Genealogy Chat

Hi all

I have my great grandfather's birth certificate. He (Arthur Thomas Edwards) was born on 13th May 1911 at 160 Strand Road, Bootle, Lancashire. The father is Arthur Edwards and Mother is Rachel Edwards, formerly Plunkett.


I have looked up the address on the new 1911 census but the family living there are the Jacksons. I have searched for both Arthur Edwards and Rachel Edwards/Rachel Plunkett on the 1901 census and the 1911 census but can't find them - They must be somewhere as their son was born a month after the 1911 census was taken!

Arthur Thomas was their second child as they had a daughter Matilda, who was born around 1909 but I have never found her birth either, although I have found all the other children who were born after Arthur Thomas.

I have also looked for the marriage of Rachel and Arthur but to no avail.

Any ideas where to go from here?
Thanks
Lianne

I just had a look on the Lancashire BMD website but couldn't see a Rachel Plunkett that looked right - I wonder if they didn't marry?

There's a Rachel Plunkett aged 17 living in Everton in 1901, though - she is a domestic nurse living at 5 Church Place, Everton. Her dad is William, aged 49, born in Liverpool and she has got a sister Emma (aged 12) and a married sister Amy Bennett aged 26 living with her, as well as Amy's husband William and their children William (1) and Elizabeth (10 m).

Just another thought - on the birth certificate, what does it say Arthur Edwards' occupation is? It's just that my great-grandmother was born in Bootle and her dad was an engineer in the merchant navy so I think that's why her mum registered the birth (five weeks after the baby was born) - because dad was away from home.

Arthur is listed as a dock labourer and the birth was registered by the mother on the 13th July - 3 months to the day after he was born.

It says that the baby was born at 160 Strand Road on 13th April 1911and the mother registered the birth on 13th July 1911and gives her address as 160 Strand Road.

That is a very long time after the birth - usually it's supposed to be within 6 weeks. Could be something odd about that?

I wonder if the Strand Road address was a relative's home? Or perhaps a nursing/maternity home? I think most babies were born at home around that time but there could have been circumstances that meant Rachel went to a nursing home (or stayed with a relation) for the last weeks of her pregnancy.

First name(s) Spouse District Vol Page

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marriages Sep 1929 (>99%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edwards Arthur T Plunkett W.Derby 8b 1320

PLUNKETT Elizabeth Edwards W. Derby 8b 1320

Did your great grandfather marry a Plunkett ?

Hi Pam, Clutching at straws I did order the marriage cert for Arthur T and Elizabeth but they are both aged 22 in 1929 on the marriage certificate and so are way too young to be the parents of a child born in 1911.

Rachels sister was called Naamah (pronounced na-hay-mah) but went under the name Amy on her marriage cert and then went back to Naamah on her childrens birth certificates! so I thought that maybe Rachel did the same and started calling herself Elizabeth for some reason. The marriage cert I got unfirtunately isn't them

My nan and grandads grandmothers were sisters and so Rachel and Naamah are both my great great grandmothers which is why I am so interested in this line of my family

thanks anway
Lianne

Could the Elizabeth Plunkett who married in 1929 be your great-grandma, Rachel? Or is it just a coincidental Plunkett/Edwards marriage?

With Naamah being so unusual a name, I looked it up and found this Naamah Plunkett in 1881:

17 Reservoir Street, Everton
Ralph Plunkett Head Mar 29 Carter b. Liverpool
Mary A Plunkett Wife Mar 28 Book Folder & Sewer b. Wolverhampton
Luke Plunkett Son 8 Scholar b. Liverpool
Naamah Plunkett Daur 6 Scholar b. Liverpool
Ralph Plunkett Son 4 Scholar b. Liverpool
William Plunkett Son 2 b. Liverpool
Dorothy Lees Mother-in-Law Wid 69 Formerly Nurse b. Liverpool
Naamah Lees Daur Unm 19 Servant Domestic b. Wolverhampton

I think Naamah Lees should be Ralph's sister-in-law (I suppose they meant "daughter to the mother in law") but this could be why this Naamah was given that name?

Actually . . .

Did your Rachel's sister Amy marry the William Bennett I found on the 1901 census? Just thinking, that Rachel was the only Rachel of about the right age in the right location - that sister Amy would tie in with Amy/Naamah?

A Rachel Plunkett was born in the March qtr 1884 in West Derby (which is Liverpool) and there is a Naamah Plunkett born Dec qtr 1874 West Derby (vol 8b pg 426) which would tie up with the Amy Bennett.

Just to edit, the Rachel I found with the sister Emma and the sister Amy in 1901 is nowhere to be seen in 1891, but the birth of an Emma Plunkett does turn up in West Derby in the Jun qtr 1889. Curious.

Rachael married Edgar Dayer first:

Marriages Sep 1905
DAYER Edgar Liverpool 8b 116
PLUNKETT Rachael Liverpool 8b 116

Not sure why she waited until 1927 because Edgar died in 1909.

Marriages Mar 1927
DAYER Rachel EDWARDS W. Derby 8b 624
EDWARDS Arthur DAYER W. Derby 8b 624

Perhaps Arthur had been married before?

Rose

Just noticed the bit about Matilda - could this be her?

Matilda I Edwards Jun 1911 West Derby 8b 251

Not if Arthur Thomas Edwards was born on 13th May 1911 at 160 Strand Road, Bootle, Lancashire.!!

Unless, unless ..... they were twins?

Victoria

Of the Dayers born in West Derby, I can't seem to find these 2 in 1911:

Births Mar 1907
Dayer Martha W. Derby 8b 245

Births Dec 1908
Dayer Minnie W. Derby 8b 247

I can account for the others. Perhaps they are Rachel's? Can't see her either.

Rose

Nope! Arthur Thomas registered in the September quarter, Matilda registered in the June quarter.

And no Matilida Dayer in anything like the right time frame.

Victoria

Wow thanks people!!!

Yes Kate, they are the correct family at 17 Reservoir St, Everton, I have the Plunkets going back to 1861. It's only when the Plunkett sisters Naamah/Amy and Rachel marry that I loose them!

I have been stumped on this for a very long time and thought that the 1911 census was going to be the answer to all my questions but it turned out it wasn't !!


I have just spoken with my Grandad, he is now unsure of Matildas real name. The family only ever called her Mattie so he was just assuming that It was Matilda.

He is also totally unaware that Rachel was married before! If she had children in her first marriage then they are also unknown to the family - unless Mattie was to her first husband but it wasn't mentioned to the other kids?

Hannah, who was the youngest of Rachels and Arthurs children only died recently and she told me that her parents only married after she was born in 1927 but she never knew the reason why.


I don't think that Arthur Thomas and Matilda were twins as I have Arthur Thomas's birth certificate and there is no time of birth on there.

Another thing! How can Rachel call herself "Rachel Edwards formerly Plunkett" on her sons birth certificate in 1911 when she wasnt married to Arthur Edwards till 1927!! - was this legal?

Well, I suppose in a technical sense, she could. I don't think it's ever been illegal to use another name as long as it's not for fraudulent purposes.

To her mind, maybe she saw herself as Arthur's common-law wife and didn't consider herself to be a Plunkett any more so therefore she was "formerly Plunkett" ie. had been known as Plunkett but now called herself Edwards.

I've recently discovered a couple in my tree - Joseph Foster and Margaret Kirkham - Margaret turns up on the census as his "wife" in 1871 and all later census records as far as 1901 so far. They both describe themselves as married, they're living on the same road as their married children and Margaret's siblings but they didn't actually get round to a wedding until 1887 . . .

Mattie could be a pet name for Martha.

Odd those 2 Dayers are missing along with Rachel. Makes me think they could be her children with Edgar.

Rose

Hi All

I got a copy of the marriage cert for Arthur Edwards and Rachel Dayer - she is a widow

Yay - it's the correct couple as the fathers name is correct plus Rachels sister is listed as a witness!

I'm still unable to locate Rachel in 1911 - anyone any theories???

She should have 2 children born in her first marriage and she would have been pregnant with Arthur Jr who was born only a month after the census took place!

thanks again
Lianne

What are Arthur's details from the marriage cert? Have you found him in 1901 yet?

Rose