Genealogy Chat

Hi, my partner's grandfather was brought up during the first world war in the care of barnardos after his mother was deemed unsuitable to be responsible for children by the court system. We have contacted Barnardos and have paid for the info they have - including 3 photos of his grandfather, never before seen by the family - unfortunately his parents are only listed as mr + mrs, no christian names. His father was away in france at war. Does anyone have any idea how i can find info on his father's name - eg. army records and/or how i could access court records from the time to (hopefully) find his mothers name and more info on why she was deemed unsuitable? Sorry this is so long-winded! Thanks for reading! Karen

To find his parents names you need to find your partner's grandfathers birth cert that will give you the info to search for his parents and his fathers army records.

what names, locations and dates do you have? If you post details someone may be able to help

Roy

Your partner's grandfather's full name and approximate date of birth will allow someone to find his birth registration for you so you can then order his birth certificate to give you the information you are looking for.

Kath. x

GreatGrandad's full name May give you access to a whole load of Army info, IF you can positively distinguish him, (an unusual name helps), AND his records have survived (many did not). Granfather's birth cert is the starting point.

BTW IF the photos show him in uniform, that could help too.

Hi all, thanks for your help! Partner's grandfather was Frederick Percy Barefield born 20.2.1910. His father (who was in the army) was (we are pretty sure) was George Barefield.

Any help gratefully received - anyone know about accessing court records from 1916?

Hi

As Kathleen says, you can order the birth certificate with this ref:

Name: Frederick Percy Barefield
Year of Registration: 1910
Quarter of Registration: Apr-May-Jun
District: Hackney
County: Greater London, London, Middlesex
Volume: 1b
Page: 491

After 1911, the mother's maiden name is listed on the birth registration index. There are births registered in Hackney where the mother's maiden name is Cottey/Spencer/Richmond.

Edward Barefield m Edith Cottey in 1902
Charles Henry Barefield m Ellen Lillian Spencer 1907 and
David Barefield m Charlotte Victoria Richmond in 1906

1901 census suggests that each of these three men (Edward, Charles and David) are sons of David and Eliza Barefield living in Hackney in 1901.

- but none of these mention George.

The other Barefield family in Hackney in 1901 are George (b 1874) and Katherine -perhaps the family that SHRat found in the WWI records?

All the best

You can find his Medal Index Card here:------

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documentsonline/medals.asp

and click on ‘search’ just under the ‘About the World War One Medal Cards’ heading at the top of the text, fill in the search box and away you go. To understand what is on the card check:---

http://www.1914-1918.net/mics.htm

I would expect him to have been awarded the complete trio; British War Medal, Victory Medal and 14-15 Star.

Now for his Service Record. This is on Ancestry, there are 22 pages, though some are duplicates.
His DOB would be 1874, so agrees with the census above, and first child born Oct 1901.

Marriage given as Dec 5th (I think, it’s difficult to read) 1892 to Catherine Seal, Witnesses D Seal and R Barefield.

Children:-
Eliza Elizabeth born 29.10.01 Bethnal Green
Albert Thomas born 20.07.04 Bethnal Green
George Edward born 19.11.08 Shoreditch
Henry born 08.10.11 Whitechapel
Emily Beatrice born 01.07.13 Bethnal Green
Daisy Margaret born 08.05.15 Bethnal Green

BUT NO Frederick Percy!

Next of kin:- Catherine Barefield, 32 Cheshire Street Bethnal Green.

In early 1916 he was charged 2/7d for a copy of the death certificate for Daisy Margaret (the army was all heart), and shortly afterwards there is a note to cancel the payment of Separation Allowance to Catherine, as she was serving 6 months hard labour having been convicted for the neglect of her children. The note continues that the eldest daughter’s whereabouts are unknown. Then the record is damaged but there could be a reference to five surviving children for whom allowance would be due, with Eliza ineligible and Daisy dead that would leave one child not named above.

SH Rat you're a star! There is certainly room for a Feb 1910 birth between Nov 1908 and Oct 1911.

I had a quick check back on Ancestry since I recalled children before 1901 - and the marriage is given as 1892.

There are also:
Katherine aged 5 (she would have been 20 by 1916) - named after her mother?
David aged 4 (named after his grandfather? - see below)
William aged 2

The 1891 census shows that George Barefield too is a son of David and Eliza.

I'll check for deaths of Barefield children - I wonder what sort of pressures Katherine/Catherine was living under?

There are 15, but seven are outside London.

The others are:

Daisy M b 1916, d 1916 Bethnal Green Mar qtr
Eliza Ann b 1903, d 1905 Bethnal Green Dec qtr
Ellen b 1906, died 1906 Bethnal Green Sep qtr
George b 1895, d 1895 Hackney Mar qtr
George b 1898, d 1898 Shoreditch Mar qtr
Harriet Ada b 1903, d 1903 Bethnal Green Dec qtr
Henry Charles b 1907, d 1907 Bethnal Green Dec qtr
William b 1900, d 1904 Bethnal Green Mar qtr

It is very likely though that several of these are children of George's brothers.

Daisy M could be Daisy Margaret, born 8th May 15 died at 'seven months old' on 5th Jan 1916 of Bronchial Pneumonia

Wow wow wow! I am so chuffed that you have found this info for me! Have now seen it all for myself on Ancestry, I've been having trouble knowing where to look but knowing it is there waiting to be seen seems to make it easier!

It certainly seems to me that Catherine may well have had some kind of breakdown -how awful must it have been for her to have one child die and then a couple of months later have the rest taken away, all while her husband was at war in france and she didn't know if she'd see him again. I'm sure nowadays things would have been handled differently (at least, you'd hope so!).

Does it strike you as odd that the children were put into 'the system' rather than being cared for by their older brothers and sisters, or do you think this would have been the norm?

Thanks again for the info and all your help.

Hi Karen

I think Barnardos were very much seen as a safety net in those days - it kept the children out the workhouse, which was universally hated, and the housing in Bethnal Green was notoriously bad. That poor little lass with bronchial pneumonia at 7 months wouldn't have stood a chance. I do wonder with it being such a short sentence whether that too wasn't actually seen as the best way to help - the standard of housing and food may well have given Ketherine a chance to recover her health?

I heard that one of the "Thought For the Day" people (Roger Royle?) was taken in by Barnardos - his father had died, and his mother had cancer - it was her choice to pass the boys to the charity.

I understand that it no longer runs homes - the need isn't there any longer - and instead concentrates on finding ways for teenagers to get back on track for whatever reason and is doing some sterling original work.

Don't think you could count on the elder siblings. The oldest one we know that was still around was Albert, and he was just coming up to 12.
Eliza Elizabeth had disappeared, and there is no contempory mention of Katherine, David and William they could well be out of touch.

I also wonder if (sorry to raise the issue) the death of poor little Daisy Margaret was a result of mum's neglect or the cause of her lack of interest. Judging by the dates, I lean towards the latter view.

George must have had a rough time of it too. Losing a child, having the wife in gaol and the family broken up while serving in France. It does not appear that he was given any leave at this time! Nor was his discharge in any way hurried. The army was all heart.

SH Rat, we have been talking about the very same thing - was little Daisy's death the 'cause' of the neglect (Mum may well have had a nervous breakdown or similar), or was it the result of neglect and the death drew the attention of the authorities to her behaviour? I am still trying to get any information I can from the case against Catherine Barefield for the neglect of her children, which was heard at Old Street Court (I believe it no longer exists?), so any help on that score would be much appreciated! Have found evidence on the BMD that Catherine, the eldest daughter would herself have been married by this point and had 3 children of her own! Which may explain why she was unable to help even if she wanted to - if living conditions were poor anyway, which, from what I can gather is fairly likely -she would have had to put her own family first!

Also, does anyone have any idea why George would not have named all his children on his army records? Frederick Percy (partner's grandfather) is missing, as are the older 3 children. May have been able to understand older ones being omitted if they had left home, but Frederick was in the middle!

Must have been an awful time for the whole family and I find it slightly strange that as adults these children who had been through so much together seemed to have little or no contact.

Thank you all for your continued help. Karen

Hi Karen,

Since the UK's archives sytems are so numerous and complex, the National Archives have set up a finding system that covers all repositorys in the UK. If you go to the National Archives website and select the "access to Archives" button (acronym A2A), the search facility there is fairly user friendly.

If you go to:

http://www.a2a.org.uk/search/index.asp

then putting in Old Street Magistrates Court brings up a reference as follows:

London Metropolitan Archives:
Old Street Magistrates' Court
(formerly Old Street Police Court)
1905-1980

Clicking on that one hit takes you to a page giving the LMA reference "PS/OLD". There is a link there to a page giving the contact details and the website details.

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/archon/searches/
locresult_details.asp?LR=74

(Apparently LMA is Archon 74)

Their website is at:

http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/leisure_heritage/libraries_archives_museums_galleries/
lma/lma.htm

I have to dash - if you need assistance with LMA someone on here will be much more expert than me - but if you have had no feedback when I get back, I'll see if I can track the references you need.

All the best

Thank you for all this advice and information... I am about to embark on a similar quest for my cousin, who knows nothing of his dad's family except his grandfather's name, place of birth and medal number.. I am collecting these details later today, and didn't really know where I would start... now I do!

Thanks again

Love

Daff xxx

Hi Daff,

I've had a quick look back at the info given so far. I'd picked up the birth registration reference from FreeBMD

- go to http://www.freebmd.org.uk/ and click the red search button.

Any problems, put up a query and someone will be sure to help.

All the best

Hi Karen,

I'll see if I can find that LMA ref. Meanwhile, please be cautious - as you say there are two Catherine Barefields - the mother and the daughter - going by the evidence on this thread only, the one you are looking for may have been the daughter before she married, and the father may be a George, but perhaps not a Barefield? The birth certificate will provide these answers if you don't already have it - you can apply online using the ref on the previous page for £7, and it will then be posted to you within a week or two.

All the best

Karen
"Also, does anyone have any idea why George would not have named all his children on his army records? Frederick Percy (partner's grandfather) is missing, as are the older 3 children. May have been able to understand older ones being omitted if they had left home, but Frederick was in the middle!"

The army would not be interested in the older children if they were no longer dependant on George (or mum) but Fred Percy is a mystery, IIRR there is a mention of 6 children (dependant implied) but only five named on one of the first few pages of his army records. Apart from the fact that these papers were filled in by a recruiting serjent, and not over-carefully done, often with a long queue of recruits, it's possible George mentioned him, but he was never written down. Army records are always 100% correct, but they are not always right. (Army humour)