Genealogy Chat

Hi Vera,

Thank you for checking Durham online.
The other children were not Christened as Catholics and the parents marriage was in Church of Ireland, St Peters, Dublin.
If the information is at Hartlepool I will be 'over the moon'.

Regards, Jim

James

I did check Dunham Records online for a baptism. There was one possible but turned out not to be the right one. Will check to see what they have loaded so far for Hartlepool Baptism.

Were the other children baptised as Catholics?
.

Vera

Hi KenSE & Vera,

Thanks for all input.

I have a photocopy of the original 1861 but did need a magnifying glass to be sure of Fred's age. I didn't think of Joseph being called Fred as he married & died as well as army records only show Joseph but who knows........
It was for that reason I never sent for the Joseph Frederick Jones cert.

Yes I realised Joseph may have been baptised at Hartlepool - precisely why I did the first post asking if somebody might have a look for me.

And I'll ask if someone might be able to have a look at Woolwich baps for Joseph Frederick Jones.

Thanks again, Jim

Another possibility is that they had not decided on his name when they registered him. There is a male Jones registered in the fourth quarter of 1869 in Greenwich (which did include Woolwich Arsenal) and a couple more in the second quarter of 1860.

If Fred was about to be transferred to Hartlepool then they may have had to register the baby quickly and had him baptised in Hartlepool.

Have you tried this one. Original difficult to decipher but think page no is 704.

England & Wales, FreeBMD Birth Index, 1837-1915
about Joseph Frederick Jones Name: Joseph Frederick Jones
Date of Registration: Oct-Nov-Dec 1859
Registration district: Lewisham
Inferred County: London
Volume: 1d
Page: (click to see others on page)

Vera

Sorry about the age mistake, Ancestry has transcribed Fred's age as 39 in 1861, and it does rather look like that on the image but close inspection shows it to be 32.

Is it possible that he was registered (and baptised) Frederick Jones but was always called Joseph afterwards?
e.g.
Births Jun 1859 (>99%)
JONES Frederick Greenwich 1d 536

I wouldn't advise getting the certificate though but someone here might be able to check Greenwich/Woolwich baptisms.

Hi KenSE & Potty,

In the 1861 census I have, Jane is shown as 3 years younger than Fred. (He 32 & she 29) In the 1871 Fred is shown as 42 & Mary 40.

Their marriage took place in the Parish Church of St Peter, Dublin and only show 'of full age' so no help there.

Lydia was baptised in the Parish Church of Yarmouth, Isle of Wight so there is no reason to believe they were Catholic.

It is because Joseph may have been baptised at a later date that prompted me to post an 'ask' on here. He was not baptised where he was born as apart from looking through all the local Church Bap records myself I also paid for a search by the Greenwich local history centre in case I had missed it.

Another sticking point is that Fred died in hospital and the informant was the Dr.

Regards, Jim

I wonder if the family were Catholic? The local records office might not have catholic records. What church was Lydia baptised in? Also, it is possible that Joseph's baptism was some time after the birth.

If I have looked at the right records then in 1861 Jane is 10 years younger than Fred, whereas in 1871 Mary is only two years younger. What was the age difference on the Marriage certificate?

Hi Kath,

Perhaps its time to stop flogging this horse!
Joseph will continue to be a mystery. I have everything else about him and would have liked to get the birth record. C'est la Vie.

Many Thanks for your input. i appreciate it. Jim

I think back in those days that most births were registered within a few days of the event and a new mother certainly wouldn't have traveled from Kent to the North East in that time (confinement was usually about 3 weeks in those days) so I'm pretty sure the birth would have been registered in Kent (if indeed it was registered at all which it might not have been).

As for the mother's name I still think it could be Mary Jane as it all depends on who was giving the information as to which name they used. The 2 census records where the name is different still have the birthplace and birth year as the same so it looks like the same person to me.

If you have the marriage certificate of Fred and Jane you must already have Jane's maiden name.

Kath. x

I do not have Lydia's birth certificate and will only get it as a last resort as my income is limited.
Lydia is in BMD's though so officially registered. I have Lydia's baptism record and her mother is shown as Jane as it is on the 1861. Jim

I have just deleted the Hartlepool post to end any confusion. Jim

Do you have Lydia's birth cert? What mother's name is given on that?

Hi again everyone.

I have obviously inadvertently caused some confusion for which I apologise. As there are now replies coming to both posts I guess its best to leave things as they are.
What would be useful would be able to combine the 2 posts.

I had assumed that by anyone going to Durham Record Office would not read Hartlepool appeals and vice versa so posted another request.

Reggie, I did read Glitterbaby's post re lawful birth registration hence my comment about Joseph's father being in the army and doing things 'properly'.
His daughter Lydia was baptised and registered in 1857 so its a reasonable assumption that later children would be also.

Kath, you are completely correct in suggesting no more certificates be ordered particularly as I have so many useless ones at the moment. I guess you are saying that Joseph's birth would have been filed correctly even if it wasn't registered until family arrived at Hartlepool. I would still appreciate having/knowing the details on the baptism note though.
I have tried Greenwich Local Studies which is actually at Woolwich to no avail, hence turning to the N East. Its possible that Fred may have had to go North in a hurry before a baptism could be carried out.

I too thought about Fred's wife being called Mary but she is definitely only Jane on her marriage cert. Mary could be an assumed name for some reason. Or is she another wife?
The name Jones is hard enough to search but having the Christian name will be critical i believe.

Thank You again everyone, Jim

There would seem little point in ordering yet another birth certificate - especially ones whose birth is registered in Co. Durham - as the census in 1861 and 1871 clearly shows him as being born in Kent.

I would forget birth certificates for the time being and concentrate on checking baptisms at Kent County Records Office bearing in mind that as his mother is named on two separate census records as both Mary and Jane that her name may be Mary Jane (most likely as he has a sister called Mary J.)

Kath. x

Didn't you read GlitterBaby's post about birth registration?

Hello Everybody. Thank You to all of you for your input. I will take the suggestion to add another appeal for Durham. There were 3 Joseph Jones registered in the (Greenwich, Woolwich) Lewisham records 1859/60 none of which were the right one.
I have the marriage certificate for Fred & Jane in St Peters Dublin but it was 'Mary' on the 1861 that has prompted me to search further for J J's birth record. He had a sister Lydia, born on Isle of Wight 1857 who was baptised & registered and as Fred was in the army I believe he would have done the 'correct' thing & registered.
I have the 1871 (no Lydia) and know more of the other family members except William. Far too many of that name to search from a distance.
By 1881 Fred has died but it is the 'Jane or Mary' that is holding me up with searching for her death record.
There are 2 Joseph Jones shown in BDM's in Co Durham but knowing where he was baptised might lead me to the right area to order a yet another certificate.
Thank You again all contributions are appreciated. Jim

What are you hoping to learn from the baptism record?

If it's his mother's maiden name, you'll be out of luck - that info isn't on a baptism.

Looks like his parents may have married in Ireland...........

Also remember that it was not compulsory to registers birth until 1875