good thing, lol, have managed to find them in 1881 Henry Hulme abt 1815 Etruria, Staffordshire, England Head Newcastle Under Lyme Staffordshire Jane Hulme abt 1809 Etruria, Staffordshire, England Wife Newcastle Under Lyme Staffordshire Emma Mandley abt 1851 Etruria, Staffordshire, England Daughter Newcastle Under Lyme Staffordshire Harry Mandley abt 1870 Newcastle, Staffordshire, England Grandson Newcastle Under Lyme Staffordshire Henry Mandley abt 1841 Newcastle, Staffordshire, England Son in Law Newcastle Under Lyme Staffordshire May Mandley abt 1878 Newcastle, Staffordshire, England Granddaughter Newcastle Under Lyme Staffordshire |
|||
|
Jools | Report | 15 Jun 2006 19:46 |
|
1841 I think. William snr is a shoemaker. Looking at the image it could be read as MAUDLEY or MANDLEY HO107/1009/3 Registration district: Newcastle Under Lyne Sub-registration district: Newcastle ED, institution, or vessel: 6 Folio: 39 Page: 22 Living Goose Street (no number) Newcastle U Lyme George Mandley 3 Staffordshire, England Henry Mandley 9 months Staffordshire, England John Mandley 8 Staffordshire, England Mary Mandley 30 Staffordshire, England William Mandley 30 Staffordshire, England William Mandley 7 Staffordshire, England Remember 1841 rounds down, 0-14=as stated, 15-19=15, 20-24=20 etc There's another family with a similar surname on this page, hang on while I get them. Still in Goose Street Thomas MANLEYor MAULEY 30 journeyman shoemaker Mary 30 George 12 Potter app Thomas 9 Ann 6 James 4 Eliza 1 |
|||
|
N | Report | 15 Jun 2006 19:58 |
|
wow Jools, she says on bended knee's kissing your feet, lol, thank you ever so much for that, really am grateful for that and also to all the others who tried to help. Thank you :-) oh forgot to say, its defo them, as the shoemaker part fits cheers :-) |
|||
|
Jools | Report | 15 Jun 2006 20:06 |
|
LOL nicola - how did you know I'd just had a shower :)) Anyway, there's this in 1851 which sort of fits - but doesn't if you see what I mean Living (I think) 14 Risk or Rick Street, NULyme Sarah A MANLEY/MAULEY head single 19 shoe binder William single 15 brother potter George single 13 brother potter Henry brother 9 scholar Elizabeth sister 5 ?Esther? RHODES servant ?45? HO107/2001 Registration district: Newcastle Under Lyme Sub-registration district: Whitmore ED, institution, or vessel: 1b Folio: 100 Page: 37 |
|||
|
N | Report | 15 Jun 2006 20:17 |
|
LOL Jools, lucky guess, LOL yes i have a street named rick, or hick, so thanks for all of that very much appreciated thank you :-) |
|||
|
Jools | Report | 15 Jun 2006 20:23 |
|
I've just had a look for Sarah on the 1841 - I think i've found her but this is odd too (though you may be able to work it out). Sarah Mandley 10 Staffordshire, John Mycock 68 yeoman Staffordshire, Cecilia Rhodes 33 Staffordshire, Eliza Rhodes 16 silk Staffordshire, Jane Rhodes 72 widow Staffordshire, England HO107/1009/1 Registration district: Newcastle Under Lyne Sub-registration district: Newcastle ED, institution, or vessel: 2 Folio: 41 Page: 33 The odd is Sarah and Ceclia. I had another look at the 1851 image and my ?Esther? Rhodes when I look at it could indeed be Ceclia. So for whatever reason Ceclia seems to have been an integral (though possibly not related) part of the family. Of course she could have been a relative, but that for a different thread. So perhaps William and Mary died before 1851? |
|||
|
N | Report | 15 Jun 2006 20:36 |
|
Jools think you have hit jackpot again, just been on family search site, looking to see if i can find a marriage for this william and there is one with a sarah Roades, so this could be her family. thanks you again ever so much, really grateful cheers :-) :-) |
|||
|
N | Report | 15 Jun 2006 20:44 |
|
get you now, re- read it all, LOL on the 1868 marriage cert, william maudley/ mandley is dead and it says he was a shoe maker, so looks like you are correct and he died before the time. But at least i have a wifes name, more than i had before and also childrens names. As i have been after Emma & henry Maudley/ mandley for ages, also i wonder which surname is correct then, do i go off the marriage cert or the census? LOL |
|||
|
Jools | Report | 15 Jun 2006 20:52 |
|
ALWAYS certificates not census. The sloppy writing on census is never to be trusted - come on, you know some of the utterly ridiculous mistranscptions there've been (not counting the Boxley family I found for someone yesterday who had been transcribed as Cox). I take the surname as transcribed by ancestry when I did the copy & paste, then make sure I put that I've checked the image and it says whatever. Jools |
|||
|
N | Report | 15 Jun 2006 21:02 |
|
Thanks Jools, will stay with Maudley then, LOL. i am now going o copy and paste all of the information i have and go through it properly, lol. I will soon put another thread up for Emma and Henry Maudley/ Mandley, LOL. Thanks again for all of your time and energy, i am really happy and it now gives me something to get my teeth into, LOL Thank you :-) :-) |
|||