Murder most foul! Or was it a bad-tempered mare?

Are you sitting comfortably? Then I’ll begin… here is today’s story (with links, of course, to the Lost Hamlets and the Downing and Whitehouse families!)

To begin at the beginning… it is spring of 1822. It has been a mild spring and the weather is good for hunting. You, Joseph Downing, are a wealthy and respected young man of 38, with a profession as a beast leech and a practice which you took over several years ago from your late uncle Isaac who was an eccentric old gentleman, from whom you inherited both money and several properties. You are married with one son and three daughters  and, after your uncle’s death, you  moved from Portway to Turner’s Hill.

Yours is a close-knit little circle. Your father Paul Downing also lives on Turner’s Hill, although his house there was the site of some disturbance last year when four local Rowley men broke in and stole various items and last September, at Stafford Assizes they were all sentenced to death for this, although the sentences were commuted and the four were all transported to Australia instead.

Your wife Nancy, who you married in 1810, has her parents and three older brothers  living nearby. One of those brothers, Samuel married your sister and only sibling Mary in 1813 so you four are double in-laws. Mary and Samuel live in West Bromwich but sadly have no children of their own so they have adopted your eldest daughter Emma and have paid for your children Matilda and Isaac to go to school.

You and Samuel are good friends and share a love of shooting so you often go shooting together in the Lightwoods area of Quinton, riding from your respective homes and meeting at the house of Thomas Fox, a blacksmith, in Beech Lane, on the turnpike road from Birmingham to Hales Owen. You bring your own victuals but buy in beer in generous quantities from the local pubs, which the three of you consume after your shooting. Life, it seems, is very good.

So, how does it happen that in September of that same year, you, Joseph Downing, find yourself on trial at Shrewsbury Assizes, in peril of your life – accused of the murder of your own brother-in-law Samuel Whitehouse in the woods on your way home after such a day out? Read on to find out!

The trial account

Summer Assizes – Shrewsbury, Saturday August 3 1822, Criminal Court (Halesowen was in Salop or Shropshire at this time so the case went to the Shrewsbury Assizes, not Stafford.)

As can be imagined, this case excited much interest and the newspapers of the time carried extensive reports, much of which I am showing verbatim:

“The trial of Joseph Downing for the murder of his brother-in-law came on at seven this morning, long before which hour every seat in the court was occupied. A large proportion of the audience were ladies. Mess’rs Puller, Campbell and Male appeared for the prosecution and Mess’rs Jervis, Pearson and Russell for the defence.

The indictment charged the prisoner with having, on the 3rd April last, given Samuel Whitehouse a mortal blow on the back part of the head with a gun barrel, of which he languished till the 5th April, when he died.

The prisoner, in a firm tone, pleaded – Not Guilty.”

This is the evidence which was put before the Court:

On the 3rd October Joseph Downing and his brother-in-law Samuel Whitehouse had met by arrangement at Tom Fox’s house and forge. Both came on horseback from their homes, about four miles apart, Samuel riding a mare which he had not had very long but which was described as ‘skittish’ and, while they were waiting for Joseph to arrive, he told Tom Fox that the mare had already thrown Samuel on a previous visit to Fox, having run against and broken down a stile for which he had had to compensate the farmer and of which he had said “what a mercy it was she had not killed him”. He said he would get rid of her, for she was so shy; he was afraid she would kill him some time or other.  The same mare had also subsequently thrown and kicked one of his grooms. Samuel also brought his spaniel, a gun dog bred to find, flush and retrieve game from undergrowth and water.

Joseph had not two but three purposes with his visit. He came to shoot and socialise but also brought a colt to be shod at the forge and a new gun barrel which he wanted Fox to bore out and widen in his forge. Downing’s mare and colt were left in Fox’s warehouse for the day, Whitehouse’s mare tied up at Fox’s ‘hovel’, as Fox described it himself during his evidence. Then he loaned Joseph a gun and the three men went out shooting. Fox also testified that “During the whole time, there were no words of anger between them; they were very friendly; I never saw them better friends in my life.”

Fox told the court that he had known Joseph and Samuel very well for several years. They were great friends and had been for years.  They were in the habit of coming frequently to his house for the purpose of going shooting together, putting up their horses, and sending for beer to the public houses. They usually brought their own victuals with them. On that day, they went out shooting together, and he accompanied them. They all returned about three in the afternoon, after being out between four and five hours.

This is Fox’s description of the rest of the evening:

“On our return we all took some refreshment. I then tried to widen the breech of the gun-barrel and we walked out to look at Whitehouse’s farm. We returned about six. We then took more refreshment, both food and drink. The ale came from the “Dog” public house, and was paid for by both. Altogether we had 12 quarts of ale. [A quart, a quarter of a gallon, is two pints, so the total here is twenty four pints of beer].  We three, a man of mine, my son and wife, partook of it; but they had not more than two quarts (four pints) of the whole. I, Whitehouse and Downing drank equal quantities [which would have been twenty pints, nearly seven pints each for the three men]. We continued drinking until nearly nine o’clock [so these quantities of ale were drunk over three hours]. In this time, Downing and I laid a wager on the age of Downing’s colt of £1. Each of us produced £1, and gave the money to Whitehouse to hold, who put it into one of his pockets, I did not see which.

 I looked at the clock just before Downing and Whitehouse went away, which was on the stroke of nine. It was moonlight, clear but cloudy at times. It was rather calmish. Whitehouse went first. I fetched his horse from my hovel, where it had been put up, and I helped him on. At that time we were all fresh [drunk!]; but the deceased could sit his horse, as well I saw. I held his horse, and gave him the gun. It was then in the state which it had been the whole day. The lock was then entire, and the spring in its place. Downing followed, and mounted his horse, which had been kept in our warehouse. He was in the same [drunken] state in which we were.

They crossed the turnpike road to go through the wood. There is a narrow path through the wood which joins the road near the gravel pit. Across this path there are two gates, one next the road, and another 35 yards further on. I opened the first gate for them; Whitehouse passed through first and Downing followed. I went to the second gate. Here Downing said he had forgotten his gun barrel, and asked Whitehouse to stop or he would lose his road, as he had done the time before. I went back for the gun barrel, walked at a moderate pace, and on my return found Downing waiting for me at the gate. Whitehouse had gone on. The trees shade the road, so that more than 100 yards cannot be seen; but he was out of sight. I delivered the gun barrel to Downing, who rode on at a foot’s pace, leading the colt in his right hand. The colt was about 2 years old. The path is what is called ‘a little trig road’.

I returned and went to bed.”

So, this evidence shows, the two men had, after a night of hard drinking, left Fox’s house to make their way home cross country, all three men, apparently, considerably the worse for drink!

Perhaps, by this time, you feel a map would be useful? When I first read the trial reports and tried to place the events in my mind, I certainly did. So here is an extract from the OS One-Inch map from 1872, somewhat later but I have put stars at Turner’s Hill, The Oaks at West Bromwich (which was  possibly where Samuel lived and this site was certainly associated with the Whitehouse family a few years later) and also at the probable site of Tom Fox’s forge, opposite the Light Woods.

Copyright: David and Charles, Newton Abbot, Devon.

And Joseph and Samuel had become separated in the wood. Presumably at some point their routes would have diverged anyway as one was going to Rowley, probably – looking at the map via Whiteheath Gate, and the other to West Bromwich, perhaps via Oldbury.

This extract from the Tithe Map for the area shows Plot Number 217, described in the apportionments as ‘house, blacksmith’s shop and garden, Plot 217, the property of Lord Lyttelton, at the Turnpike road’s (now Hagley Road West) eastern extremity in the township measured 2 roods, 1 pole.’ And the Fox family were associated with this site for most of the 19th century.

Copyright: Michael Hall

So this was right at the edge of the parish, on the toll-road, very near to the Beech Tree Inn, probably about where the road from Harborne comes up to meet the Hagley Road West and where eventually the Wolverhampton New Road began when it was built much later. This was also near Warley Woods and the Bear Wood, so there would have been some promising areas for shooting.

What happened next?

Now we hear the evidence of Richard Aston, an apprentice shoemaker:

“I am apprentice to John Bridge of the Beech Tree, who is a shoemaker. On the 3rd April I set out for Oldbury about seven o’clock. On my return I took the road from West Bromwich. I passed Parker’s house about 20 minutes after nine.  I heard a horse galloping; I stopped it; the bridle had been in our shop for mending, and I noticed the broadness of the reins. I took the horse to Ezekiel Dearns, and inquired who had passed that way. In consequence of what I there heard, I pursued the road towards Fox’s.

In my way, near Wood’s Gate I found a body. I saw a hat lying about two yards from the body, nearer to me. The body lay across the road. A gun was lying about two yards from the body, near to the hat. I dismounted and found it was Mr Whitehouse. He was leaning on his right side, his face towards Fox’s, and he lay in the road. He was not then sensible.

I led the horse to our house. I afterwards went to Mrs Fox’s and she and a man named Henley returned with me. As I was going back to the body, I heard a man halloo, as if he was making an alarm. I thought it might be Mr Whitehouse got up, hallooed “Mr Whitehouse,” and heard a horse gallop from the place where he lay. He was then lying on his back, the flap of his smallclothes unbuttoned and his waistcoat stripped under his arm; and his pockets, to the best of my recollection, unbuttoned. In the left-hand breeches pocket we found nothing; in the right-hand pocket two £1 notes; his watch was gone.

We took him to the Beech Tree public house. It was three quarters of an hour from the time I first saw him, till I saw him again. I took the gun the first time, and left it at Mr Bridge’s shop. The next morning I found that the spring was off and shot in it but no wadding.

About five in that morning, I saw Downing, and again between twelve and one. The second time he brought me the spring of the gun; there was a little dirt in the middle of it. He said a good many had been looking for it, but no-one could find it but he. I had told Hanley that the spring was missing. I went with the prisoner to the place where he found the spring which was a few yards from the spot where the deceased was found. The place was soft and dirty; there was dirt in the muzzle of the gun, so that it appeared to have fallen on the muzzle. Afterwards I saw Mr Granger riding a mare which I believe to be that which I caught.”

Cross-examined by Mr Pearson:

“The gun was in a ditch, where the gravel was sufficiently hard to throw it on one side. I caught the mare at a gate. She seemed alarmed but I did not see her tremble. The gate was little more than half a mile from the place where I found the deceased. When I reached the deceased, the mare started. A spaniel was lying by the body and he went with me. Whitehouse breathed hard, like a man who was intoxicated. I lifted him up, under the arms; and did not, the first time, perceive the waistcoat tucked up. The person of the deceased must have been removed between the first and second time I saw him. When I went to Fox’s, Mrs Fox called twice to waken her husband; I heard someone answer whom I thought was Mr Fox, as if drunk or asleep. The gun was placed in the shop, where many might have seen it.”

Poor Samuel Whitehouse! Knocked senseless and then robbed, it seemed.

Mrs Fox had gone back to alert her husband to what had happened. He said:

“I was awakened by my wife who told me that Whitehouse lay hurt at the Beech Tree. I went to the Beech tree public house and found him there wounded. I mounted Whitehouses’s mare and rode to Downings to inform him what had happened. It was nearly two in the morning before I reached Downings, in consequence of the badness of the road. I went by the same trig road. I called Downing, who came down, and I informed him of the state of his brother-in-law. I said he was very badly hurt, and had lost his money. Downing said “he was very sorry it had happened and could not think which way he went that he had missed of him. Then we made ready to come to the Beech Tree. It was nearly four before we started, because the mare had not been fed, and it was necessary to feed her. Downing mounted his horse. In returning to the Beech Tree we came through that wood. Before that time I had been told by my wife in what place Whitehouse had been found. When we reached it, we stopped and looked about to see it we could find anything. It was then day-break. He dismounted and looked about. He said he thought there was some blood but it was not light enough to see. I looked and thought it was blood, but it was scarcely light enough to see.

We then went on to the Beech Tree and arrived nearly at five. Downing went into the room where Whitehouse was. I followed him; he was then so sensible as to know me. Downing went to the bedside and asked him if he was sick. I think he said “Yes” but I did not hear him. He shook hands with me very much. About an hour afterwards, Downing made him some tea, fed him with a teaspoon, took his hand, and felt his pulse, which he said beat regularly. I did not see Whitehouse take Downing’s hand. He knew me, I am sure. 

We remained at the Beech Tree for nearly three hours. The Doctor and Downing consulted that Mr Baddeley, of Dudley, another Doctor, should be called in, and Downing went [to Dudley] for him. Between 10 and 11, Downing returned to the Beech tree.

 Before Mr Baddeley came, Downing and I went together to the trig road. We searched all about the place where Whitehouse had lain. We found horses in the road before we came to the spot, on that side of the gate where he was found. We then went to the place and Downing found the spring of Whitehouse’s gun in the rut which might be three or four inches deep, and had no water. We found nothing else. We then went back to the Beech Tree. I might be 3 yards from Downing when he found it. He said “Here is his gun-spring,” before he took it up.”

The gun barrel taken away by Downing was produced, and identified by the witness. The spring of the gun was also produced and sworn to be that found, and the gun of Whitehouse was identified in the same manner.

All of this evidence was presented for the prosecution, so they clearly felt it was sufficient to charge Joseph Downing. Downing’s barrister Mr Jervis cross-examined Tom Fox.  More facts (and opinions) emerged:

Tom Fox: “I do not remember any attempt of my wife to wake me because I was in liquor. The mare had been ridden to Hales Owen, about three miles, to fetch a doctor, after being caught a mile from my house. I was present while the surgeon searched the head. Whitehouse appeared to know me, as he shook hands with me very much by the right hand. Directions to fetch Downing were given in the presence of Whitehouse. Before this the doctor had said that he was in danger but might recover.

When I reached Downing’s, he appeared to have been in bed; he dressed and came to me. I told him “Whitehouse was badly hurt, and had lost his money.” He went and gave the mare a feed of hay; she had been 11 or 12 miles, besides having stood all day.

When we reached the Beech Tree, Downing went up first and I followed him. He went to the bedside and spoke to Whitehouse. He administers to cattle, and is somewhat acquainted with medicine. Whitehouse looked at him, and seemed to know him. When he shook hands with  me, I was nearer to his hand than Downing. When Downing felt his pulse, he seemed sensible and showed no aversion. There was a twitching of his limbs on the right side which made it difficult to keep the clothes on him. He took the tea from the prisoner’s hand. Mr Bloxam being gone, Downing desired that the doctor might be fetched, and both the Mess’rs Bloxam came. He remained until their arrival, and desired them to do the best they could for him. They examined and dressed the wound again in his presence, and he looked at it. The two brothers of the deceased came after the dressing. Downing then desired that Baddeley, his own surgeon might be fetched and Downing and Thomas Whitehouse went for him. Downing returned first.

Then we went to the spot and he plucked out the spring of the gun with a stick. He attended the coroner’s inquest at every sitting, and also attended the funeral.”

Then some evidence was called from local people about various movements:

Ezekiel Dearn examined by Mr Campbell:

“I am a nailer by business, living by the side of the road. In the morning of the 3rd April I saw the prisoner and deceased separately pass my house. About nine in the evening, as near as I could guess, I saw Downing return at a gentle trot leading a colt, at a rate of 4 or 5 miles an hour. A few minutes later, two strangers passed on foot in the same direction. They were walking at a common pace. About four or five minutes after, Mr Whitehouse’s mare came up loose at a gallop, and she passed on. Near four minutes after Aston brought the mare to my door.

Cross examined by Mr Russell: The mare continued to gallop as long as I saw her: 10 or 12 minutes elapsed after Downing passed before the mare came by. Afterwards I continued working at my nail shop about an hour, by the road side; but I saw no other man or horse pass. Downing could not have gone back without my seeing him.”

Thomas Wakeman, examined by Mr Puller:

“On the 3rd April I went to Oldbury, and returned by the Rowley Road. I set out to come home 20 minutes before nine. It is about two miles and a half from the place whence I set off to Parker’s. I came gently, walking all the way. About forty yards before I got to Parker’s, I met a man leading a horse which seemed a young one. I wished him “good night”. He was going at a good fair walk. At that time I did not know him. He did not appear to take any notice of me. He was like the prisoner at the bar. Before I met him, I heard a halloo which seemed to come from before me. Afterwards, not more than seven yards behind, I met another man going about the same pace. I was then about three quarters of a mile from the spot where Mr Whitehouse was found.

Cross examined by Mr Jervis: There are other roads by which the persons might have reached the place than that through the wood.

Ann Fox, the wife of Fox the publican was called and brought into the witness box; but being in ill-health, she immediately fainted away, and was not again called, it being understood on both sides that her testimony would not be material.

Thomas Taylor, examined by Mr Male.

“My father lives about 100 yards from Fox’s house; I live with him. I went out about a quarter after nine on the evening of the 3rd April to procure some mud for the oven. I heard a voice in the wood call “Fox! Fox!” not very loud, and then a noise as of something falling. It did not appear as if it were a heavy fall. I was about 300 or 400 yards from the place where Whitehouse was found. My father was not so near the spot as I, but he might have heard the fall. It certainly was not 10 o’clock. The road is hard where Whitehouse was found. I heard no footing of horses.”

John Taylor, the father of the last witness, stated that he heard the cry of “Fox” three times at half past 9 by his clock but heard no footing of horses.

Then there was the medical evidence given by the two Doctors Bloxham, of Halesowen.

Mr Stephen West Bloxham examined by Mr Hale:

“I am a surgeon in partnership with my father at Hales Owen. On the 4th April I was called to attend Mr Whitehouse, the deceased. I found him totally insensible and speechless. The left side was quite paralysed, and the right in constant action and convulsion. I found a wound a little above the projection at the back oof the head. It was about two inches in length and half an inch wide. On examining the wound with my finger, I found the scalp separated for two inches upward in that part which is naturally separated in infancy.

I will not swear that it might not be caused by a fall from a horse; but I think, from examination of the head after death, such consequences could not have been produced. I think a fall from a horse could not have occasioned so extensive an injury. The blow must have inclined upwards, because the scalp below was perfect and that above severed. I cannot swear that a kick from a horse would not have produced a wound and effects such as I described but I am not inclined to think it was done by a horse from other appearances of the head. There were two wounds full of dirt on the left temple which induced me to suppose that this temple came into contact with the ground. There was no dirt in the wound at the back of the head. Had the deceased fallen with his hat on, the consequences could not have been so extensive.

My opinion is that the wound and fractures in the skull were produced by a violent blow at the back of the head; I think from a flat instrument.  Any of the square sides of a gun barrel would be likely to produce the wound. I have no doubt that the blow behind was the cause of Mr Whitehouse’s death. I think he could know no one, and must have been incapable of shaking hands with any one from the time of the accident. I saw the prisoner about seven on the following morning in the presence of the deceased. I communicated to the prisoner, and so did my father, the dangerous state of Whitehouse. My father, in my hearing, expressed to the prisoner a wish to consult the family surgeon, and was informed by him that Mr Baddeley was the family surgeon. I do not recollect that he said anything further.”

Cross examined by Mr Pearson:

“I believe Mr Baddeley to be a very scientific man.

The two wounds on the temple might have been produced by a fall from the horse, and the back wound by a kick from the horse, without any other blow. The hat must have come off at the time when the chief blow was given. The back wound had bled some quantity, but I think not so much as to carry off the dirt. The edge of the horse-shoe might be free from dirt by constant friction. I should think the whole of the horse-shoe would not be received into the wound, but it would have admitted the edge of a horse-shoe. A kick from a horse would not be more violent than a blow from a man inflicted by a heavy instrument. A horse’s kick at the striking distance might produce the appearances at the back of the head; at least I will not swear it would not.

If the deceased answered a question as to his illness, I should think him sensible. If he grasped the hand of another in gratitude for fetching his friend and brother-in-law, this would be a proof he was sensible. I do not think it possible he could have moved from one side of the bed to the other, nor from a road into a ditch at six feet distance. Had a man given him the blow on the back of the head as he was riding, he must have fallen forwards, in which case his head would be towards the place to which he was proceeding.”

On re-examination, the witness said that if the horse had by a jerk turned round, the man might fall in a contrary direction. The wound appeared to be made with an instrument rather than a horse’s foot, because it was straight, not circular. It might possibly be given between the collar and the hat if the hat was on. The fracture was four or five inches towards the front of the head; which might have been produced by the weight and violence of the blow. Any square iron bar might have produced such a wound.

Mr C W Bloxam examined by Mr Puller:

“I am father of the last witness, and have been a surgeon 40 years. I saw the deceased the morning a after the violence but did not examine the wound itself until the morning after. I have heard the account given by my son, and as far as relates to the extent of the wounds, and the fracture of the skull, I entirely agree with him. After the death, I opened the wound and found it in the state which he has described. The impression on my mind at the time was, that it was inflicted by some heavy metallic substance, from the sharpness of the blow given. Such a derangement of the skull could not have been produced without a very wide instrument if of wood. The gun-barrel is certainly capable of producing the wound; I found part of the scalp which was mashed nearly to correspond with one of the squares of the barrel, but I cannot take it on myself to say that the wound actually was produced by it.

Cross-examined by Mr Russell:

“I could form very little judgment from the comparison with the scalp in the state it then was. Mr Baddeley did not attend when I made the examination, which was before the Coroner. It was possible the wound might have been given by great force. No injury was done to the hat.”

So the two doctors differed from Mr Fox as to whether Samuel Whitehouse was conscious at the Beech Tree Inn but seemed convinced that a blow from some metallic implement had caused the wound.

Then there was the evidence of Benjamin Granger, the person prosecuting this case:

Benjamin Granger, the prosecutor, constable of the parish of Halesowen, was examined by Mr Puller:

On the 13th of April, I went to examine the state of the wood. There are various little tracks which are very narrow; but one is waggon way, which is wider than the right path.

On the 20th I rode Mr Whitehouse’s mare, and she carried me safe. When I passed the second gate, I dropped the reins to see where she would take me, and she went straight up the right track. I ordered Fox to go through the same ceremony which he did in fetching the gun-barrel and returning and it took a minute. It is 576 yards from the second gate to the place where Mr Whitehouse was found. There is a bank at the place, on which a person standing might have struck Mr Whitehouse as he rode along. I was present before the coroner when Mr Downing was there. I heard his examination taken; he was told it was his option whether he would say anything. I heard it read to him, and saw him sign it.

As it appeared that the prisoner had been sworn at the start of the inquisition, Mr Justice Bayley thought the subsequent examination not admissible in evidence against him. His Counsel, however, waived the objection and it was read. It gave a narrative of the proceedings of the day, and stated that he never saw Whitehouse in the road, though expecting every moment to overtake him. The only part which could be supposed to assist the prosecutor’s case was, that in which he said he did not remember meeting with anyone; whereas Wakeman said that he met a man who he believed to be the prisoner.

This was the case for the prosecution.

The prisoner, being asked if he would say any thing for himself, replied “Nothing, my Lord, except that I am not guilty.”

Various witnesses were then called  for the defence:

Samuel Hodgets: “I live with my father, near the wood. I remember, a month before Mr Whitehouse’s death, his coming late at night to my father’s house, saying that he had been thrown from his mare and lost her. We went to look for her, and found that she had broken into one of the fields. He paid for the damage done to the stile she had injured, and rode her home.”

Thomas Binks: “I was servant to Mr Whitehouse, and live with his widow. About a month ago I was sent out on the mare; she plunged and threw me. I have attended the mare in the stable; she is kicking and vicious.”

Mr Thomas Winter, the surgeon who attended the last witness after his accident, stated that he was brought to his house stunned and with a cut on the ear. As the wound had no dirt in it, he thought it might probably be occasioned by a kick from the mare.

Joseph Cox, who lives in the road to the prisoner’s house from the place where the body was found, saw him pass at a quarter or twenty minutes before ten, at a slow pace, leading the colt with his right hand.

Mary Binks, the servant to theprisoner, remembered his arriving at home on the evening of the 3rd of April. He took the colt to the field, put up his horse, came in and shortly after went to bed.

Mr Baddeley, a surgeon in extensive practice at Dudley, was fetched by a brother of the deceased.He examined the wound. The whole injury seemed caused by one blow, which could not have been given without injuring the hat, if on. The effects might undoubtedly have been produced by the kick of a horse, and much more probably than by an instrument.

Mr Winter was called again, and said that having attended to the evidence, he had no doubt the wound might have been given by a kick of a horse. A horse’s foot would have given a more severe blow than a man could strike with a colt in his hand.

Mr Evans, surgeon at Shrewsbury, thought it much more probable that such an injury was caused by a kick from a horse than by human force.

Mr Thomas Whitehouse, a brother of the deceased, stated that he had often seen the deceased and the prisoner together, and always in apparent friendship.

What did the Judge say?

Mr Justice Bayley addressed the jury:

He had not stopped the case because when life was lost it was right that all the circumstances should be investigated with the greatest care. But now, if they thought every probability was in favour of the prisoner’s innocence – that the deceased might have been delayed on the road by taking the wrong path – that the position of the body at first, its subsequent removal after Downing had passed on, the direction in which the horse was found, and the whole demeanour of the prisoner, left them without doubt, it would be unnecessary for him to read over the evidence.

The Jury immediately said that they were satisfied and found a verdict of Not Guilty.

Mr Justice Bailey then said “I think it right, in the presence of the prisoner and of all who have heard the trial, to express my opinion that, if the unfortunate deceased did come to his death by human hands, which is by no means clear, it appears from all the evidence that it was from other hands than those of the prisoner.”

Downing, who during the trial had preserved an entire composure, burst into tears on hearing this address, and said with great emotion “Thank you greatly, my Lord; thank  you, Gentlemen of the Jury.” He was immediately discharged.”

So this was the account taken from newspapers at the time.

I hope my readers will forgive this very long account, but there are so many relevant details in the evidence that it seemed simplest to repeat the reports here.

So Joseph Downing was freed, without a stain on his character but that did not, apparently satisfy everyone. It appears that his family, at the time of the burial on 10th April, a week after the incident, were unsure what had happened and there is a note on the burial entry in the Register  “Murdered or found in a dying state being thrown from his horse and kicked.”

The case rumbled on. A Reward of £100, for the apprehension and conviction of the person or persons who robbed and murdered Samuel, was offered in a newspaper advertisement in Aris’s Birmingham Gazette on 15th April 1822. This report noted that he had been robbed of several bank notes, his watch, chain and seals and a leather shot pouch. A Coroner’s Inquest had been started and statements taken from Mr Downing and the Foxes, father and son and at that point the elder Fox had been detained in custody on suspicion of being implicated in the act. But it seems that nothing more came of that and attention then shifted to Joseph Downing.

Two years later

I found another article about a trial at Shewsbury Assizes in September 1824, two years later when a John Felton was charged, on the oath of the widow Mary Whitehouse with stealing Samuel Whitehouse’s silver watch, bank notes and other items. This was how the report began:

“ This case excited a very considerable interest, and the court was unusually crowded. To explain the circumstances of this transaction, it will be necessary to state the following facts:-

In the 3rd April 1822 Mr Samuel Whitehouse, a respectable farmer, residing at West Bromwich, went to visit a Mr Joseph Downing, an opulent farmer, residing in the Parish of Rowley, near the Beech Lanes, on the road to Halesowen, who was his brother-in-law” ……  etc, etc.

And then came the heavy hint that perhaps Mr Downing was not so innocent at all… an acquittal and the words of the Judge on that occasion did not prevent these innuendos, it seems.

“Mr Downing was apprehended on the charge of having murdered Mr Whitehouse and was fully committed for that crime and was tried at the Summer Assizes at Shrewsbury 1822 but was acquitted. It was sworn on that occasion, by a surgeon, that a blow had been inflicted with the barrel of a gun (and it was proved that Downing carried a gun when he left Fox’s house), which would have produced such an injury as that which occasioned the deceased’s death.

The prisoner Felton as also, at the time of the Coroner’s Inquest, in custody on suspicion of being concerned in the murder, and also a young man named Fox, the son of the man at whose house the deceased and Mr Joseph Downing were drinking on the night of the murder. They, however, were finally discharged.”

No mention, either of the opinion of another surgeon at the earlier trial that the injury was more likely to have been inflicted by a kick from a horse!

But back to the report on Felton’s trial:

“Mr Maule, for the prosecution, stated the case to the Jury. He said that the prisoner, at the time of the murder and robbery of Mr Whitehouse, kept the Pheasant public house, within half a mile of the spot where the deed was perpetrated. It could be proved that on the night in question, the prisoner [Felton] was seen on horseback, going in the direction where the body was found, and must have passed the place. It was not alleged that the prisoner inflicted the wounds that caused the death of the deceased, but that he passed by when the deceased lay insensible on the ground and rifled his person of his watch and ten £1 notes. The deceased, when first discovered, was lying on his face with his head towards a ditch, but in a quarter of an hour afterwards, when assistance was procured, on proceeding to the spot, he was found in a different position, and the pockets rifled of the watch and notes.

The deceased’s watch was found in the prisoner’s possession in June last, and in such a condition that no doubt could be entertained of its having been buried for a considerable period in the earth, as it was covered with soil and tarnished. On the prisoner being taken into custody, he told two different stories about his obtaining possession of the watch.

The Jury would seriously consider the facts he should prove, and if they were convinced of the prisoner’s guilt, they would discharge their duty by convicting him.”

Then entered a new character – Samuel Whitehouse’s widow.

Mrs Mary Whitehouse, the sister of Mr Joseph Downing, a good-looking woman, attired in deep mourning, was called. She was exceedingly agitated and could not speak for some time. She, being partially recovered, stated that, on the 3rd April, her husband went out shooting, and took with him the watch now produced.

Thomas Fox, the Landlord of the Pheasant public house, recollected the deceased, Paul Whitehouse and Joseph Downing coming to his house; the deceased had bank notes in his pocket and a silver watch. [Two errors here – it was Samuel, not Paul Whitehouse who died. At the time of the original incident, Thomas Fox was not the landlord of the Pheasant, the accused John Felton was!]

Richard Aston, whose detailed evidence in Downing’s trial we saw earlier in this script, found the deceased in the road insensible, and went to the Beech tree public-house for assistance; on returning to the deceased, he said “I heard a halloo, and then a second halloo; and I made a hallooing in answer, and directly after I heard a horse gallop off in a direction towards the Pheasant public house, which is about half a mile from where the deceased lay. When I arrived where the deceased was lying, I found he had been removed into the ditch; his waistcoat was raised up; the waistband of his breeches was unbuttoned, and one of the pockets was unbuttoned. I did not see that he had a watch when I first saw him. He had no watch when I saw him again. I assisted in removing him to the Beech Tree, where he lived two days in a state of insensibility.”

John Downing – [yes, almost certainly distantly related to the Rowley Downings!]: “I live at Harborne; on the night of the 3rd April 1822 about twenty minutes past nine, I saw the prisoner at the bar pass my house on horseback, which is situate about half a mile from where Mr Whitehouse was found, and in the direct road to the Pheasant public –house. The prisoner’s father lived at Harborne; I particularly noticed the prisoner by his beating his horse over the shoulders to make him go faster. It was a moon-light night; I am sure it was the prisoner.”

Cross-examined by Mr Maule:

“I saw the prisoner on other days in April frequently; he visited his father, and my house is on the road, between the residence of father and son; the prisoner might have gone up a turnpike road after he passed my house and not have passed through the wood.”

Questioned by the Judge:

“I was 20 yards off the prisoner when he passed me; it is not uncommon for a man to beat a horse on the shoulder; I did not speak to the prisoner, though he was a neighbour; his horse was darkish; I have known the prisoner since he was a child.”

Moses Hyam identified the watch left in Mrs Tonk’s possession to be the same he sold to Whitehouse.

Edmund Darby, a constable, apprehended the prisoner at Birmingham, when he gave different accounts how he obtained it.

The prisoner declined saying anything in his defence, and called several witnesses, who gave him a good character.

Mr Justice Park considered that the circumstances were very slight against the prisoner.

The Jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

More details about the strange circumstances surrounding the watch emerged in a report in the Shrewsbury Chronicle dated 20 August 1824:

John Felton, charged with stealing a silver watch, value £3, from Samuel Whitehouse.

Elizabeth Tonks, took the Pheasant Inn off the prisoner’s hands in June 1822. In October last, he brought a dirty and tarnished silver watch to her house; he asked if a man had been there to enquire for him, and on being answered in the negative, he told Mrs Tonks that he had advanced 11/- (eleven shillings) on the watch to a strange man who was to have met him there to redeem it; he then asked Mrs Tonks to let him have 11/- on it, but enjoined her to let no one know of the transaction, and particularly not her servant girl, who had lived with him also at the Pheasant, when he kept it; witness accordingly took the watch in pledge, cleaned it in the best way she could, and used it; and that afterwards, when the matter became public, she gave it up to Darby, the constable.

Darby stated that he apprehended the prisoner at Bromsgrove Fair, where he had horses to sell, and telling him he was come to apprehend him, he said “Are you, by God! About that damned watch; I do not care about it; I had it of a man whom I did not know.”

A great number of respectable persons who had known the prisoner from 4 to 26 years, gave him a most excellent character.

The names of certain people seem to recur in these trials and it is likely that the local authorities were under some pressure to solve this mystery, and numerous people seem to have come under suspicion.

Summary

Was Joseph involved in attacking his brother-in-law? He certainly had nothing to gain financially – Joseph was a very wealthy man, as was Mary Downing, Samuel’s wife and both Joseph and Mary had received substantial bequests from their uncle Isaac Downing in 1814. And there is no evidence that the men were on bad terms, quite the contrary. So what motive could he have had? It’s difficult to think what motive Tom Fox would have had either, although he too clearly came under suspicion.

My own view is that it seems perfectly possible to me that, with Samuel riding in the dark in a very drunken state, his unreliable horse could have thrown him as he rode through the wood and then kicked him in the head and the horse was certainly running wild at that time. It appears that the Judge at the trial also had great doubt about whether Samuel had died as a result of a human attack.

The route taken by the two men – both of whom were the worse for alcohol – would have diverged anyway at some point cross country and it was clear that there were various tracks and pathways through the Lightwoods and that Joseph Downing had got lost there before. And could he really have attacked his brother-in-law so viciously while he was himself on a horse and leading a colt with his right hand? It seems unlikely.

That Samuel was subsequently robbed definitely happened, perhaps by one or more passing men who took advantage of his unconscious state and may not even have realised that he was so badly injured, (it seems the wound was on the back of  his head and not immediately obvious in the dark of the woods). And he probably smelled of drink, too so the thief may just have thought he had fallen down drunk.

But what a fascinating glimpse of the life these men led and how the movements of people along the road were noted by the local residents!

I wonder whether Joseph was able to resume anything like his normal life after that. Was there always a whisper of doubt about his innocence? Did his wife Nancy suspect that he might have killed her brother? Did his sister Mary think that he had struck down her husband? Did all five of his daughters choose to live with their Aunt Mary, Samuel’s widow, in West Bromwich because of family issues or did they just prefer to live in a town? Who knows? They all returned to Turner’s Hill, to live with their mother and brother Isaac after their father’s death.  I am currently trying to track down Joseph’s Will and also his son Isaac’s Will which may give some clues. Did all of those daughters and Isaac remain unmarried because of the family disgrace? We shall never know.

Would there have been much sympathy in Rowley in 1822 for Joseph? Remember that only the year before, four Rowley men had been sentenced to death for a minor robbery at the home of Joseph’s father, although those sentences were commuted to transportation, so local support might have been thin on the ground.

So, there it is – a real life murder mystery, unsolved, it seems, to this day. Or was it a terrible mishap, involving a man worse for drink, a bad tempered horse and an opportunistic thief?

What do you think?

The 1841 Census – Turner’s Hill 3 Redferns but mainly Downings

The next family on the 1841 Census were the Redferns, Joseph Redfern, his wife Ann Maria (nee Priest) and their elder children. This is how the family were shown in that Census:

Christian nameSurnameAgeOccupationWhether born in CountyWhether born in Scotland, Ireland or Foreign Parts
JosephRedfern35LabourerYes 
MariaRedfern40 Yes 
SarahRedfern12 Yes 
ElizaRedfern10 Yes 
JosephRedfern8 Yes 
WilliamRedfern6 Yes 
AnnRedfern4 Yes 
ThomasPriest15 Yes 

Thomas Priest was Joseph’s stepson, the illegitimate son of Ann Maria Priest.

No need for much new research on this family, I did a family study on this family in August and September 2023 which appears in two posts.

There is little new to be added to that information since then so any  interested readers may wish to refresh their memories from those posts:

The Downing Family

Next along the hill were Joseph Downing and his family, Joseph was shown as a farmer. This was their household:

Christian nameSurnameAgeOccupationWhether born in CountyWhether born in Scotland, Ireland or Foreign Parts
JosephDowning55FarmerYes 
Nancy 50 Yes 
Isaac 25 Yes 
SarahWard20Female ServantNo 
HannahHarris30 No 

The Downing Family

There are many Downings in and around the Rowley area, also in Tividale, Sedgley, West Bromwich and Harborne and many of them were owners or tenants of land and therefore more prosperous than most of the average nailers. They intermarried with other families of similar status in the area. Many of them left Wills which, where I have been able to find them, have been the source of a lot of information.

Joseph Downing (1784-1849)

Joseph’s age in the 1841 Census indicates a birth year of about 1786, bearing in mind that in this census adult ages were rounded down to the nearest five years. I had hoped that I would be able to find Joseph in the 1851 Census which would give me a more accurate year but although I found Nancy still on Turner’s Hill with various others, she was now a widow. So now I knew that Joseph had died between 1841 and 1851, into the period of civil registration so easier to find – this should give me an age from the death registration and from the burial if I was able to find that. There were several death registrations of Joseph Downings in the Dudley Registration District between those dates but only one of them was for a Joseph of the right age. Joseph Downing, aged 65, died in the first quarter of 1849 which brings me back to a birth date of about 1784. And this Joseph Downing, aged 65, and – according to the entry in the Burial Register – of Turner’s Hill was buried at St Giles on 2 January 1849. So this is definitely the right Joseph Downing. The Burial entry indicates that he died of a diseased heart.

So now I could look for a baptism of this Joseph. I searched FreeREG for a period from 1780 to 1790 in Rowley Regis and the surrounding area within 7.5 miles. Somewhat to my surprise, there were only two such baptisms – one in 1780 in Himley – a little early if our Joseph’s age was recorded correctly and quite a long way away  – and one in Rowley Regis on 11 January 1784. It seems likely that this second Joseph was our man. This Joseph was the son of Paul and Ann Downing, who had also had a daughter Mary baptised at St Giles in 1782. There were no other baptisms for this couple anywhere that I could find which makes me suspect that the Hannah Downing who died in July 1786 and was buried at St Giles may have been this Ann – Ann and Hannah are sometimes used interchangeably. Or it is possible that she was the Ann Downing who was buried at Halesowen in December 1792. The only other trace that I could find at that point of Paul Downing was a burial at St Giles in November 1823, aged 81 (giving a birth year of about 1742) and giving his abode as Turner’s Hill. So, again, that ties in neatly with this family.

Joseph’s father Paul Downing (1742-1823)

Paul is not a common name in the Downing family nor indeed in Rowley Regis at this time, as far as I can see, but I was able to find a marriage of a Paul Downing on 14 February 1782 to Ann Darby – another name associated with Rowley – by Licence (which indicates a certain level of wealth or social standing). The marriage is listed as having taken place at Rowley Regis cum Clent but I cannot see it in the Rowley Regis Register so presumably it took place at Clent.  And there was a Paul Downing baptised at Harborne on 10 February 1765 who may have been connected in some way, he was the son of John and Martha Downing. The only Paul Downing that I have been able to find in the area in the 1841 Census was a blacksmith living in Hagley Road, Harborne so it does seem that the Downings in that area used Paul as a Christian name, more so than the Rowley Downings. However, I  know from other sources (of which more anon) that this Joseph Downing was the nephew of Isaac Downing of Turner’s Hill.

There was a Paul Downing living on Turner’s Hill from at least about 1782 until 1823. I found a newspaper report that in 1821, John Fox, John Priest, Samuel Perry, Benjamin Perry and Ephraim Rollason of Rowley were convicted at Stafford Assizes for housebreaking at the dwelling-house of Paul Downing in April 1821 and stealing a coat, two sheets and other goods. This does make me think that Paul Downing must have been living in a house of a larger than average size for the village. It would not have taken four men to burgle the average small cottage in the village.

For this crime all four were sentenced to death at Stafford Assizes, which seems a harsh sentence to our modern thinking although I have been able to discover that these death sentneces were commuted and they were all were transported to Australia instead. This was in the period of demobilisation of the army after Waterloo, leading to mass unemployment, poor harvests owing to bad weather, the Peterloo Massacre in 1819 and the introduction of the Corn laws which had a disastrous impact on the poor. Who knows what motivated these four men to break in and steal, though it does not appear that they managed to steal very much and the death sentences seem draconian to us today. I had also noted that Ephraim Rollason appeared in court a couple of times previously charged with stealing so this may not have been a one-off. I cannot help thinking that it would not have made the Downing family very popular amongst the poorer families of the hamlets who lost four of their men.

There was also Isaac Downing on Turner’s Hill at this time, he was buried at St Giles in November 1814, of Turner’s Hill, aged 75, having died of asthma. It seems that Paul and Isaac were brothers. And the maps which appear to have been prepared in connection with the Enclosures in Rowley in the late 1790s or very early 1800s, also show Paul Downing as tenant of land on Turner’s Hill. Looking back, I see that I wrote at some length about the Downings (amongst other families) in my piece about the farms in the Lost Hamlets.

Joseph and Nancy

Joseph Downing married Nancy Whitehouse – again by Licence – at St Giles, on 29 March 1810, the witnesses to this marriage were Mary Downing and William Whitehouse, a really Rowley union, it seems!  A daughter Emma was baptised at Rowley on 17 September 1810, daughter of Joseph and Nancy, followed by Matilda in 1813, Isaac in 1815, Mary Ann in 1818, Lavinia (1821-1824), Amelia in 1823 and another Lavinia – Lavinia Augusta in 1829. In all of these baptisms except the first, Joseph was described as a ‘Beast Leech’.

The ‘beast leech’

A ‘beast leech’ is an old term for a man practiced in healing cattle, which would have included horses and other livestock  – a veterinary or cow doctor. The term is first recorded, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, in 1627 in a dictionary by F Holyoake and that dictionary thinks that it was a term used in English Regional dialect. Certainly there are numerous examples of this term in Yorkshire in the mid 1700s but clearly it was not limited to there. 

In archaic and Old English the word leech meant a physician, healer or surgeon and the term apparently comes from the Old English word lǣce which meant healer. This use had apparently fallen mostly out of use by the 17th century. But, as we can see, the use certainly continued in connection with animals.

And it must have been that there was a need for people experienced and knowledgeable in the treatment of sick animals in most farming communities. Doubtless some horse dealers, grooms, cattle dealers developed their own expertise in dealing with ailments and problems in their own specialisms but the description of Joseph as a beast leech over a period of years suggests that he was recognised as having particular skills in this area and earning his living from his practice and, since his uncle was also a beast leech, this may have been a family occupation.  There is certainly continuing evidence that the Downing family were particularly interested in cattle breeding.  But by 1841 Joseph was described simply as a farmer in the census.

So this was the only Census in which Joseph Downing appeared, and he died, aged 65, on the 27th December 1848 and was buried at St Giles on 2 January 1849. There is much more to say about Joseph Downing, so much that this will be a separate  post about him, soon!

Nancy Downing (nee Whitehouse) 1788-1855

Nancy Whitehouse was born in about 1788-79, which fits with both the age shown in the 1841 and from the age of 62 which she gave in the 1851 Census.  There were four Nancy Whitehouses baptised between 1785 and 1790 in the immediate area of Rowley, two in Wednesbury and one in Kingswinford. But the fourth one was baptised in Rowley Regis on 11 May 1788 which is a close fit, she was the daughter of William and Hannah Whitehouse. As Nancy gives her place of birth in the census as Rowley it seems likely that this is our Nancy.

In 1851, as a widow, Nancy was still living on Turner’s Hill. With her then were her surviving children Isaac (35), Mary (30), Amelia (27), Lavinia (21), along with a Thomas Whitehouse, aged 63, a widower shown as a ‘resident’ (not shown as a relative) and two servants – Joseph Hodgets who was a manservant, aged 20 and Caroline Wasnidge, a general servant aged 35. All of these were born in Rowley Regis except Thomas who was marked born in Staffordshire and Caroline who was born in Birmingham.

As I have often noted previously, those prosperous enough to employ servants often employed people from outside the village.

In 1851, all of the children listed were unmarried. Nancy‘s occupation was listed as an annuitant, as were her three daughters while her son Isaac was shown as a ‘proprietor of lands, etc’, as was Thomas Whitehouse. No mention of farming at all. So this was definitely a well-to-do family on both sides, it seems, owning land and wealthy enough to leave annuities for their unmarried daughters.

Where were the Downing daughters in 1841?

I was curious as to where the four girls, then 20, 17, 15 and 11 were in 1841 as they were not with their parents. The answer was that they, were with Thomas Whitehouse and a Mary Whitehouse, (b.1786, possibly his wife or his sister-in-law)at his home in High Street, West Bromwich. It seems very likely that Thomas was related to them in some way.

This Thomas Whitehouse was a Currier, these were skilled craftsmen, currying was the process of stretching and finishing tanned leather, using techniques of dressing, finishing and colouring to give the leather the desired colour. The leather was then ready to pass on to the finishing trades such as saddlery, bridlery, shoemaking or glovemaking. Walsall was at that time the capital of saddlery in England, plus the making of bridles and harnesses and leather goods, due to the proximity of lime pits used for tanning leather and metal industries supplying metal fittings so Thomas Whitehouse would have had a ready market nearby.

Whilst looking at the Whitehouse family, of whom there were many in this area, I noticed a list published in the Worcester Journal in 1845, of ‘members of the Dudley and West Bromwich Bank” which also showed their occupations and where they lived. There were seven Whitehouses listed among the investors: Richard from Oakham who was a Cattle Dealer (a source for Thomas’s hides, perhaps?); a Joseph and a John, both of Dudley and both canal carriers; a William and a William Frederick of West Bromwich, both Nail Merchants; Thomas of West Bromwich, a currier plus the representatives of a Samuel Whitehouse Deceased, also of West Bromwich and also a currier; and a William of Dudley and West Bromwich who was a Canal Carrier. There were no Downings listed among the Investors, perhaps merchants had more disposable capital than farmers, or perhaps they were more inclined to invest in banks. This is quite a close cluster of Whitehouses, who seemed – at least some of the time  – to be close to each other in location and to be occupied in complimentary businesses. It is quite possible they were all related.

William and Hannah Whitehouse’s family

I looked to see what other children William and Hannah Whitehouse had had baptised at Rowley Regis around the time of Nancy’s birth. The first was Joseph in January 1775 which makes me think that William Whitehouse and Hannah Willetts were the couple who were married at St Philip’s, Birmingham on 14 February 1774. Then followed Samuel in 1777, William in 1780, Thomas in 1785, and Nancy in 1788. However, of these, I have discovered, from the Will of William Whitehouse (abt 1751-1827), Nancy’s father, that his son William died in 1812, sons Samuel and Thomas both died in 1822, leaving only his eldest son Joseph and Nancy herself of his children. So whoever the Thomas Whitehouse shown in the 1841 Census was , he was not Nancy’s brother, though he was very likely related.

So the Thomas and Samuel Whitehouse who were both curriers in West Bromwich must have been brothers from another or at least more distant twig of the Whitehouse family.

But it was when I was looking at these Whitehouse men that I came across a fascinating story of which more in my next post. But what I discovered for certain was that Samuel and Nancy and Thomas Whitehouse –were definitely siblings and that Joseph Downing had married Nancy Whitehouse in 1810 and Samuel Whitehouse had married Mary Downing in 1813 – Joseph’s sister and only sibling. So the families were double in-laws and clearly very closely connected!  

Nancy Downing died in 1855 and was buried at St Giles on 22 August that year, her age given as 67 and her abode as Turner’s Hill. The person making the burial entry noted that the cause of death was General Decay. Thomas Whitehouse, appears to have died in May 1852 in Rowley Regis and was buried in West Bromwich, which had previously been his business base and home for many years.

Isaac Downing (1815-1874)

Isaac was still living on Turner’s Hill in 1851, listed within his mother’s household and described as a “Proprietor of Lands, etc.” His sisters Mary, Amelia and Lavinia were also living there by that time and Thomas Whitehouse.

In 1861 Isaac was still there – although it is clear from the Census that the family were not living at Turner’s Hill Farm, as this is shown separately and occupied by a different family. The Downing abode was a private house. By this time, his mother and Thomas Whitehouse had died and Isaac, by then 42 and unmarried, was shown as the Head of the Household and described as “Principal Occupation: General Superintendence of the cultivation of Land”. Again his three sisters were also living there, all single.

By 1871, Isaac was 55 and shown as a Landowner and Farmer, employing 4 men. His sisters Mary and Lavinia were still with him, all of them unmarried.

Isaac died in 1874, aged 59 and was buried at St Giles on 20 November 1874. He was the last surviving issue of Joseph and Nancy.

Joseph and Nancy’s daughters

From another source, I learned that Mr and Mrs Samuel Whitehouse had been married six or seven years, and had no children of their own. Joseph Downing, who had married Samuel Whitehouse’s sister had four or five children. Samuel Whitehouse had reportedly taken Joseph and Nancy’s eldest daughter Emma from her birth and had adopted her as his own. He had also sent two other of Downing’s children to school, Whitehouse expressing his great satisfaction at what he had done, and saying what good children they were.

Samuel Whitehouse and his brother Thomas both died in 1822 when Emma was about 12 but I suspect that at least one of the girls, if not all, remained with his widow Mary nee Downing. Another Thomas Whitehouse, a bachelor, married a Mary Whitehouse, a widow, by Licence in West Bromwich on 27 September 1827 and I suspect that this is the Thomas and Mary Whitehouse with whom the girls were living in 1841. 

Just to add to the confusion about this family, when this second Thomas died in 1852, in his will he referred to his ‘late brother Samuel’ – don’t you just love it when branches of families use all the same Christian names…?  And in the same Will, the second Thomas left property to a William and Joseph Whitehouse of Rowley, some minor bequests and the residue of his estate to the Downing children, naming Isaac as his nephew. Isaac was Mary’s nephew – but not his but it appears he considered Isaac as such.

Of Joseph and Nancy’s children then, their second daughter Matilda (1813-1837) had died of fever on 24th October 1837, aged 24 and of The Heath, West Bromwich (which was where Samuel and Mary Whitehouse were living at the time of his death and presumably where she continued to live) and was buried at West Bromwich. Emma (1810-1850) had died of Typhus Fever at Great Malvern, unmarried, aged 40 in 1850 and was also buried at West Bromwich. Amelia (1824-1861) died in 1861 and was buried at St Giles  on 22 July. Lavinia Augusta (1829-1873) died on 12 March 1873 of Heart disease and was buried at St Giles on 18 March; her sister Mary Ann (1818-1873) died ten days later on 22 March 1873 of Hepatitis and Fatty degeneration of the heart and was buried at St Giles on 27 March. Isaac was described in their Probate Records as ‘Brother and only Next of Kin’. Isaac died the following year on 15th November, with Angina Pectoris given as the cause of death.  None of the children married.

So, this particular family ended in 1874. What a contrast with some of the other, poorer families in the area who left dozens of grandchildren and great-grandchildren. I have not yet managed to find all of the Wills for this branch of the family and suspect they may be at Stafford Record Office but will continue to try to trace them for the further information they contain.

What sort of social life did the family lead?

I wondered what sort of life Isaac lived, whether the unmarried siblings were reclusive or whether they took part in life in the village.

What was Turner’s Hill House like?

I found an advertisement in the County Advertiser in 1875 which was placed by the Trustees of the Will of this Isaac Downing. This refers principally to the site as a

“Freehold Mineral Property , comprising a desirable Residence and Premises and several closes of very rich Pasture Land adjoining, with an extensive bed of Rowley Rag stone therein, together with the very valuable MINES and MINERALS thereunder ,situate at Turner’s Hill”.

This was being sold at Dudley in One lot and there was some further description of the house itself.

“That very desirable and compact FREEHOLD ESTATE, called TURNER’S HILL, with residence, pleasure grounds, luxuriant Shrubberies, Greenhouses, Vineries, Stables, Coach-Houses, Outbuildings, Entrance Lodge and Premises occupied therewith, and  several closes of very fertile Pasture Land, with the Outbuildings and Cottages adjoining, the whole lying well together and comprising an area of nearly 20 acres.”

This surprised me, I had not realised how extensive the estate was. I wonder where the Entrance Lodge was? On Turner’s Hill or somewhere off Portway? So I looked on the NLS webpage and found this image of the top of Turner’s Hill which shows Turner’s Hill Farm quite clearly. And I now think that the estate called Cloudlands on this map is Turner’s Hill House – it fits the description above very well, it has shrubberies and gardens, it has outbuildings and cottages, it has an entrance lodge!  

Copyright: National Library of Scotland Creative Commons Re-use.

Another paragraph notes “This property is situated in the very centre of the South Staffordshire Coalfield, and the Earl of Dudley’s new sinkings at Lye Cross are only a few yards from it’s boundary, proving beyond doubt the existence of Thick Coal of the very best quality under the entire Estate.”

The earlier Isaac Downing probably lived here, too and the previous news snippet shows that he had an estate worth £1,000 a year, so presumably this was that estate. The 1800 Enclosure Map shows Isaac Downing and Paul Downing as tenants in this area. And was this the house that attracted the attention of four burglars?  In another context, in 1822, I noted Joseph Downing was described as a “opulent farmer”. So it appears that the family were quite wealthy.

Copyright: Mike Fenton.

Comparing this photograph with the map and the position of the road up between the quarries, I think that the large white house in the middle of the picture is probably Turner’s Hill House, much nearer to the edge of the quarry when this picture was taken than when the map was surveyed in the 1890s.

So the family lived in some luxury and they owned most of the surrounding cottages. I was surprised that there is very little evidence of live-in servants, in the census entries there is usually only one or at most two servants, I would have expected coachmen, grooms or gardeners, with the buildings and gardens listed.

From the description in the advertisement, I now think that all of this little group of cottages was associated with Turner’s Hill House and the farm – and quite possibly most of the people living in the houses worked for the Downings in one way or another. Perhaps Mary Cooper the washerwoman or Hannah Cooper or Phoebe Brinton living a few yards down the lane, actually worked for the Downings? I had wondered why a washerwoman would live so far from the village so that she or her customers would have to carry laundry a long way. But if she worked in a laundry at Turner’s Hill House, that would make more sense. So, in effect, this seems to have been another self-contained enclave in a similar way to Gadd’s Green, but associated – at least in the mid to late 1800s with the Turner’s Hill House estate, and the Downing family. This makes sense in many ways since the hamlet was so physically removed from neighbouring hamlets by a steep hill.

Isaac’s social standing

There is not much to be found about the Downing daughters and their lives. But their brother was easier to track. I noticed that in 1851, Isaac was one of several gentlemen appointed as assignees to hold finds in a bankruptcy case of a local Bank which implies a certain respectability and good standing in the financial community.  In 1855, Isaac was shown as one of the Churchwardens which implies at least some association with St Giles’s, the Parish Church. In 1856 Isaac was listed as holding a General Game Certificate and certainly his father Joseph and his uncle Samuel went shooting regularly. In 1867, Isaac Downing, of Turner’s Hill was elected as a member of the Royal Agricultural Society which indicates a continuing interest in farming then.

In the 1851 and the 1871 censuses the family had visitors staying who were named Crump and it seems that these were the children of the then Vicar William Crump so clearly the family had some social contacts within the village.

The Cattle Connection

You may remember, when I listed Whitehouses in business, earlier in this piece, I mentioned a  Richard Whitehouse from Oakham who was a Cattle Dealer. This must have been very close to the Downing estate and it is more than possible that Richard was related to Nancy, Joseph Downing’s wife.

The Sale of the Shorthorn Cattle Herd

I wonder whether this was a particular Downing interest, as in 1872, shortly before Isaac Downing died, there were numerous reports including one in the Gloucester Journal that he and another man Mr John Harwood of Winterfold, Kidderminster, sold their

“entire herds of shorthorn cattle, consisting of about 65 Head of Bulls, Cows and Heifers, of the Oxford, Waterloo, Wild Eyes, Kirklevington, Lally, Blanche and Surmise Tribes. More than half the Stock are directly descended from animals bred at Kirklevington, and the others largely inherit this highly fashionable blood. The sale includes the magnificent Bull Third Duke of Claro (23729), whose Sire and Dam were both by the celebrated Seventh Duke of York (17754(), and the superb Bull Eighth Duke of Geneva (28390). The young stock are by these excellent Sires, and the Cows and Heifers are served by them. Catalogues, with pedigrees may be had on application to Mr Strafford of Euston Square, London or of Mr Minett, at Winterfold.” Clearly this was no small local sale and generated considerable interest and the animals sold for what were described as “extraordinary prices” .

Another report in that Journal  a little later describes the sale itself. The sale was held

“in one of the large parks connected with the residence of Mr John Harward at Winterfold, situated about three miles from Kidderminster.  There was a large attendance of Shorthorn Breeders from all parts of the country. Among those present were the Lord Fitzhardinge, the Earl of Bective, Colonel Kingscote, MO, the agents of Lord Skelmoersdale, Mr Brogden MP, Colonel Morris (New York), the agent of the Duke of Devonshire, the agent of Sir W Throckmorton, etc.

Luncheon was served, prior to the sale, to which about 500 sat down. Five hundred! That must have been quite a sight to see! This picture shows Winterfold House in 1850 so it was a very grand establishment.

Copyright: Historic England.

At the sale, one animal, named as the Fifth Maid of Oxford, was sold to Mr G Moore of Whitehall, Cumberland for 900 guineas. Lot 26 was sold to a Mr Bowley of Cirencester for £210 guineas and was said to be one of the purest and best bred animals of that tribe in the Kingdom. In the eight-bull department – Lord Fitzhardinge  (Of the Berkeley Castle estate near where I live now) had started the bidding for the Duke of Geneva, at £900 guineas but it was eventually  purchased by Mr Leney of Kent, for the sum of £1,650 guineas,  said to be a “remarkable fine animal, fully developed in every particular, healthy in appearance and well fed.”

The sums raised by the sale were: Cows £15,458; heifers £12,343; and the bulls £3,114. The average price per head was £253/16s. the highest on record.

So if Isaac was closely involved with the breeding of this herd, he was clearly a serious breeder. John Harward was also named as one of the executors of Isaac’s Will so they were at least good friends although I have found no evidence that they were related.

John Harward was a solicitor and apparently a temperance campaigner and preacher. He only outlived Isaac by a few years but I noted that there was another very large sale of Harward’s cattle in 1880 and almost continuous reports of sales of individual beasts after Isaac’s death so clearly Harward had not sold his entire herd at the sale detailed above, perhaps only ones jointly owned with Isaac Downing. I have also learned from the National Archives catalogue that a cache of legal documents relating to the “Downing/Whitehouse/Crump family” was deposited at Stafford Record Office by Harward and Evers, Solicitors of Stourbridge, John’s company, so I am considering whether a visit to Stafford Archives might be worthwhile at some point.

Summary

Generally building the pictures of the lives of this family was slow because they were not very well documented anywhere, as other families often are on Ancestry or Find My Past. Perhaps this is because there were no descendants, so there was less reason for family historians now to document them so fully.

But it appears that Isaac, at least, was not completely reclusive and played a part in society and was, clearly, extremely wealthy in comparison with most residents of the village. It seems rather sad that this wealth and privilege did not prevent all the children of Joseph and Nancy remaining single and dying at relatively early ages and without leaving children to continue their legacy.

One more post to come on the residents of Turner’s Hill in 1841 and another on a particular episode the Downing/Whitehouse families!

The 1841 Census – Turner’s Hill 2 – The Rollasons

The next family listed in the 1841 Census is that of William “Robinson“, it appears or that is how it is transcribed on Ancestry – bear with me. Start with the basics – this is the family group as shown on the page, as transcribed on Ancestry and  on FindMyPast:

Christian nameSurnameAgeOccupationWhether born in CountyWhether born in Scotland, Ireland or Foreign Parts
WilliamRobinson40Coal minerYes 
JaneRobinson35 Yes 
JeremiahRobinson15 Yes 
EdwardRobinson15 Yes 
JamesRobinson13 Yes 
RodahRobinson11 Yes 
MarthaRobinson9 Yes 
RuthRobinson4 Yes 
ElizabethRobinson1 Yes 

Fairly straightforward then, local family, all born in Staffordshire. But, unusually, there were very few clues about them on Ancestry which is usually quick to offer hints to other records for names I am researching. Although the hints can be spurious, sometimes they can offer useful links. But I did notice, looking on Ancestry at the details of the census entry for William, that someone had suggested that his name was actually Rollason or Rollinson. Ah, yes, now that is definitely a local name that I recognise.

Copyright: The National Archives. HO 107/997/3.

You can see how the name is difficult to read in this small extract from the 1841 Census (the other children are on the next page) and this looks more like Rolinson than Rollason but for someone not familiar with local names, Robinson was a reasonable guess. But from comparisons with other records over several decades of his life, I have settled on using Rollason for him as the name this man was recorded as most!

Copyright Mike Fenton.

Taken in the 1970s, this view is looking over Alsop’s Quarry and the houses and farms can be seen at the top of Turner’s Hill, though it is impossible to know whether these were exactly the same houses as in 1841. But it does show how far up the hill they were from the village of Rowley and may be a clue to why the families there often used Dudley, rather than Rowley as their church.

The Robinsons/Rollasons

Out of interest, I checked the Rowley Regis Parish Registers to see how long Rollasons had been in the parish and there was a first clue to potential difficulties to come. Searching the digital copy of the Parish Registers is a good way of finding when people were in the parish, how many there were, whether there were any other place links, how the spelling varied. And the spelling certainly varied for this family, perhaps more than I have come across with any other Rowley family. There were 31 entries for names beginning with Rol in volume 2 of the digital version of the parish Registers, none in Volume 1 – the first was in 1729 when Enoch Rolason married Mary Davis at St Giles. There were 15 entries for Rolasons in this volume with this spelling, another 10 with Roliston, 2 with Rolison, 1 Roleson, 1 Rolinson, 1 Rollison, and 1 Rolloson. And that was just for the period 1685-1772. And these related to several different branches of the family, several of them described as ‘of Dudley’ and one from Oldbury. The next tranch of the Registers – from 1771-1812- has another 96 entries, more than half spelled as Rolinson but again with another six different spellings in various parts of the register.

One of these entries was for the unfortunate Alice, wife of Stephen Rolinson. The Burial entry relates that in September 1802 she “was murdered by a red-hot nailrod being thrust into her side while at work in a nail shop. It penetrated through her stomach and a considerable way into the right lobe of her liver. She died about an hour after. The Coroner’s Inquest sat on the body from 12 o’clock at midday until 6 the next morning when a verdict was returned Wilful Murder. The murderer was acquitted at the following Stafford Assizes.” Poor Alice, what a terrible death but what a long time the jury took to return their verdict – presumably both parties were known to the jurors – oh, to have been able to hear their deliberations! I cannot find any other record of the inquest or the trial so we do not know who the other party was.

The final tranch of the Parish Registers (1813-1849), Volume 4, has 60 entries for names beginning with Rol, 46 spelled Rollason, 7 with Rolinson, 2 with Rolason, 2 with Rolaston, 2 with Rollinson, and 1 with Rollaston. So it appears that expecting any sort of consistency in identifying this name is a forlorn hope. And, for once, I do not appear to have any connection with this 1841 branch of the family, although I do have people with various spellings of this name on my tree there are only a few and they are mostly in the mid-1700s so no short cuts for me there.

The Rolinsons of Dudley

William Rol*son (1801-1862)

So, back to basics. The 1841 Census gives me no information about where William Rollason or Rollinson was born. So I looked for him in the 1851 Census which would give a more detailed place of birth and also confirm relationships within the family. But William, now definitely shown in this census as Rollason, was no longer on Turner’s Hill. By 1851, he was, with his wife Jane and children James, Ruth, Elizabeth and several younger children born after 1841 – Sarah Jane (1842), Rebecca (1844), Phoebe (1846) and Ann Maria (1849), plus his daughter-in-law Sarah and her son Jeremiah (1849)– all living in Constitution Hill, Dudley which is on the Rowley side of Dudley, near Kate’s Hill.

And living next door in 1851 in Dudley was an Edward Rollason, presumably the Edward listed as William’s son in 1841, by now married and with his own wife Mary (Mary Ann, nee Ingley or Hingley) and two children, Rosanna and William. Lodging with Edward was his sister Rhoda with her husband Thomas Williams. So, with all these matching names, it is definitely the same family.  By 1861, William and his family had moved to Bath Street, Dudley and again, Edward was living with his wife and six children two doors away, plus a lodger Henry Hingley who was presumably related to Mary Ann.

So, the 1851 Census tells me that William was born in 1801 in Dudley. In fact, all of his family were shown as having been born in Dudley which makes me suspect that they were living on the Dudley side of Rowley and of Turner’s Hill and counted this as Dudley. Now I was looking, in FreeREG,  for the birth or baptism of a William ROLLASON in about 1801.

But there is no baptism for a William Rollason in this period, anywhere in Dudley or the surrounding area. There are clusters of Rollasons (with varied spellings) in Oldbury, Brierley Hill and Wednesbury, some of the fathers were William but there was no baptism between 1798 and 1805 for a William.

However, when I searched instead for ROLINSON for the same period, up came a whole list of 64 different baptisms, including just two for William, both at Dudley St Thomas, one on 15 March 1801 the son of Joseph and Phebe Rolinson and another on 4 November 1804 for William son of John and Phebe Rolinson. There was very little variation in the spelling of the surname here, the Rolinson family name was clearly familiar and well-established in the Dudley parish. Variations in spellings at this time often arose when different people – clerks, registrars, priests – wrote down what they heard or what they expected to hear.

Hmm, just to try to get some idea of how many Rolinsons there were in the area, and whether there were any particular names in use in any of the families, I looked at baptisms for Rolinsons in Dudley St Thomas, from 1790-1810. There were what appear to be twenty Rolinson couples having their children baptised at Dudley in this period of just twenty years, including Daniel and Mary; Edward with his first wife Hannah Parsons  and second wife Prudence Griffiths;  Enoch and Ann; James and Sarah; at least three, possibly four, different Johns with their wives Leah, Mary, Phebe, Sarah and Lucy; three Josephs with their wives Nancy (possibly the same wife as Ann), Mary and Phebe;  Mark and Phebe; Nehemiah and Mary; Solomon and Ann; Stephen and Phebe; Thomas and Mary; and three Williams with wives Mary, Nancy and Sarah. They really weren’t very adventurous in their naming patterns, were they? But it seems very likely – though I have not researched this any further – that most of these were related to each other, brothers and cousins. This is indicated by the names they gave their children, too which all recur across the couples. All of the names are biblical, as is so typical of much of the Black Country at this period which is probably not surprising as the readings from the bible which they heard in chapel and church were probably the only narrative that they ever heard. I digress…

But the greatest of these was love.. sorry, I mean, the couple I was most interested in were Joseph and Phebe Rolinson . Joseph Rolinson married Phebe Davis (both of Dudley) on 2 Aug 1784 at Dudley St Thomas. They were married by banns and both made their mark so neither was literate enough to sign their names. Their children that I have found baptisms for are Jeremiah (1790), Elizabeth (1792), Mary (1793), Sarah (1796), Joseph (1797), Isaac (1799), William (1901), Benjamin (1802), and Dudley (1804). (Edward and his wife Prudence also named a son Dudley the following year so it recurs. And there was also a Dudley Rolinson baptised at DST in  1754, son of William Rolinson and Catherine (nee Dudley) so it was not completely new to the Rolinson family and was in fact a family surname brought forward.)  So it looks likely that, if this was our William, and that he named one son Jeremiah, after his brother and a daughter after his sister Sarah.

The Rolinsons were not strangers to Rowley Regis. There were 49 Rolinson entries in the Parish Registers between 1772 and 1812, plus another half dozen with variations of Rolinson, rather than Rolason. But none of them appear to relate to the William on Turner’s Hill in 1841.

In fact William is one of the most challenging people I have ever tried to trace.

I shall work on the basis that I have correctly identified the baptism at Dudley of the correct William Rolason/Rollason/Rollinson. 

William Rolinson married Jane Parkes on 23 November 1823 at Kingswinford St Mary, with Kingswinford given as the abode for them both.  The witnesses to the marriage were William Parkes and Thomas Walker.

The GRO entries for their younger children, (born after the start of civil registration in 1837) mostly -that is for Sarah Jane Rolinson(1842), Phoebe Rollason (1846) and Ann Maria Rollason(1849) ) – give a Mother’s Maiden name as Parkes  which fits with the marriage I had found. Rebecca Rolinson, born in 1845, has the Mother’s Maiden name as Vanes – which may be a Transcription error, as it is difficult to see how William could have changed wives in the middle of this period, unless she is the child of a different family – and Elizabeth Rollason, born in 1841 where the Mother’s Maiden name is shown as Smith. I cannot offer any convincing explanations for these differences, especially as William was still living with Jane in 1861 and all censuses in between.

I see also from other records that Rolinson and Rolason seem to be used interchangeably, including by children of the same parents, and also by the same person over their lifetime, just to add to the difficulties.

William and Jane were still in Bath Street in the 1861 Census, still with their son Edward next door. Their children Rebecca and Ann Maria were still living with them, plus their married daughter Sarah, now Garbet.

By the end of the following year, however, they were living in Oxford Streeet, Dudley where Jane died on 2nd November 1862, aged 63 of Bronchitis and Exhaustion, and William died on the following day, 3rd November 1862, aged 62 of Paralysis and Exhaustion. Both deaths were registered by their daughter Rhoda. They were buried together on 9th November at Dudley St Thomas.

William and Jane’s children shown in the 1841 Census:

As the family appear to have moved out of the hamlets by 1847 at the latest I have not gone into great detail about the later lives of their children and have also limited myself to those children who were living on Turner’s Hill in 1841.

Jeremiah Rolinson (1825-1843)

Jeremiah died, aged 18 years and 9 months on 5 May 1843 and was buried at Dudley St Thomas on the 7 May, noted as ‘of Rowley’.

Edward Rollason (1826-1897)

Edward was born on 10 March  1825 and baptised at Dudley St Thomas on 16 December 1838, along with James, Rhoda, Martha and Ruth. The bonus for me of this family group baptism record is that the date of birth of the children was recorded in the baptismal register so that we unusually have accurate dates of birth for these children.

Edward married Mary Ann Ingley (sometimes Hingley) (1829-1895) at Sedgley on 6 September 1847 when he was ‘of full age’ (ie 21 or over) and she was still a minor, both said to be of Dudley. Mary Ann’s father William was a Vice Maker.  The couple lived in the Dudley/Kates Hill areas and had ten children. These were Rosanna (1847-1918), William (1850), Samuel (1852-), James (1855), Reuben (1858), Edward (1860), Isaac (1863), Mary Ann (1865), Elizabeth(1867) and Minnie Martha (1869).

Edward gives his place of birth mostly as Dudley but in later censuses as Oakham which might also have been Turner’s Hill.

Up to the 1881 Census, Edward and his family were living in Constitution Hill and later in Bath Street, Dudley, often near his own parents or siblings. But in 1881, while Mary Ann Rollason, giving her marital status as Married, was living in Tower Street, Dudley with four of their younger children (aged from 12-23), Edward, now aged 60, was recorded living as a Boarder in St John Street, Dudley where he is shown as a coal dealer. He was living in the household of a widow, Mary Ann Hill, aged 41, a nailer and her son John who was a coal miner. And in 1891, when Mary Ann Rollason was living with her son Isaac and his family in Flood Street, Dudley, Edward was still living in the household of Mary Ann Hill, as a lodger, but they had apparently moved to Owen Street, Kates Hill. I say apparently because when you look at it on the map, St John’s Road appears to turn into Owen Street so it may have been the same house as in 1881. By this time Edward was described as a coal haulier and he and Mary Ann Hill were living next door to another coal haulier Charles Dewell so perhaps there was also a coal business here.  These places were only less than a mile from each other but show two separate residences over more than a decade. So it does appear that Edward and Mary Ann had separated between 1871 and 1881.

Mary Ann Rollason, nee Ingley, died in early 1895 and was buried at Dudley St Thomas, on 3 February 1895, aged 66 and with her abode given as Flood Street, Dudley where she had been living with Isaac in 1891.

Edward Rollason died on 7 August 1897, at 65 St John’s Road, Dudley, of pneumonia and his death was registered by his daughter Rosanna, now married and still living in Tower Street, Dudley where her mother had lived in 1881. Rosanna had been present when her father died so presumably there was no estrangement between them, even if her parents had parted. Edward was also buried at Dudley St Thomas on 11 August 1897. Was he buried with his wife, who had been buried there two years before? I don’t know, but it would be interesting to find out!

James Rollason/ Rollinson (1828-1897)

James was born on 9 January 1828 and baptised at Dudley St Thomas on 16 December 1838, with his siblings. He was still with his parental family in the 1851 Census. But he had married, on 4 October 1847 at Tipton St Martin, to Sarah Wheale. They were both minors and neither have an abode shown in the marriage record so presumably were living in the Tipton parish. James was shown as the son of William Rollason, miner (James was also a miner) and Sarah’s father John Wheale was also a miner.

Their son Jeremiah was born in the September quarter of 1848 so is also living with William’s family in 1851. They had a further ten children thereafter, making a total of eleven. These were John (1852), James ((1854), Edward (1858), Job ((1860), Rosanna ((1862), Fanny (1865), Jane (1865), Sarah Ann (1866), Ruth (1868), Cornelius (1873) and Joseph (1876).   James also stayed in the Dudley area for the rest of his life, dying on 24 December 1897 and buried at DST on 2 January 1898. His wife Sarah had died in 1895.

Rhoda Rollason/Rollinson (1829-1909)

Rhoda was born on 19 November 1830 and baptised at Dudley St Thomas on 16 December 1838, with her siblings. She was married at St Andrews Netherton on 15 May 1848 to Thomas Williams, a miner like her father, (although his father was a chainmaker) of Dudley. Both of them give their abode as Dudley so it appears the family had already moved from Turner’s Hill by this time, perhaps her father William had moved to work in a different mine.

In 1851, Rhoda and her husband were lodging with her brother Edward in Constitution Hill, Dudley, as already noted abovewith their 10 month old daughter Elizabeth.

By 1861, Thomas and Rhoda Williams were living at 13 John Street, Dudley with their children Elizabeth (10), John (8), Ann (4) and Emily (1), plus one Boarder John Garbett (23, a coal miner. plus a lodger Frederick Hawkes (19, who was a fishmonger). All three of the children were described as ‘Sunday Scholars’ and this may be another indication that they were Methodist or at least nonconformists, who had more Sunday schools than any of the other denominations.

Rhoda’s younger sister   Sarah Jane (b.1842) had married a William Garbett in 1860 and another sister Rebecca Rollason ( b.1844)  – was to marry this Frederick Hawkes mentioned above in 1862. Rhoda’s niece another Rebecca Rollason, (b. 1872) daughter of Martha and Joseph, was later to marry a John Garbutt (b.1870) in Pontefract in 1890, he was also from Dudley so it seems likely that these Garbetts and Hawkes were all inter-related and remained connected with the Rolason/Rollinson family over a long period.

 In all Thomas and Rhoda had six children, the last two were Rhoda (b.1865) and Rosannah (1867). They were in Dudley in the 1871 Census but then moved to Havercroft in Yorkshire by 1881 where Thomas was shown as a Coal Miner and in the next two censuses they were living in Featherstone, near Pontefract. Thomas died there in 1895 and Rhoda died in Royston, Yorkshire in 1909.

Martha Rollason/Rollinson (1836-1874)

Martha was born on 13 February 1836 and baptised at Dudley St Thomas on 16 December 1838. She was with her family in the 1841 Census. married her first cousin Joseph at Sedgley on 16 February 1852 when her abode was given as Gornal. He was the son of William’s older brother Joseph and Lucy, nee Rose. Joseph was 23 and a miner, Martha was said to be 20 in the marriage details but she was actually 16!  

Martha and Joseph had Benjamin (1854), Obediah (1858), Joseph (1860) all born in Dudley and in 1861, they were living at Waterloo Street, New Dock, Dudley. But in 1871 they were living in Featherstone, a coal mining town near Pontefract, Yorkshire. Their daughter Rebecca was born in 1872 in Harrington, Durham and in 1874, Martha appears to have died giving birth or soon after to William who also died in the same quarter, she was buried at West Herrington, Durham on 7 May 1874.

In the 1881 Census, Joseph was back in Dudley, living at Chapel Street, Dudley with Moses and Rebecca and his widowed sister Caroline who was presumably helping to look after the children. But Caroline re-married in 1884. I have been unable to trace him in the 1891 Census but Rebecca was married in Featherstone in October 1890 to John Garbett and they settled there and had eleven children.  And Moses was also married in Featherstone in 1891 and remained in the North, Yorkshire and Durham area for the rest of his life, so Joseph may well have moved back to the area, too. In 1901 he was  definitely back in Featherstone living with Rebecca and her husband and family. In December 1901, there was a death registration for a Joseph Rollason in Wortley, Yorkshire. This Joseph had died, aged 73, in the County Asylum there and I think that this was this Joseph Rollason as I can find no other trace of him after that time. He had been admitted on the 12 July that year and died on 27 September so he may have been there as a hospital patient, rather than because of mental problems.

Ruth Rollason (1838-1885)

Ruth was born on 15 January 1838, and was baptised at Dudley St Thomas on 16 December that year. She was living with her family in Constitution Hill, Dudley in the 1851 Census.

On  27 Apr 1856 Ruth married at Dudley St James, aged 18. Her husband rejoiced in the name Manassah which is another Old testament name and a great deal easier to track than Rolason/Rollinson. Perhaps it was a relatively unusual name as the biblical Manassah was ‘The Evil King of Judah’, who ruled for 55 years and introduced not only child sacrifices but also sorcery and demonic worship… fortunately, our Manassah did not exhibit any such antisocial tendencies!

Manassah Plant gave his occupation as an Engineer in the Marriage Register, as did his father although at this period this is likely to have meant that they looked after stationary pumping engines,in mines and factories,  rather than the more general engineering we think of today. There is a full scale working replica of the Newcomen atmospheric steam engine at the Black Country Living Museum. Thomas Newcomen invented the first successful engine in 1712, although nothing remains of the original now, it was known to have been put to work in the Black Country in pumping water out of deep coal mines.

In 1861 Manassah and Ruth, with their eldest children Phoebe (b.1858) and James (1860 – aged 5 months), were living in Portway Road and Manassah was shown as an Engine Driver. By 1871, they had moved to Tipton, where they were living at 1 Newels Road, Dudley Port, just four doors away from the Mallin family which I have looked at during my study of the Alsop family. By this time, Phoebe was 13, James 10 and Rebecca (b.1863), Martha (b.1865), Ruth (b.1867), Sarah Jane (b.1869),  and Fanny, aged 1 month had been added to the family. Living next door to them, at 2, Newels Row, were Christopher and Phoebe Plant, Manassah’s parents and on the other side of them at No.3 was Manassah’s sister Phoebe with her husband Charles Bridgwater and their four children. So a tight little family grouping, as we have so often seen in these Black Country families. The 1881 Census finds Ruth and Manassah at 14 Railway Terrace, Tipton with three additional children Manassah (b.1873), Moses (b.1876), and Lilly (b.1878), so a total of 10 children. 

That was the last census in which Ruth appears. She died in 1885 in the West Bromwich Registration area and was buried on 2 June 1885, although the record of this does not indicate where, other than ‘West Midlands’ which is a modern reference because there was no such administrative region in those days.

In 1891, the widowed Manassah was living at 43, Moor Street, West Bromwich and was listed as a ‘Stationery Engine Driver’. With him were Fanny, Manassah Jnr, Moses and Lilian who was now 13. In December 1897 Manassah re-married at Blackheath St Paul’s to a widow, Louisa Woodhouse (nee Barnsley) who had two sons and a daughter from her first marriage. At the time of the marriage, both gave their abode as Halesowen Street, Blackheath. But in 1901, they were all living in Bradley Street, Tipton along with two children of Manassah and Louisa, John (b.1899) and Maud (b. 1900) – Louisa was more than twenty years younger than Manassah and had been 37 when they were married, he had been 58. However in the 1911 Census, Louisa was living in Brades Village with these two youngest children and, although she was described as Married, she was also Head of the household. In this census Manassah was with his widowed son Manassah at 81 Moor Street, West Bromwich and working as an Engine Driver (Stationary) at an Iron Foundry.

And in 1921 Louisa was living at 12 Henry Street, Langley and gave her occupation as a Housekeeper, still with John and Maud living with her.  Manassah, however, was living at 54 Thynne Street, West Bromwich with his daughter Sarah Jane and her husband Edward Aston and their three grown up sons. Manassah’s age was shown in this Census as 94 years and 3 months.

Manassah died in April 1922 and was buried at Heath Lane Cemetery, West Bromwich on 15 April. This  may well be where Ruth was buried, too. Although both the death registration and the burial record (and the 1921 Census) show his age as 93, in fact he was 85 – but there would have been no-one to dispute the matter and the ages of very old people (and he was old, for those times) are often exaggerated, I find. In any case, they are only as accurate as the facts known to whoever was registering the death!

Elizabeth Rollason or Rollinson (1843-1909)

Elizabeth was born in about 1840 in Rowley, almost certainly while the family were living on Turner’s Hill. She was baptised on 2 February 1840 at Dudley St Thomas. Three more sisters followed her, Rebecca in 1844, Phoebe in 1846 and Ann Maria in 1849 but I have not explored these last children in as much detail as they did not appear in the 1841 Census. Elizabeth was with the rest of the family in Constitution Hill, Dudley in the 1851 Census.

Elizabeth was married at All Saints Sedgley on 4 October 1858, when she was 18, to Edward Fisher, who was a Grate Moulder, presumably in an iron foundry. Their first son George Henry was born in early 1860 and a daughter Sarah Jane was born in late 1861. Another daughter Elizabeth followed in the third quarter of 1863 but sadly her father Edward died at about the same time, when he was only 24.

In 1867, Elizabeth married at St John, Kates Hill to William Finch, a miner who was a little younger than her at 22. The 1871 Census finds them living in one of the Courts off Fountain Street, Dudley with the three children of Elizabeth’s first marriage, all listed under the name Finch but with no children of their own.  But by 1881, William Finch had also died, aged 36 and he was buried at Dudley St James in March 1881.

So by the time of the 1881 Census, Elizabeth, now 38 and described as a pipe maker (tobacco, unemployed) was living with her daughters Elizabeth and Sarah Jane in the Minories, Dudley. However, in July 1882, Elizabeth  married for a third time, at Dudley St Thomas, to Joseph Freeman.

In 1891, Elizabeth Freeman, a widow, is living at 54a, Birmingham Street, Dudley with her daughter Elizabeth Fisher, aged 26, William Matthews, a Boarder who was 30 and a chairmaker, Jane Wakefield, aged 17, and Henry Harper aged 14, also both boarders and then George Fisher, aged 8 and Thomas Fisher aged 3. All of these were born in Dudley, and it may have been that Elizabeth was in effect running a boarding house. So where was Joseph Freeman? It seems that this was the Joseph Freeman of Birmingham Street who had died in Dudley, aged 48 in the June quarter of 1888 and was buried at Dudley St Thomas. Poor Elizabeth really didn’t seem to have much luck in choosing husbands for longevity, did she?

But who were the George and Thomas Fisher who were living with her in this census? They are shown as the sons of the Head of the Household which was Elizabeth Freeman. But the clue is in their surname – they were not Elizabeth’s sons, they were both illegitimate and I suspect that they were the sons of her daughter Elizabeth Fisher who was listed just above them in the census. Certainly in the 1901 Census, George is still living with Elizabeth Freeman and is shown as her grandson and Thomas was living with this Elizabeth Fisher, now married, and described as her son and I suspect that George(b.1882) was her son, too as Elizabeth Rollason/Fisher /Finch/Freeman would already have been 42 when this George was born and 48 when Thomas was born, having had no children since 1863 in either of her subsequent marriages. And she already had a son named George Henry Fisher (b.1860) who was Elizabeth Fisher’s older brother. I have been unable to find baptisms for either of these two boys so there is no clue from that quarter. However I have resisted the temptation to buy the birth certificates as I am satisfied that these two boys were the grandsons of Elizabeth Rollason/Fisher /Finch/Freeman.

Elizabeth died in August 1909, aged about 67 and was buried at Dudley St Thomas.

Summary

So there we have the household of William Rollason who were living on Turner’s Hill in 1841.

Although there were undoubtedly other Rollasons/Rollinsons in Rowley and Blackheath, it seems fairly clear to me, from their baptisms and burials, that this branch regarded themselves as a Dudley family and, although they all moved around, rarely staying in one place for very long, for William and Jane and three of these children, those places were mainly in the Dudley area. Martha and Rhoda’s husbands and families ended up moving north to Yorkshire for work and settling there but Edward, James and Elizabeth stayed within a few miles of Dudley and each other. There is little of the deep-rooted attachment to Rowley and the immediate area which characterises so many of the families in the Lost Hamlets. And there appear to have been several instances of marriage breakdowns with couples living separately for many years, at a time when divorce was essentially not possible for people of this class. Again, not something I have observed very much in other family studies but a practical solution for those times.

This has been a challenging family to track because of all the name changes and variations and frequent changes of abode. For once, I have not found a connection to my own family tree and I started out thinking that I would not need a tree, working from paper notes which accumulated rapidly. After a few frustrating days, I gave in and created a separate family tree for this family on Ancestry and this did help to keep them straight. So if anyone has connections to this family, there is a tree on Ancestry with all my research so far.

I did not do a general search on the Rollason name, until I had completed this piece, as I prefer to reach my own conclusions before seeing whether there is anything to confirm or refute them. But a general search produces the AI generated information that there is, apparently, no formal One Name Study for Rollason registered with the Guild of One-Name Studies, although individual genealogical research and regional name collections (such as historical Warwickshire and West Midlands records) frequently track the name. And happily, despite my rant recently about the dangers of AI, all of that fits neatly with my own findings and needs little further explanation. The AI report also notes the variations of the name and also notes that there were a number of Rollason Christenings at the Ruiton Independent chapel at Sedgley in the 18th and 19th centuries, again, all of which tallies with my researches for this piece. So there were no great surprises or additional areas for exploration there. A similar search for Rollinson reveals that this is generally taken to be a variation of the Rollason name which again bears out my own conclusions.

There is a website dedicated to the Stubbs Family but which has a page about Rollasons living in Witton, Birmingham so if any Rollasons are reading this, they may find that of interest. Glancing quickly through it, I could see that these Rollasons appear to be partly in West Bromwich and that one of them married a Mallin – some names keep popping up! https://stubbsfamilyhistory.wordpress.com/2011/01/11/rollason-linneage/

Another interesting finding was that there is a book entitled The Old Non-Parochial registers of Dudley comprising those of the Society of Friends … by a certain Arthur A Rollason. I was pleased to find this book on the Internet Archive and was able to download a copy. I searched it eagerly – there was one Rollason entry found – the author! Hey ho… There is also – according to the Sedgley Manor website – another book by him entitled Dudley Pedigrees but I have been unable to find out any more about this book, nor to trace where it can be seen. Hopefully, it will be at Dudley Archives when I am next able to visit again.

Creating a tree on Ancestry also enabled me to see trees created by other people for individuals in this family which were mostly pretty well in line with my own research. However, this did bring home to me the advantages of having FreeREG with its very full transcriptions, as it meant that I had usually accessed full details of the fathers of couples at their marriages to confirm I was looking at the correct couple. I came across more than one instance in other trees where someone had obviously not seen the full marriage record and had attached the bride or groom to the wrong parents, whereas FreeREG shows the name of the fathers where it has been recorded at the time. So those trees have gone off at a tangent, researching the wrong line for all the earlier generations, which is unfortunate. However, messages about such things are not always appreciated or accepted. Perhaps Ancestry will offer them some hints once it has absorbed the tree I have created.  Thank goodness for FreeREG!

I had not anticipated that this one family would expand to take up a whole piece but it has. I hope to be able to fit in more than one family in future pieces!

Onward in my next piece on the 1841 Census to the family of Joseph Redfern and possibly to Joseph Downing.  Although I also have a short diversion of more general interest in preparation which I hope to slot in soon.

The 1841 Census – Turner’s Hill Part 1

I have succumbed to the temptation to repeat the analysis of local residents in the 1841 Census with the other hamlets, including those of Perry’s Lake, Tippity Green and Turner’s Hill.  As before, some of these will already have been looked at in previous family studies or pub studies and I will not go into great detail on the children here but will try to identify how these families related to each other.

So Turner’s Hill. Was it once owned by someone called Turner? Or does the name come from another source? I do not claim to know the definitive answer to this but I have heard a suggestion that back in the mists of time, the Devil was on Romsley or Clent,  trying to defeat the God Thor who was on this hill, by hurling spears (or some sort of weapons) so this hill became known as Thor’s Hill. Difficult to prove that one way or another…

Another theory I read a few weeks ago was that the hill was named for the painter Turner who was supposed to have painted scenes from it. However, J M W Turner was born in 1775 and there is a parish register entry for the burial at St Giles of “John Woodhouse Snr of Turner’s Hill” in December 1727 so the name was in use at least 50 years before he was born and probably longer. Certainly there are parish register entries for the name Turner in Rowley Regis as early as 1614, so it is entirely possible that the name relates to one of that family. And the earliest entry for the name of the Hill spells the name with an apostrophe, implying that it was possessed by someone.

So, who lived on Turner’s Hill in 1841? The names of families in nearby Finger i’the-Hole are familiar to anyone who follows this blog and many of those surnames also appear in Perry’s Lake and Tippity Green so it will be interesting to see whether there are any unfamiliar names on the Hill.

Copyright: Alan Godfrey Maps.

This map was first surveyed in 1881 and again in 1902 so is considerably later than the 1841 Census. However, it is the only detailed map I have been able to find which shows individual buildings and it does show the separation between Gadds Green, the Hill enclave and the heights of Turner’s Hill, referred to on some maps, including this one, as Cloudland! At this time, the toll road between Halesowen and Dudley went over the hill from Perry’s Lake, the new road down to Portway did not exist so this would have had quite a lot of traffic on it. Some of the houses shown in this map may not have existed in 1841, I believe that Turner’s HIll Farm was occupied by Joseph Downing as he is the only farmer listed on the Hill without the name of the farm.

The route taken by the enumerator notes that he went from “Windmill Farm, through the Tippity Green Toll Bar to Perry’s Lake, thence to Finger Hole and William Bridge’s house, taking the whole of Turnershill, back by Samuel Round and Josiah Parkes houses (more accurately, named farmhouses), back by the Bull’s Head, (so back to Hawes Lane, but not mentioning Tippity Green) to Cock Green”. So, as far as I can work out, he treated ‘Fingerhole’ as one unit, ignored  for the time being the Stone Farm and what he called Freebury Farm and went on to Turner’s Hill where the listings do indeed have William Bridge as the second entry for Turner’s Hill.  The first entry is that of Mary Cooper and two other women.

Having worked his way round the houses on Turner’s Hill, the enumerator then appears to have gone back past Fingerhole to  the two farms partway up the hill to the left of that community on local maps. I think that the ‘Stone Farm’ he mentions must be what was otherwise known as Hailstone Farm – and which was indeed the nearest building to the Hailstone itself so this would be a logical name for it – and that what he called Freebury Farm  was the farm a few yards from Hailstone Farm and which was noted in other records, including a Parish Register entry in 1744, as Freebodies Farm.  But clearly in his mind these two farms were quite separate from Finger i’the-Hole which may reinforce the local perception at this time that this was a self-contained entity.

So, in 1841, the first household listed on Turner’s Hill is this:

Christian NameSurnameAgeOccupationWhether born in CountyWhether born in Scotland, Ireland or Foreign Parts
MaryCooper75Wash for hireNoYes
HannahCooper45 Yes 
PhebyBrinton25 Yes 

Alas, this 1841 census gives us no helpful information as to relationships or occupations for anyone other than the head of the household but it is possible, indeed likely, that this is a family group of some sort. There is a tick in the column for this entry for Mary which appears to indicate that she was born in “Scotland, Ireland or Foreign Parts” but it does not tell us which.  From other entries in this batch of entries however, where this box is ticked, I have developed a theory that the enumerator treated anywhere other than Staffordshire as ‘Foreign Parts’!  

I have had little success in finding out much more about these ladies or their relationships to each other. It appears that Mary Cooper died in February 1851 and was buried at St Giles on 9 February, her abode shown as Turner’s Hill, aged 86, the cause of death shown in the burial register entry as ‘old age’.

Being a washerwoman/wash for hire/laundress was no easy career choice in those days. Washer women had very difficult jobs. They had to haul water for long distances, (especially true at the top of Turner’s Hill, as there were few springs up there, they had to make their own soap, and scrub clothes endlessly on top of maintaining their own households. And for all of their intense labour, wages for washerwomen were low. Washerwomen, while not high-status persons, performed an essential job given the lack of laundry facilities in most smaller houses. 

This 19th century painting of a washerwoman by H. Valkenburg is in the Netherlands Art Collection so unlikely to be set in England but probably still gives some idea of a washerwoman’s working conditions. Although I suspect that – as when in our times when tv cameras go into people’s homes, the background may have been somewhat sanitised, I would have expected there to be rather more laundry around.

Perhaps Mary and Hannah went to the houses of better-off folk to do laundry in their houses, perhaps local farmers or landowners, this way they might have several clients and such more prosperous people might have more room for the laundry work.

Hannah and Pheby also appear in Turner’s Hill in the 1851 Census where Hannah, born in Rowley, is shown as a laundress and Phebe/y, born in Dudley, as a needlewoman. By 1861 the two women had moved to Cock Green, Hannah still working as a laundress and Phebe as a Sempstress. Both were shown as unmarried in both of these latter censuses, Phebe was shown as an inmate or boarder with Hannah.

Since the 1851 and 1861 Censuses both show that Hannah was unmarried and was born in 1794 in Rowley Regis, I looked for a baptism for her at St Giles. There were two possible Hannah Coopers baptised in that period – Hannah, the daughter of Richard and Mary Cooper (no abode shown) on 29 September 1793 and Hannah, daughter of James and Jane Cooper  (also no abode shown) on 22 November 1795. Since Hannah was living with a Mary Cooper in 1841, it seems likely that she was the first of these.

Again, there is only one marriage of a Richard Cooper and a Mary in the area and the right period to be the parents of this Hannah and that took place at Dudley St Thomas on 12 February 1782, when widower Richard Cooper married Mary Brown. Catherine, the wife of Richard Cooper had been buried at St Giles a year earlier in January 1781, so that may well have been the same man. The 1841 Census shows that Mary was not born in Staffordshire but if she was a Dudley girl, that would fit, she would have been born in Worcestershire.  I can find no other trace of this Richard alive, although there was a Richard Cooper, aged 80 who was buried at St Giles in 1794 who may have been the husband.

There is a death of a Hannah Cooper, aged 73 in the Dudley Registration District in the December quarter of 1866 which may well be this Hannah as she does not appear to be in the 1871 Census. And there is a burial of a Hannah Cooper at St John (Kates Hill) on 30th December 1866 which is likely to be the same person. It is possible that residents on Turner’s Hill regarded this newer church (opened in 1840) as serving that community so that our Hannah was buried there.

Pheby Brinton, I thought, might have been Hannah’s daughter but since she was apparently single in later censuses, that would not explain why she had a different surname.  But Pheby is a mystery in all ways.  Censuses indicate that Pheby was born in about 1816 in Dudley but I cannot find a baptism for a Pheby Brinton in a ten  year period from 1810-1820 in Dudley or anywhere within 7.6 miles of Dudley. Neither Ancestry nor FindMyPast can find much about her other than the three censuses that I have already found. There are other Phoebe Brintons in earlier generations in the surrounding area and the Brinton name was not unknown in Blackheath when I was growing up. There were also Brintons in Oldbury and Halesowen. But I can find nothing about Pheby/Phebe after the 1861 Census, not even a death or a marriage.

What a contrast then, this little household presents to their neighbours just down the road in Finger i’the-Hole where everyone was related or connected to each other whereas the three members of this household, who may or may not have been related, appear to have been self-contained and leaving little trace of their lives behind them.

The next  household listed was:

Christian NameSurnameAgeOccupationWhether born in CountyWhether born in Scotland, Ireland or Foreign Parts
WilliamBridge60FarmerYes 
ElizabethBridge50 Yes 
JamesBridge15 Yes 
SarahBridge2 NoYes
MariaHarrould25 Yes 
WilliamBradshaw40 NoYes
      

William Bridge (1780-1845)

William Bridge was not to appear in any later Censuses. He died in 1845, aged 63, of ‘numerous complaints’ according to a note in the Burial Register and he was buried at St Giles on 13th January 1845. So, although we know that he was born in Staffordshire, we do not know whether he was born in Rowley itself.

William, like Edward Alsop, was one of the signatories to the advertisement in 1829, requesting sporting gentlemen from trespassing on their land so presumably he was farming in the Rowley area for some decades.

When I searched FreeREG for a baptism for William Bridge over a ten year period from 1775 and within an eight mile distance from Rowley there was only one result. I believe that this William was the William, son of James and Elizabeth Bridge whose baptism on 5 January 1780 is in the Halesowen Registers which would fit with the age shown in the census and at his burial; William’s third and fourth children were also named Elizabeth and James which is another helpful indicator. Halesowen Parish, at this time, included Oldbury and the priest or clerk did not always keep the records separate so he could have come from that area and the Rowley Registers include references to other members of the Bridge family from Oldbury and also in the parish of Rowley. By 1781 children were being baptised at Rowley to a James and Elizabeth Bridge so it seems possible that William’s parents moved into the Rowley parish at about that time. There were at least four Bridge couples baptising children at Rowley in the early 1800s, likely to have been related in some way but I have not investigated this yet.

William Bridge, a bachelor, had married Elizabeth Siviter, a spinster, on 15 January 1815 at St Giles, both presumably of the parish as no mention is made of any other parish. William and Elizabeth appear to have farmed at Plant’s Green, down in the valley near Old Hill for some years and where they had Joseph (1816), William (1818), Elizabeth (1820), James (1822) – probably the James shown in the census above, and John (1824), all while they were living in Plants Green. By 1841, most of these had presumably moved away to be married or work elsewhere. Plant’s Green was located between Old Hill, Cradley Heath and Saltwells Colliery and is shown on the 1881 OS Map but by the next edition in 1901 it had been built over. Surrounded by iron works, foundries and collieries, Plant’s Green was also a centre for back yard chain and nail making shops and was apparently later deeply tied to the 1910 Cradley Heath Chain Makers’ Strike. However, while William and Elizabeth’s children were born there in the 1810s and 1820s while he was farming, one can imagine that as the area became much more polluted and unsuited to farming as the heavy industries developed around it. Turner’s Hill must have seemed rather different than this area down in the valley.

Elizabeth Bridge (1787-1860)

Elizabeth Bridge, nee Siviter was born in about 1790 from her age in the 1841 census, 1788 is indicated by her age of 63 in the 1851 Census.  This makes it likely that she was the Elizabeth, daughter of Richard and Hannah Siviter who was baptised on 10 June 1787 at St Giles. In April 1789 the same couple had a daughter Hannah, of which more anon. 

By the 1851 Census, Elizabeth, Sarah and Maria Harrold had moved to Old Hill. Elizabeth was shown as a retired farmer. I think that Elizabeth died in 1860 as an Elizabeth Bridge, aged 73, of Old Hill was buried at St Giles on 17 August 1860.

James Bridge (1822-1860)

The James Bridge shown in the 1841 household, whose age was rounded down for this census to 15 was probably the James who was baptised on 4 August 1822 at St Giles. James was still farming on Turner’s Hill in the 1851 Census, apparently on the same farm as his neighbours in that census were still Hannah Cooper and Phoebe Brinton, just as they had been in 1841. By 1851 James was 28 and married. James Bridge and Anne Eliza Hodgetts had married by licence at St Giles, Rowley Regis on 22 May 1849 when he was listed as a farmer of Turner’s Hill and she a spinster of the village. His father was listed as William Bridge, farmer and her father John Hodgetts, also a farmer. The wedding was witnessed by William Whitehouse and Maria Harrold who also appears in the census in 1841. Marrying by Licence involved a fee and was sometimes seen as a status thing so perhaps the farm was prospering. Certainly by 1851 there was a female servant at the farm, Sarah Preston, aged 24 who was a Shropshire girl and an agricultural labourer, the young Reuben Ingram who was 18 in 1851 and born in Sambourne,Warwickshire, he has cropped up in various other family studies.

Was Anne related to Betty Hodgetts who was married to Edward Alsop the farmer at Mill Farm in Hawes Lane? Very possibly. When time permits, I will explore the Hodgetts family more. Alas, James Bridge was not to make old bones, he died in 1860, aged only 37 and was buried at St Giles on 29 Mar 1860, his abode given as Turner’s Hill.

Sarah Bridge (1838-1861)

The Sarah Bridge shown in the census was apparently not born in the County, according to the census here. There is a tick in the column for this entry for Sarah which indicates that she was born in “Scotland, Ireland or Foreign Parts” but my other research indicates that this was not so and all future records refer to her being born in Oldbury which appears, for this enumerator to count as Foreign Parts. There was a baptism of a Sarah Bridge at St Giles on 9 December 1838, which would fit with the age of this child, and her parents were shown in the baptismal register as Joseph and Ann Bridge of Turner’s Hill and that he was a labourer. So perhaps Sarah was William’s granddaughter?

 It seems likely as Joseph, eldest son of William Bridge, Farmer, was married in May 1838 at West Bromwich to Ann Davis, whose father Benjamin Davis was also a farmer. Once more, families marrying into other families with the same occupation, so that the new spouse already knew the ropes of the job. Later Joseph Bridge and his family were living in West Bromwich where he was a corn factor. I had never heard of corn factors until I started researching the Alsop family where Isaac Mallin was also a corn factor – perhaps this was a profession that the sons of farmers went into when they were either not needed or wished to work on the family farm, or perhaps it was simply an ancillary trade to farming and milling or just simply more profitable.

Sarah Bridge was still living with her grandmother Elizabeth Bridge in Old Hill in the 1851 Census, by now aged 12 and a scholar, though now her place of birth was shown as Rowley Regis. In the 1861 Census, taken on 7 April, following the death of her grandmother, she was living in High Street, West Bromwich with her Corn Factor father Joseph and younger brother William, aged 20. However, Sarah died of tuberculosis in September of that year and was buried at Holy Trinity, West Bromwich on 20 September.

Maria Harrold (1815-1885)

Also still in the household with Elizabeth Bridge in 1851 was Maria Harrold, now described as the niece of Elizabeth Bridge and a servant though whether she was a servant to her aunt is not stated. Maria’s place of birth was now given as Oldbury, Worcestershire so perhaps the places of birth for her and Sarah had been transposed in the 1841 Census.

The Harrolds were another family who seemed to live in the Turner’s Hill/Portway/Birchfield Road/Titford area. They first appear in the parish registers for St Giles in about 1769.

Maria’s baptism at St Giles had taken place on 6 August 1815, daughter of Joseph (which has a ? after it in the Transcript so it is  possible that this was John or even James) and Hannah Harrold of Birchfield Lane, so not a great distance from Turner’s Hill and I have noted that Elizabeth Bridge, nee Siviter had a sister Hannah so it is possible that this was Maria’s mother, although I have not been able to find a marriage for either Hannah Siviter or Joseph Harrold.  In 1817 a William, son of Joseph, a farmer and Ann Harrold, of Birchfield Lane was baptised but in March 1818, Joseph Harrold, aged 27 of Birchfield Lane was buried. There were several other burials in the following years of young Harrold children from the Portway area being buried at St Giles, so it seems that there were several branches of the Harrold family living there in the early 1800s. But it appears that Maria’s mother had been widowed at a young age and that may have been why Elizabeth Bridge took in her niece. Or it is possible that Hannah remarried (there was certainly a marriage of a widowed Hannah Harrold in West Bromwich in 1836) and a new husband might not welcome step-children.  Whatever the cause, it seems that Maria lived with her aunt for a number of years.

In 1861, Maria was back on Turner’s Hill, staying with Anne Bridge, the widow of James Bridge who was still farming at Turner’s Hill Farm, with two labourers. Maria was noted as a cousin to Anne. However, after her aunt’s death in 1860, and soon after the census Maria was married. On 15 October 1861, only a few weeks after the death of Sarah Bridge, Maria, aged 46, a spinster, of Rowley, daughter of Joseph Harrold, was married by licence at St Giles to none other than Joseph Bridge, aged 45, a widower and corn factor of West Bromwich, son of William Bridge, a farmer. The witnesses to this marriage were William Woodall and Sarah Whitehouse. So this was Maria’s cousin and father to Sarah Bridge. ( Joseph’s wife Ann Bridge had died in 1858 in West Bromwich where they were living and he was trading as a corn factor.

Not even three months later, sadly, it seems, however, that this short marriage ended. Joseph Bridge died in January 1862, aged 46 and was buried in West Bromwich on 8 January 1862. Joseph died of heart valve disease, gout and asthma. With such ailments, it seems that Joseph cannot have been a well man even at the time of his marriage, perhaps he wished to make provision for Maria in view of her long association with the family.

In 1871 Maria was visiting in Moseley Road, Birmingham, staying with Maria Nichols, aged 84 who had also been born in Rowley Regis. Both women were described as ‘living on income derived from house & Property’.  In 1881, Maria was living as a boarder in New Road, Kings Norton and was described as an annuitant.

Maria died in 1885 and was buried at St Giles on 5 June 1885, aged 69. Her address was given in the Burial entry as Fox Cote, Hagley.

William Bradshaw (1800-?)

William Bradshaw was listed as a Male Servant but was probably what was more usually described as an agricultural labourer. He was apparently born in about 1800 but not in the County of Staffordshire and was no longer  at the farm in the 1851 Census. There is a tick in the column for this entry for William which indicates that she was born in “Scotland, Ireland or Foreign Parts” but That leaves a fairly broad range of possibilities! It seems likely that he was a casual labourer and could have gone anywhere from there. A search of local  parish registers, per FreeREG, does not show any likely marriages or burials in the immediate area up to 1880. There are 62 possible William Bradshaws in the 1851 Census born in about 1800, scattered far and wide across the country without any means of deciding which if any of them was this William Bradshaw so I have not attempted to pursue this any further!

The Hipkiss family

Christian nameSurnameAgeOccupationWhether born in CountyWhether born in Scotland, Ireland or Foreign Parts
JamesHipkiss55NailmakerYes
PhebyHipkiss45Yes
JamesHipkiss10Yes
EzekierHipkiss5Yes
ThomasMorton15Coal MinerYes

The Hipkisses are one of the core families of the Lost Hamlets, families who lived there over many generations and intermarried with the other core families frequently.

James Hipkiss (1781-1851)

It seems very likely that James Hipkiss is the son of Thomas and Esther Hipkiss (nee Whitehall) who was baptised at St Giles on 16 September 1781.

I think that he may have had an earlier marriage to Jane Hackett at Tipton in 1808 and had five children with her. I am still exploring this possibility.

However he married Phebe Moreton on 27 November 1826 at Tipton which ties this family firmly into the Hill family living just down the road. Phoebe (or Pheby as it is spelled here) Moreton was the sister of Ralph Thomas Moreton who had married Elizabeth Hill. The widowed Elizabeth Hill was still living in Finger I’ the Hole in 1841.

James and Phoebe, together with their younger son Hezekiah had moved to Spring Row by 1851 where they were living with Thomas Moreton,  probably the same Thomas Moreton who had been living with them in 1841 and his wife Mary. They are described as his parents-in-law in this census but I think that this is Phoebe’s illegitimate son Thomas Moreton, born in 1822, as –in-laws was also used to describe step-relationships and James was his step-father.  James was described as a Pauper/Nailer and Phoebe as a nailer. My blog pieces on the Hill family, specifically Elizabeth Hill, deal with the Moreton family in some detail.

James died in 1851 and was buried at St Giles on 14 December 1851. The burial entry gives his cause of death as ‘old age’, he was about 70. However, his son James had been killed in a pit accident a few weeks earlier which may have caused or accelerated his decline.

Phoebe Hipkiss nee Moreton (1894-1876)

Phoebe was the daughter of Francis Moreton and Ann Milles who were possibly from the Bromsgrove area and, like several siblings, Phoebe was  baptised at Harborne Parish Church, in her case on 18 May 1794. It is possible that at this time, the parish of Harborne extended almost as far as Whiteheath so the connection to Rowley may not have been as distant as it appears at first sight.

Phoebe had an illegitimate son Thomas Moreton in 1822 in Rowley Regis and married James Hipkiss four years later so it seems unlikely that James was his father. She and James were living with Thomas Moreton and his family in 1851 in Spring Row so had moved down from Turner’s Hill by then.

In 1861, Phoebe was living in Blackheath as a lodger in the household of Thomas Butcher, a labourer, I do not know of any other relationship between them. In 1871, at the grand age of 81, she was living in Causeway, Blackheath and Henry Hadley, her grandson, was living with her, plus a lodger Thomas Willetts. I have no details of a Henry Hadley so cannot tell which of Phoebe’s children he belonged to. I shall continue to research this as it is possible that there were other children of hers that I am not aware of. 

Phoebe died in November 1876 and was buried at St Paul’s, Blackheath, on 5 November 1875, aged 86. Her abode was shown as ‘The Hill’ which seems to have covered the whole area between Blackheath and Quinton and Gorsty Hill so an exact location is unclear. There was another Phoebe Hipkiss, aged 78 and of Perry’s Lake who was buried at St Giles on 20 January 1868 but the 1871 census shows that the Blackheath Phoebe was born in Harborne which is correct for James’s wife so clearly this was not the Phoebe who was buried in 1868. I suspect that this Phoebe may have been a sister of James Hipkiss but this is unclear as I am unable to find any census entries at all for this Phoebe Hipkiss. It is possible that she was married to a Hipkiss.

James Hipkiss (1828-1851)

James was about ten at the time of the 1841 Census and the only baptism of a James Hipkiss in this period was on 6 April 1828, at Dudley St Thomas, when James, the son of James (a nailer) and Phebe Hipkiss of Dixon’s Green was baptised. Although there is a three year difference here, in the 1851 Census James gave his age as 22 which is closer to the correct age.

James married Phoebe Ruston on 25 December 1850, at Dudley St Thomas. They were living with the Ruston family in Club Buildings in the 1851 Census, along with their five month old son Joseph. Another son James was born on 26 November 1851. This was less than a week after the burial of his father James at St Giles, aged 23, after he was killed in a coal pit, as noted in the Burial Register.

Phoebe Hipkiss subsequently remarried, to Philip Whittall in 1858 with whom she had three children Ebenezer( 1859-1864) ,  Sarah Jane (1861-), and Ann Maria (1862-1863) , before Philip died in 1864, aged 37. In 1870, when Phoebe was 42, she married William Taylor, a nailer aged 33, at Dudley St Thomas and she was living with him in the 1871 and 1881 Censuses in Blackheath.  In 1891, Phoebe was living in Long Lane as a boarder with Thomas and Elizabeth Hill, presumably the same couple who had acted as witnesses to her marriage to William Taylor in 1870. Elizabeth Hill was Phoebe’s sister and according to this census Thomas was born in Gadd’s Green so he is certainly one of the Hill tribe.  In 1901, Phoebe was living in Hackett Street, Blackheath, aged 72, as a Boarder with John Blakeway, a widower aged 78. I think that it was this Phoebe Taylor who was buried at St Pauls, Blackheath on 19 January 1905, her age given as 73 which is a couple of years out but such discrepancies are not unusual for people of this age at this time, when there would have been few people alive who actually knew her correct age.

Hezekiah Hipkiss (1836-1888)

(probably Hezekiah, but sometimes recorded as Issachar or Ezekiel any of which may be attributed to whatever name the writer at the time thought they heard!)

Poor Hezekiah, it appears that no-one knew how to spell his name as it appears as Hezekiah, Ezekier, Issachar and several other variations in various records. I have been unable to find a baptism for him and it may well be that the family were non-conformist and their children were baptised in a chapel for which no records have survived. I did check every Hipkiss baptism in the FreeREG database in the area for a period of several years around 1836 in case there was another spelling obscuring the entry and also for any children of James Hipkiss but, alas, still no joy.

In 1851, Hezekiah, now 15, was living in Spring Row, Springfield, with his mother and father in the household of his half-brother Thomas Moreton and his family. Both he and Thomas were coal miners.

On 25 December 1855, Hezekiah (with that spelling) married Mary Ann Willetts, daughter of Thomas Willetts, (a nailer) at Dudley St Thomas. The witnesses to this marriage were Joseph Redfern and Maria Taylor. This seems likely to be the Joseph Redfern living next door but one in 1941 on Turner’s Hill and his future wife, Ann Maria Taylor. At Joseph and Ann’s wedding in June 1856, Hezekiah and Ann Hipkiss returned the favour and acted as witnesses. Hezekiah and Joseph would have grown up together on Turner’s Hill and were obviously good friends. Joseph remained living on Turner’s Hill for the rest of his life, more about him later – Hezekiah moved on.

By 1861, Hezekiah (this time named as Isacher) had moved with Mary to Rowley Village, a few doors from the King’s Arms. In 1871, they were to be found in Causeway, Blackheath, this time as Issachar and he was still working as a miner. In 1881,now listed as Isaac (though the spelling is unclear and has been overwritten), by now 45 and still a coal miner, the couple had moved to 32 Hackett Street, Blackheath.

On 26 February 1888, Isachar Hipkiss, aged 52, of Blackheath, was buried at St Paul’s, Blackheath.  Issachar or Hezekiah and Mary had no children, it seems.

Thomas Moreton (1822-1895)

Thomas was the son of Phoebe Moreton, baptised as the ‘base-born son of Phebe Moreton’  on 24 February 1822, at the Poorhouse – which was somewhere in the Brickfields/Cock Green area. There are no clues who his father was and, since he continued to use the Morton or Moreton name throughout his life, there is no reason to suppose that James Hipkiss, who married Phoebe four years after his birth, was his father, although he grew up in the Hipkiss household and members of the family lived with him later in life. His own Christian name might be a hint, but Phoebe had a brother Thomas and she may have named her son after him. And Thomas is not exactly an unusual name in the village. DNA might provide some clues if any descendants are really keen!

Thomas was a coal miner, and lived on Turner’s Hill at least until 1841, although at the time of his marriage to Mary Ruston at Dudley St Thomas on 17 Apr 1843, his abode was shown as Dudley Wood, as was Mary’s. Thomas and Mary had ten children – Emma (1843-1843), Ann Maria in 1844, Joseph in 1847, John (1848-1849), Mary Ann in 1850, Thomas in 1851, Caroline in 1856, Rebecca in 1857 and Alfred in 1860.

By 1851 Thomas and his family, including his mother, step-father and half-brother Hezekiah were living in Spring Row which was in Springfield. In 1861 they were to be found in Bell End, and in 1871 in Long Lane, Blackheath, Thomas always shown as a coal miner. In 1881, he and Mary were in Newtown Street, Cradley Heath , although they may simply have been staying temporarily with their son Thomas and by now, aged 60, Thomas had taken up rivet making, an occupation also followed by his son.  1891 finds Thomas and Mary lodging in Malt Mill Lane, Blackheath. Thomas died on 5 November 1895, of bronchitis, perhaps a legacy of his many decades working as a coal miner, perhaps simply from the heavily polluted air locally from all the foundries and chimneys. He was buried at St Paul’s, Blackheath on 10 November, his age shown as 74.  His abode was shown as Long Lane, as it was for his widow Mary who died on 12 June 1908 and was buried at St Paul’s on 17 June, aged 86. So, like so many natives of Rowley Regis, Thomas and Mary  lived out their lives within a mile or so of the village and quite possibly never travelled further afield than a couple of  miles.

Conclusion

Although I have only looked at three households on Turner’s Hill so far, I think this is a good point to stop this piece and will begin another piece with the next household – The Robinsons.

Families of the Lost Hamlets – Finger-I’ the Hole, the 1841 Census

Having researched the Hill family of Finger-I’ the Hole (later known as Gadd’s Green) at such length in previous posts to my blog, I have been looking at what to explore next.  As I concluded at the end of the Hill family study, it is now apparent that, by and large, the families in Finger-I’ the Hole especially and in the adjoining areas were so closely connected that any family I now investigate there will almost certainly link back almost immediately – in one way or another – to the Hill family.

So I have gone back to the 1841 Census to see who else was living in Finger-I’ the Hole in 1841 and whether or how they related to one another. The 1841 Census does not show relationships and adult ages are rounded down to the nearest five years (mostly, occasionally a presumably accurate full age is shown) and the origins of each person are limited to whether or not they were born in the County.  So there is a certain amount of guesswork about relationships (which can sometimes be resolved by looking at the next census). I will look at the children shown here in more detail as part of further family studies but am just trying to establish how these mixed households related to each other at this point.

Copyright: The National Archives.

The image above lists the census enumerator’s route which is shown on the first page of each batch of the census. It appears that the enumerator was approaching Finger-I’ the Hole from Tippity Green and he later moved on to Turner’s Hill before returning to The Bull’s Head and Cock Green so presumably the first families  listed lived in the first houses he came to as he climbed from Perry’s Lake. There is no mention of Freebodies Farm in this census so it is possible that some of the people listed under Finger-I’ the Hole were living there although none of the occupations are shown as farmers.

The occupations appear to be shown only for the Head of the Household, even though it is highly likely that older sons, the women and some of the younger children would also have been working or making nails. This is better recorded in later censuses.

In censuses, a double stroke after a group of entries indicates that the entries for that household are complete. A single stroke indicates that a sub-group is living in the same house. At the end of the subgroup a double stroke then shows the start of the next household. I am not totally convinced that these were always correctly recorded, perhaps omitted sometimes from the pages I am looking at as at times it appears that there is yet another group living in the same household but the stroke or double stroke are not shown. But I will work on the basis of what is shown. Where I have been able to find the maiden names of the married women I have added these in brackets, these were not shown in the Census.

My apologies that the correct layout for the table has not copied over from Word so some names are spread over two lines – very irritating!

In 1841 then, living in Finger-I’ the Hole, were:

First Group

The Priests, the Taylors and the Hills

Christian nameSurnameAge Occupation Whether born In County
WilliamPriest45 Nail m[aker] Y
Sarah (nee Smith)Priest45   Y
ElizabethPriest15   Y
Sub-household  1      
JosephTaylor40 Nail m Y
Margaret (nee Bagnall)Taylor40   N
EmmaTaylor12   Y
JosiahTaylor10   Y
ThomasTaylor8   Y
MariahTaylor6   Y
Sub-household  2      
ThomasHill45 Nail m Y
Catharine (nee Taylor)Hill45   Y
ThomasHill15   Y
ElizaHill15   Y
JamesHill12   Y
ElizabethHill9   Y
JosephHill7   Y
JohnHill5   Y
CatharineHill5m   Y

So were there really three families living in one house here? Three adult men, nailmakers, with their families of one, four and 7 children respectively? It seems there were. Or perhaps this was a once larger house sub-divided, as discussed previously in my blog.

Were they related to each other? Yes, certainly in at least some of the cases.

William Priest had married Sarah Smith at Harborne on 3 October 1813. The parish boundary of Harborne at this time covered all of the Hill part of what later became the town of Blackheath and also included much of Whiteheath. So, although this couple had not been living in the Lost Hamlets at the time of their marriage, they were probably close by.

I have not yet identified how or whether William Priest and David Priest, the husband of Ann Hill and living just a few doors away, were related but I have not yet researched the Priest family in detail so that may yet emerge. They do not appear to have been brothers but I have more work to do on David Priest’s family.

Nor have I yet discovered whether Sarah Smith was a Rowley girl but again, that may become known. Sarah’s age, given as rounded down to 45 in the 1841 Census seems to be given ten years later in the 1851 Census as 43 but it is possible that this is not the same Sarah so more research is needed. There were 17 Sarah Smiths baptised in Rowley Regis St Giles alone, between 1790 and 1810 and another 21 at Dudley St Thomas, so it is not going to be a quick process to identify her with any certainty and for these marriages before Civil Registration started in 1837, family details are not given so I do not know who her parents were!

However, looking at the marriage of the next couple listed – Joseph Taylor to Margaret Bagnall, – I was interested to find that this took place at Kingswinford on 19 May 1823. And on the same day, Thomas Hill married Catherine Taylor, also at Kingswinford – a double wedding of the Taylor siblings, presumably. So finding those two families living together now makes more sense.

So there were connections between at least part of this household and their neighbours but more to be investigated.

Second Group

The Hipkisses, the Whitehalls & the Taylors

Christian NameSurnameAge Occupation Whether born In County
JohnHipkiss70 Nail m Y
Ann (previously Nock, Nee?)Hipkiss60   Y
PaulHipkiss20   Y
Sub-household      
SolomonHipkiss30 Nail m Y
Sarah (nee Brookes)Hipkiss30   Y
ThomasHipkiss9   Y
HannahHipkiss7   Y
MariaHipkiss5   Y
AnnHipkiss3   Y
(N/k in this census, actually Solomon Jnr) 5m   Y
       
JohnHipkiss Jnr30 Nail m Y
Priscilla (nee Guest)Hipkiss25   Y
SelenaHipkiss8   N
HenryHipkiss3   N
WilliamHipkiss7m   N
Sub-household  1      
JosephWhitehall59 Nail m Y
Sarah (prev.Taylor, nee Hipkiss)Whitehall69   Y
Sub-household  2      
ElijahWhitehall25 Nail m Y
Ruth(nee Priest)Whitehall25   Y
SarahWhitehall6   Y
TabithaWhitehall4   Y
EmanuelWhitehall2   Y
       
PhilissTaylor35   Y
MaryTaylor12   Y
JosephTaylor9   Y
SamuelTaylor7   Y
WilliamTaylor5   Y

Another interconnecting group –

Looking at John’s history, John Hipkiss Senior, from his age in the 1841 Census and at the time of his death in 1850, was born in about 1770. There were three possible John Hipkisses baptised about this time, two at Dudley St Thomas and one at Harborne. Only one was actually born in 1770, John, son of George and Margaret Hipkiss who was baptised on 25 Feb 1770. Another John, son of Edward and Mary was baptised at Dudley on 29 April 1764, which is a little early. The third John was baptised at Dudley on 5 December 1773, the son of John and Sarah. None of these seem to have died in infancy so it is not really possible to know for sure which was this John. However, none of this John’s numerous children was called Edward, George or Margaret so it is possibly the son of John and Sarah that we are looking at.

A Rowley killing

I noted an intriguing burial entry in the St Giles Register on 18 December 1792 when a William Richards was buried with a note that he had been “killed by Jno. Hipkiss”. Sadly I have been quite unable to find out any more about this event, whether or not there was an inquest or a trial, no mentions in the Press and whether this is the same John Hipkiss.

Military Service

Whilst researching, I also came across an entry in the Royal Hospital Chelsea Records for a Sgt. John Hipkiss who was discharged from the 37th Regiment of Foot in August 1808 suffering from ‘diseased viscera and broken constitution’. I looked up viscera and it apparently refers to the soft internal organs of the body, including the lungs, heart, and the digestive and reproductive systems. Quite a poorly man, then. His age was given as 32 (so born in 1776) and his place of birth as Rowley, Staffs so it is possible that this is the same John. Interestingly there was another Hipkiss from Rowley on the same page of hospital records, a Corporal Joseph Hipkiss who had been discharged in October 1806, following a severe fracture at what looks like Trinidad – although the writing is not good and it may be that this is an obscure medical term I do not recognise. This Joseph was 36 then, so born in 1770. This was during the Napoleonic Wars when Britain was at war with France, which continued until 1815, and 1/6th of all British men served in the army or navy during this period. They may have been brothers or cousins but Rowley was a large parish. There were probably a lot of Rowley men who served in the army during this time.

 John’s marriages and offspring

However, it may have been this John Hipkiss who married an Ann Shaw in Dudley St Thomas in 1794, when he was about 24, the marriage witnessed by Sarah Hipkiss and J Bond. And it may have been this Ann, the wife of a Hipkiss who was buried at St Giles on 26 July 1798. An unnamed child of John Hipkiss  was buried at St Giles on 19 August 1798, less than a month later and it is tempting to think that Ann may have died in childbirth and her baby a few weeks later.  I cannot be sure but it is possible.

Certainly a John Hipkiss, a widower, married a Sarah Day, a spinster at Dudley St Thomas on 15 January 1799, just a few months later.  Joseph Hipkiss, the son of John and Sarah was baptised at St Giles on the 5 January 1800, possibly or possibly not the Joseph Hipkiss buried at St Giles on 20 July 1802. Mary, daughter of John and Sarah Hipkiss was baptised at St Giles on 12 February 1804. On the 14 September 1806, Sarah, wife of John Hipkiss was buried at St Giles and only three weeks later, John, son of John Hipkiss was also buried there. Draw your own conclusions, but sadly I suspect that John had lost another wife and child in childbirth.  And it seems possible that John had at least one living child to care for and would need another wife.

In addition to the birth of Solomon to Ann Nock, there is a baptism on 25 December 1807 of a John Hipkiss, son of Jno. and Ann Hipkiss at St Giles. Where does he fit into the picture? – I really don’t know since Ann Nock and John Hipkiss were not married until 25 November 1811. Perhaps John Snr managed to fit in yet another marriage in between which I have not yet found!  

So I think it is fair to say that John Hipkiss Senior, as he appears in the 1841 Census, had a fairly complicated marital history. But it appears that he had at least one son – Solomon Nock– born before he married Ann Nock and that this Solomon was still living in his house with his own family and who continued to use the name Solomon Hipkiss for the rest of his life. Next door to them was John Hipkiss Jnr, born to John and Ann in 1807. There had also been twin sons James and Daniel born to John and Ann, and baptised on 8 December 1811, just a month after their marriage. I wonder whether the curate had realised that John and Ann were not actually married and put pressure on them to marry before the twins were born? Little Daniel’s burial on 1 January 1818 has a note that he, aged 3 weeks, had been found dead in bed with his mother. His twin James was buried a few months later on 29 April 1812, aged 20 weeks, of a bowel complaint.

Solomon Hipkiss and his family are in the household of John Hipkiss who appears to be the right age to be his father. However, I can find no trace of a baptism for a Solomon Hipkiss anywhere in the area. He is very consistent in the 1841 Census, later censuses and his age given at the time of his death in 1884 that he was born in about 1810 in Rowley Regis and, since he was living with John Hipkiss it seems likely that he was John’s son.

So I looked at children called Solomon who were baptised in Rowley Regis at about that time and there were three.

Solomon Priest was baptised on 26 October 1806, the son of Mark and Rosanna Priest. But this Solomon died in 1808 so that rules him out.

Solomon Trowman was baptised at Rowley on 28 April 1811, the son of Thomas and Mary Trowman. But this Solomon appears to be alive and living in Cradley Heath in 1841 so not our Solomon.

The third Solomon was Solomon Nock who was baptised at Rowley on 24 December 1810, so exactly the right date. He was the ‘base born son’ of Ann Nock. Aha!  And – oh look – I see from FreeREG that John Hipkiss, widower, married Ann Nock, widow at St Giles, Rowley Regis on 25 November 1811, less than a year after Solomon’s birth, their  marriage witnessed by none other than Timothy Hill and also Richard Gaunt who was the Parish Clerk and probably frequently acted as a witness to marriages.  Timothy’s wife Maria had been a Hipkiss until her marriage. Was John Hipkiss related to her? Very probably! So this was presumably the Ann who was living in the household of John Hipkiss in the 1841 Census and it seems likely that Solomon was John’s son, as he subsequently used that name.

Also in the house in 1841 was Paul Hipkiss, who had been baptised at St Giles on 5 September 1819, the son of John and Ann Hipkiss of  Finger-I’ the Hole, John’s occupation given as a labourer. In later censuses Paul is shown as Ann’s son (John’s son too, presumably, but he was deceased by that time).

It seems that the John Hipkiss Junior who appears next in the census is the John who was born in 1807. He died, aged 40 and of Gadd’s Green, in 1847 and was buried at St Giles on 28 December 1847 so from the age and date it seems likely this is the same person. Poor chap was noted as having died, on 23 December 1840, of rheumatism which seems unusual as a cause of death but medical diagnoses were somewhat inexact at that time. His death was registered by John Hipkiss of Gadd’s Green, his father and his death certificate was uncertified so that there is no knowing what a medical practitioner might have put.  His death was followed in 1850 by that of his father, who died of old age, aged 80, also of Gadd’s Green and who was buried on 21 July 1850 so both of these Johns were gone before the next census.

John Hipkiss Jnr was living in 1841 with his wife Priscilla nee Guest. They had married at Dudley St Thomas on 26 March 1832. The witnesses at the marriage were Thomas Allen and Thomas Whitehall, a name which will recur in this family. Their children Selina, aged 8, Henry aged 3 and William, aged 7 months were, unusually for this hamlet, noted as not having been born in Staffordshire. It took a while to find out more about Selina since she was born in 1832, before the start of Civil Registration but I eventually found her baptism at Christchurch West Bromwich where she was baptised as Ann Selina on 31 Jul 1836 with an incomplete note of her birth date as 19 ? 1832, with no month shown.  I found a birth registration for a Henry Hipkiss on 1 July 1838 when the family were at Rood End, near Oldbury  and Henry was also baptised there on 12 Aug 1838. In both baptisms the family were living at Rood End and his father was noted as a collier. The birth of William Hipkis was registered in the Kings Norton Registration District, William was born on 31 October 1840 in Streetly Street, Kings Norton and his father’s occupation was shown as a miner. He was baptised on 22 November 1840 at St Nicolas Kings Norton when his father was still shown as a Coal Miner.

However, by 1841, only a few months after William’s baptism,  the whole family had moved back to Gadd’s Green, possibly because of his illness and so that his family could support them.  

Sub-household:

The Whittalls

Also, apparently living in the household of John Jnr, was Joseph Whitehall, aged 59, as his name  was shown in this census with his family. Elsewhere he is shown as Whittall and there are several other variations of this name in use around the area! There is only one likely marriage for Joseph and his wife Sarah, (aged 69) going by ages of themselves and their children’s ages and that marriage took place at  Dudley St Thomas on 11 April 1813, both Joseph Whittall and Sarah Taylor being widowed. 

Sarah Taylor’s previous husband was Josiah Taylor and they had been married on 13 September 1795 at St Giles. She had eight children with him, from Sarah Taylor in 1796, Mary in 1796, Catherine in 1799, Joseph in 1799, Elizabeth in 1803, Benjamin  in 1803, Phillis in 1805, to Ann in 1806.

Joseph and Sarah remained in Finger-I’ the Hole, or Gadd’s Green as it was subsequently known until their deaths, Joseph died in 1855, aged 75 and Sarah in 1863, aged 93 (according to the Burial Register entry, although I make her age 88), both were buried at St Giles.

More connections:

Hmm, some of those names ring bells. When I look back to the first group, living in the household of William Priest, there are the two Taylor siblings, Catherine and Joseph who had a double wedding in 1823 in Kingswinford. And the ages of those two siblings match, given the five year variance in the 1841, with Sarah’s children.  And it appears that this is who they were. Their re-married mother was living next door to them in Finger-I’ the Hole, in the household of John Hipkiss. And, guess what Sarah’s maiden name turns out to be, when I find the marriage of Sarah and Josiah Taylor? Yes, Sarah was a Hipkiss… And Sarah’s sister was Maria who was married to Timothy Hill, also living in Finger-I’ the Hole, whose family was the subject of my last family study. 

Joseph and Sarah’s son Elijah Whitehall was also living with them in 1841 and he had been baptised at St Giles on 10 November 1813. By 1841 Elijah had married Ruth Priest at Dudley St Thomas on 1 June 1836, a first marriage for both of them, and their three children Sarah aged 6, Tabitha (sometimes known as Sabia or Sabiah), aged 4 and Emanuel aged 2 had been born.  I cannot find baptisms for any of the children at present. The family were great users of biblical names and it is interesting to speculate that they were early Dissenters who had their children baptised by Methodist or Presbyterian ministers. Their use of unusual biblical names implies a good knowledge of the Old Testament.  In later years, Elijah and Ruth had added Paarai (later known as Pharoah) in 1841, Mabel in 1844, Mary in 1846, Charity in 1848, Priscilla in 1851, Abraham in 1854 and Ruth in 1857. Elijah and Ruth remained in Gadd’s Green and Tippity Green for the rest of their lives, Elijah died in 1874 and Ruth in 1883, both were buried at St Giles. I will do some more work on the Whittalls in more detail at some point.

Phillis Taylor: Also with Joseph and Sarah was a Phillis Taylor, born in about 1805 – probably Sarah’s daughter from her first marriage, as the age is correct. Along with four Taylor children – Mary aged 12, Joseph aged 9, Samuel aged 7 and William aged 5. In the 1851 Census, Phillis is still living in Gadd’s Green with Sarah and Joseph Whittall and is described as a widow. It is possible, of course, that Phillis Taylor married a Taylor so did not change her surname but I cannot find a marriage for Phillis anywhere in the area.  I found a baptism on 16 August 1829 for a Mary Ann Taylor at Dudley St Thomas, daughter of Phillis Taylor of Rowley, also a baptism for a Joseph Taylor, also at Dudley St Thomas, on 12 August 1832 when Joseph was described as the son of Samuel and Phillis Taylor of Rowley Regis, Samuel’s occupation given as a nailer.  Phillis continued to live in Gadd’s Green, with various members of the Whittall/Priest/Taylor families but no husband, until her death in 1882.

Curiously I have found a Samuel Taylor, living in Rowley Village in 1861, aged 57 who might be about the right age to be this Samuel . He is a nailer, married to a Mary and has three children – Edward aged 18, Hannah, aged 12 and James aged 9. I was also interested to see that this Samuel was living next door to an Issachar Hipkiss (later known as Hezekiah) who was the son of James Hipkiss and Phebe Moreton – Phebe was the sister of Thomas Moreton who was married to Elizabeth Hill. This may be a coincidence but there do seem to be a lot of links between the Hipkiss/Hill/Taylor families, to say the least.

3rd Group

Christian nameSurnameAge Occupation Whether born in county
WilliamWoodall45 Nail M Y
Elizabeth (nee Whithall)Woodall40   Y
EdwardWoodall15   Y
PhebyWhitehall30 Nail M Y
MaryWhitehall10   Y
SamuelWhitehall7   Y

Goodness, what a small household, only 6 people, but still two families.

To look at the second part of this household first, Pheby Whitall was the daughter of Joseph Whittall/Whitehall, living next door in this census,  by his first wife Mary Worton who had died in 1810 a few months after Pheby’s birth. Mary and Samuel appear to be  Pheby’s illegitimate children, had been baptised at Dudley St Thomas, Mary Ann on 12 September 1830,  and Samuel on 4 May 1834, both described as children of Phebe Whittall of Rowley and both noted as illegitimate. So these three fit easily into the web of family relationships in Finger-I’ the Hole.

Woodall, however, is not a common name in the Lost Hamlets area, although there were Woodalls in the Rowley Parish Registers as early as 1611 and a William Woodall as early as 1626 when Elizabeth, daughter of William Woodall was baptised. In later times, the Woodalls tended to be in the Old Hill/Cradley Heath area or Dudley/Tipton/Sedgley. In fact I find that William is definitely a favourite Woodall name, it recurs constantly through the generations.

The age of 45 in the 1841 census means that William was aged between 40 and 44 so that indicates a birth year of between 1796  and 1801 and he was born in Staffordshire. When I searched FreeREG for the baptism of a William Woodall in this period in Rowley and the surrounding area, there were only two baptisms, one at Dudley St Thomas on 6 March 1796 of William, son of John and Mary Woodall, and the other at Tipton, for William, son of Thomas and Ann Woodall. The latter William appears still to be in Tipton in the 1851 Census so it may well be that the William in Rowley was the son of John and Mary baptised at Dudley St Thomas, remember that residents of Turner’s Hill and often Finger-I’ the Hole/Gadd’s Green frequently used Dudley rather than Rowley church.

The only marriage I found for a William Woodall marrying an Elizabeth was on 23 April 1821 at Dudley St Thomas when he married Elizabeth Wythall, both of Dudley. Wythall is not a common Rowley name either. This stymied me for a while. ( I can be quite dense at times!) Until it dawned on me… Hmm, was this a corruption of Whittall/Whithall? And sure enough, Elizabeth Whithall, the daughter of James and Phebe (nee Downing)Whitehall was baptised on 1796, so a good fit for this Elizabeth. And Elizabeth’s brother Henry Whittall was married to Mary Hill, eldest daughter of Timothy and Maria Hill. So that would account for this couple living in the Hill stronghold – Hill family connection firmly established!

I found a baptism at the Old Hill Primitive Methodist church, dated 9 April 1851 for an Edward Woodall which stated that he was born on 3 August 1823, that is, baptised as an adult, and that he was the son of William (a nailer) and Elizabeth Woodall, his abode given as Old Hill. And sure enough, William and Elizabeth are living in Garratts Lane, Old Hill in the 1851 Census and Edward, now a nailmaker and aged 26, is living at the ‘Back of Garratts Lane’, with his wife Ann and three children, Elizabeth aged 6, Jane, aged 3 and Edward aged 1month.

So, as I suspected at the end of my Hill family study, the Woodall family is also closely linked to the Hill/Whittall tribe! 

The Priest household

Next along the row is the household of David and Ann (nee Hill) Priest which also includes Ann’s brother Joseph Hill and his family: I list them here for completeness but both families were covered in detail in my study of the Hill family.

Christian nameSurnameAge Occupation Whether born in county
DavidPriest35 Labourer Y
Ann (nee Hill)Priest35   Y
TimothyPriest10   Y
WilliamPriest9   Y
MaryPriest7   Y
ElizabethPriest5   Y
Sub-household      
JosephHill20 Coal Miner Y
Betsey (nee Jones)Hill20   Y
JohnHill5   Y
CathrineHill2   Y

The Moreton Household

The final household in Finger-I’ the Hole is that of the widow Elizabeth or Betsey Moreton, nee Hill. Again, this family was covered in detail in the Hill family study so they are included here just for completeness.

Christian nameSurnameAge Occupation Whether born in county
ElizabethMoreton (nee Hill)35 Mail M Y
EmmaMoreton15   Y
MaryMoreton12   Y
ThomasMoreton8   Y
WilliamMoreton5   Y
ElizabethMoreton2   Y
MariaMoreton10   Y
Sub-household      
JohnSimpson20   Y
FannySimpson (nee Hill)20   Y

The sub-household consists of John and Fanny Simpson. John and Fanny were married on 12 Apr 1841 at Dudley St Thomas. John Simpson was a minor, a bachelor and a Miner, with his abode given as Dudley Wood. Frances or Fanny, his wife, was Frances Hill, of full age, also of Dudley Wood. John’s father was Joseph Simpson, a potter and the bride’s father was Thomas Hill, a miner. Interestingly, the witnesses at the marriage were Thomas Hill and Elizabeth Moreton – and here they are, living with Elizabeth on 6th June when the Census was taken. Was this Thomas Hill the same Thomas Hill who is listed in the very first household in Finger-I’ the Hole in this census? Well, it seems not as that Thomas and Catherine were not married until 1823 but there was another Thomas and Catherine Hill pairing who baptised other children, mainly in the Handsworth area at about that time. It is intriguing, though, that Elizabeth Moreton was clearly closely involved. I have not yet been able to link the Thomas Hill in the first group to the rest of the Hill family but will continue to work on this.

Summary

So there we have it, as I suspected at the conclusion of my Hill family study, it transpires that everyone living in the hamlet of Finger-I’ the Hole in 1841 was closely related to the Hill family. It seems extraordinary to me that the entire hamlet was inhabited by one family but it appears that this was the case.

I do not know the logistics of this, how ownerships or tenancies of the various parts of the family passed between members of the family, how it was decided who would live here and who would live just down the road in Perry’s Lake or Hawes Lane. But we already know that there were members of the Hill family living there for hundreds of years…

So, who owned the properties in Finger-I’ the Hole?

The Enclosure Act and Award 1807-08

About 300 acres of common pasture in Rowley in 228 separate holdings were ‘enclosed’ under this Act and various freeholders were mentioned in this. Richard Bate, a farmer bought some additional land adjoining his existing holdings at Tippity Green, Isaac Downing did the same at Turner’s Hill. Richard Gaunt acquired land at Portway Hall. Some of these names recur in later records.

The 1841 Poll Book

On Ancestry, there is a Poll Book for 1841 which gives the names and abodes of those qualified to vote in the Parish of Rowley Regis, the nature of the qualification to vote – ie. the land or property held – and where this property was. Interestingly, there are no Hills listed as voters in the Parish, so presumably they did not own land in the area but there are various other familiar local names.

A William Bennitt owned a freehold house and land in Oakham;

Benjamin Bate held freehold houses in Tippity Green; Ferdinando Smith of the Grange at Halesowen also owned freehold land and premises there. (I have a feeling that Ferdinando Smith may have been connected with the Earl of Dudley but I may be wrong!) I am slightly puzzled that the Earl of Dudley does not appear in this list as I suspect he owned a great deal of property in the area but I cannot find his name or title in the list, perhaps nobility were not permitted to vote in elections for the House of Commons, although no doubt they made their preferences known to their tenants.

Joseph Bowater is listed as the owner of a house and land at the Bull’s Head;

Other owners are listed as holding property  –

 John Bate lived in Garratt’s Lane,  but owned one third of a house and land in Cock Green, the Bate family were in the licensed trade and owned the Cock Inn and Benjamin Bate, mentioned above, also had houses at Perry’s Lake.

Joseph Cookes, of a local farming family, had a house and land in the Knoll (Knowle), and Edward Fletcher of Netherton owned a freehold house and land there.

Charles Cox lived in Hall Street, Dudley but owned a house and land in Oakham, William Cox owned freehold land in Portway. Other voters in Portway included Joseph Green Bourne who lived in Dudley, the Rev. William Lewis who lived in Sedgley, John Mallin who also lived in Portway, John Taylor who lived in Birmingham, Joseph Woodhouse and John Williams who each owned a house and land and also lived on Portway.  

Owners of land on Turner’s Hill included Joseph Downing who also lived there, Jeremiah Detheridge and Edward Foster who both lived on Portway Road, Benjamin Thompson who lived in West Bromwich, William Woodhouse who owned and lived in a house there and William Jewkes who lived in Dudley but let his house on Turner’s Hill to James Hipkiss (who is not listed as living in Finger-I’ the Hole in 1841but is listed as living just up the hill on Turner’s Hill). As might be expected John Levett had a house and land at Brickhouse and James Adshead Levett owned houses at Perry’s Lake.

Two members of the Hipkiss family appear on this Poll Book list: Joseph Hipkiss is listed as owning freehold houses at Springfield, William Hipkiss also owned a house and land at Springfield Colliery.

The Woodhouse family are also well represented: William Woodhouse owned and occupied a house and land at Oakham, Joseph Woodhouse lived in Kidderminster but owned a freehold house and garden at Portway, let to Joseph Lowe. Benjamin and Thomas Woodhouse, publican at the Wheatsheaf and farmer respectively are both listed as owning houses at Lye Cross.

Samuel Whitehouse is listed as occupying a house and land at Lye Cross Farm and John Whitehouse as owning a freehold house at Causeway Green.

There are dozens of entries in the Poll Book relating to other parts of Rowley village and the wider parish but I have concentrated on the owners of land in the immediate area of the Lost Hamlets.

There are only two specific references to Finger-I’ the Hole in the list, Samuel Partridge who lived at Long Lane, Halesowen owned a freehold house and garden there and William Partridge of Oldbury also owned a freehold house and garden, which was let to John Hipkiss. Partridge is a name I associate with the Long Lane/Quinton area (a dear life-long friend of my mother named Partridge lived off the top end of Long Lane until well into the 1980s and many of her family were from Quinton) which is indeed where Samuel Partridge was living. Perhaps their two houses were adjoining and let to various connections of the Hill family.

Or perhaps some properties in the area were under the direct control of the Earl of Dudley who was the Lord of the Manor, and were rented direct from him, which might account for the apparent continuing occupancy over such a long period of time.

But there were no Hills, no Moretons, no Whittall/Whitehalls, appearing in the Poll Lists for the Lost Hamlets area. Two members of the Hipkiss family appear to have owned houses in the Springfield area and there are members of the Priest family listed but they are all based in the Cradley Heath area where the Priests had a strong association with the Presbyterian chapel there. Some of the houses described as Turner’s Hill might also have been around Finger-I’ the Hole. So it is clear that the Hills and their immediate family were tenants of some sort and not land owners, which ties in with their apparently fairly humble status generally. This would have been the case for most ordinary people in those days, home ownership was not a common experience for humble folk.

What next? Further research on-going!

It seems possible that there were also family connections between the Hill and also the Hipkiss, Priest and Taylor families with Cradley Heath, Old Swinford and Kingswinford so there is more digging to be done there. Interestingly, whilst looking at members of the Hill family, I notice that a Thomas Hill was at one stage the curate at Oldswinford  so that may help to explain family connections in that area!  

I am also now working on the Priest and Hipkiss families to work out how or whether they interrelated and I will also be doing more work on the Whitehall/Whitall/Witall/Wytall families so more family studies are in the pipeline.

And I confess to being tempted to do a similar exercise as this for Perry’s Lake/Tippity Green in the 1841 Census and, perhaps, in due course, Turner’s Hill to further track the close contacts between these communities. But it is painstaking work, made even slower these days as I am finding that I must check that people are not duplicated on my own family tree, having arrived there through different connections. Knowing now, as a result of this research, how interrelated the local populace were, the ‘Merge with duplicate’ button on my family tree on Ancestry is coming into use more often! And, having merged duplicated individuals, the same exercise then has to be undertaken for their immediate relatives! I have eleven Edward Coles, ten Thomas Hills, ten Joseph Priests, for example, all with sufficiently different year of birth to make it likely that they are separate individuals but needing to be checked- So updates may take a little time.

Yes, I am a glutton for punishment but I hope that my faithful readers will find something here of interest!

Families of the Lost Hamlets – the Hill family 9 – an overview

In all, Timothy Hill (1763-1831) and Maria Hill nee Hipkiss (1782-1855) had seven children between 1800 and 1823, including Benjamin who may or may not have been the son of Timothy’s first wife Ann Priest or of Maria, his second wife. I have been aware of the number of children they had almost since I started my family history research but until now I had not realised how closely they all remained in their community.

Perhaps unusually for that period, it seems that all seven survived into adulthood and childbearing age. Although it is possible that there were other children that I have not found who lived only short periods or were stillborn.

Timothy was about 68 when he died. Two of the Hill sons died relatively young – Benjamin aged 44 in a colliery explosion and Joseph aged 49. Joseph was also a miner but the burial record contains no clues about his death. Samuel lived the longest of all the children, to the ripe old age of 90, very unusual for those days.

And the four girls also all lived long lives, most of them staying within the close neighbourhood of the Lost Hamlets. Maria, their mother, had lived to be 73. Mary Hill was 81, Ann and her sister Elizabeth (Betsey) were both 86 and Jane was 77 when they died. These were unusually long lives for those times, these girls must have inherited some strong genes!

Perhaps living up on the hill above the main settlements meant that they had space to grow some of their food, fresh air, free mostly of much pollution and similarly their water supplies from local springs were probably purer than water in wells lower in the valleys. Whereas many of the men were in quite hazardous occupations, their lungs subjected to constant exposure to coal dust, furnace fumes and quarry dust, with no safety equipment which may have impacted their health, not to mention the hazards of explosions in mines and quarries.   But the women and children nail makers would also have worked in the dusty polluted air inside poorly ventilated nailshops.

Grandchildren

So how many grandchildren and great-grandchildren did Timothy and Maria leave?

Child                      No of children        No. of grandchildren

Benjamin              4                           27

Mary                     9                           53

Ann                       6                           28

Elizabeth              8                          64

Jane                      10                         68

Joseph                   5                           27

Samuel                 4                           3

Total:                     46                    270

So, from their seven children, Timothy and Maria had about 46 grandchildren and the extraordinary total of about 270 great-grandchildren, 213 of these through their daughters so not bearing the Hill surname. Many of these stayed in the immediate area of the Lost Hamlets. So, I think it is fair to say that the Lost Hamlets were well populated with this family and their close connections.

I say about 46 and 270 grandchildren and because there are a couple of instances of people marrying their cousins so Timothy and Maria would be their grandparents twice over and there are also some children whose exact parentage is unclear. There may also have been some children who died in infancy who I have no information about. And a few people simply could not be traced after a certain point and they may have had more children wherever they were.            

The Hill children married mostly local people, usually very local. Surnames of spouses in that generation include Whittall, Priest, Moreton, Taylor/Bridgwater, Hackett, Williams, Jones, Bate and Smith.

In the 1841 Census there are twelve households listed under Gadd’s Green or Finger-i-the-Hole, as it was known then, but I can only see one family listed there which is not named either Hill or one of the first four of these names – he was William Woodall. And even then, I suspect I will tie him into the Hill family at some point as he has a Pheby Hipkiss living in his household. So it appears to me that this hamlet was essentially a Hill family enclave. There were certainly Hills in Rowley as early as 1604, as mentioned in the Parish Register and it is likely that they were in the Lost Hamlets area then.  

Timothy and Maria’s grandchildren married spouses called Tibbetts, Pearson, Worton, Pritchard, Steadman, Lowe, Whitmore, Blakeway, Jarvis, Parish, Cole, Hemmings, Bowater, Ingram, Leech, Homer, Slater, Priest, Redfern, Siviter, Beet, Parsons, Stokes, Nock, While, Payne, Westwood, Cox, Perry, Raybould, Pockett, Allen, Barnsley, Groves, Ennis,  Fellows, Hadley, almost all of these familiar Rowley names.

The next generation linked with Bastable, Gazey, Horton, Harvey – and I have barely looked at that generation, there will be more names.

And yet there are other Rowley names which do not appear – no Parkes, Darbys, Rustons, Levetts, who were all farmers or business people. It appears generally that the Hill family married into families like themselves, nailers, labourers, miners, foundrymen, quarrymen – not many rags to riches stories but plenty of hard working people.

Family life for this part of the Hill tribe essentially centred – literally for centuries – around Gadd’s Green, on the Hill above Perrys Lake and Tippety Green which also provided homes for many of the overspill, which then edged along into Hawes Lane and Siviters Lane.

As I related in a previous post (Tales of Old Portway – https://rowleyregislosthamlets.uk/2023/10/15/tales-of-old-portway/) in a newspaper report about Portway, the reporter noted that “The cottage is said to be over 300 years old and one family – that of Hill, members of which reside in an adjacent cottage – lived there for nearly 200 years.” That 300 year old cottage was built then in about 1600, which ties in neatly with the first mention of John Hill in 1604.

Copyright: Alan Godfrey Maps:

This map shows Gadds Green in 1902 and there are only perhaps twelve cottages shown, none of them of any great size but as I set out in a previous post, (A Hall House at Gadd’s Green?) I think that the group of buildings shown on the right of the green circle on this map was where the Hill’s, in all their nomenclatures, lived and that it is likely that their house started as a hall house and was later sub-divided.

And when these descendants moved away they often stayed in close proximity to other members of the family, little colonies of Hills. And there were other Hill families in the area, these articles relate only to Timothy and Maria’s descendants.

Overcrowding

And the crowded conditions in which many of them lived and on which I have commented several times in these posts, were recognised by officialdom. In his 1875 report on living and sanitary conditions in Rowley Regis, Dr Edward Ballard (who prepared similar reports for many surrounding areas for the government) noted specifically:-

“Overcrowding of cottages, although, of course, not universal, nor perhaps very general, must, from my observation in this matter, be pretty common in many parts. Some of the worst cases I chanced to fall upon during my inspection were at a group of cottages at Gadd’s Green; in Mrs Siviter’s cottage at Hawes Lane, Rowley, and in one of the old cottages opposite the gas-works at Old Hill. In some of the instances of overcrowding which came under my observation, lodgers were taken in; in others the occupants belonged to the same family, but were grown-up sons and daughters of the tenant of the cottage with (in the worst case of all) a number of illegitimate children of two of the girls.”

I remember reading that paragraph for the first time, sitting in The National Archives in October 2023 and mentally noting the specific reference to Gadd’s Green. But it was only re-reading this section of the report last week that the penny dropped and, having done those detailed reports on each of the Hill children, I knew exactly which family Dr Ballard was referring to!

Improvements to Housing

The general overcrowding in the parish and the poor conditions of many cottages was to lead in the 20th century to a huge programme of house building which led to the local council setting out big new estates around Britannia Road, below Britannia Park and below Rowley village in the Throne estates. Houses in poor condition were regularly inspected, condemned and either improved or demolished and the tenants were offered new houses.

The detailed inspections which were undertaken, to meet the obligations increasingly imposed on local councils by various housing legislation, can be seen free online in the Annual Health Reports which were made by the Medical Officer and Sanitary Inspectors to the Rowley Regis Council. Some of these are available at The National Archives and others can be downloaded from the Wellcome Foundation. If you search online for Wellcome Foundation and then search their site for Rowley Regis Health reports there are three pages listing reports, and you can download any of them to read later.  They date from the early 1890s to the 1960s and make very interesting reading, dealing with all aspects of health, births and deaths, housing, sanitation, water supply and refuse disposal, many reports listing all the staff by name. And there were remarkably few staff with a lot of duties, especially in the earlier years! I have not found the reports for every year but enough to be able to observe the changes that came over the area.

What a contrast it must have been to move from a poorly maintained damp possibly subsiding two up two down cottage with no damp courses, earthern floors, poor water supply and little or no sanitation, into a newly built house with generously sized accommodation and front and large back gardens, a three or four bedroom house with a separate kitchen and bathroom, all on spaciously laid out and designed estates, not just long straight rows  of cottages as had sprung up in Blackheath in the mid-late 1800s, all within easy walking access of Blackheath town, shops, churches and chapels, schools and all the facilities they needed. And very often with familiar faces living nearby as the worst areas were cleared.

Conclusion – Kith and Kin in the Lost Hamlets

I hope that my readers have found this long and detailed account of one family in the Lost Hamlets interesting and that it may have been helpful to anyone with Hill ancestors. I am seriously considering combining all these articles into an e-book to keep all the information together.

It seems likely to me that, for centuries, these small communities in these hamlets were very insular and did not really regard themselves as part even of Rowley village proper, until the growth of Blackheath, better housing and opportunities in industry enticed later generations away from the hill.

This family study has, for me, illustrated very clearly the intrinsic web of kith and kinship which existed in the area of the Lost Hamlets and the extent to which people in the Hamlets married the boy or girl next door. (Originally, “kith” meant one’s native land or country, then broadened to include friends and neighbours, kin meant immediate and wider family.)

I follow the blog of another One Placer who is working on a OPS of a village where his ancestors lived. Over the past couple of posts he has been describing how he now has one large tree which covers most of the people which he refers to as a ‘forest’, rather than a tree. I think there is something in that analogy but in my case I do not think the Lost Hamlets or even the Hill family amount to a forest. So I looked up other words for a group of trees and I decided that the word to describe the kinship in the Lost Hamlets is a ‘spinney’ which is apparently defined as “A thicket or small wood, often on higher ground”, a thicket by the way is “a dense, tangled mass of shrubs and small trees” which seems very appropriate. So my Lost Hamlets families are all part of the Lost Hamlets Spinney!

A ‘spinney’ on a hill! Copyright Mark Schofield and Glenys Sykes

It is now apparent that as I research for more family studies in this area that I will keep finding they were also kith and kin and will link back to this research and the work I have done on other families, more trees and shrubs within the Spinney! And I observe that such webs of kinship were the norm in many small places and in small places within larger places. Tribes might be another description, although that can have sinister connotations these days. But tribes looked after their own and protected them. This, albeit a long time later, is my tribe.

How astonished these people would be, I suspect, to stand in Tippity Green today and see that almost all of the places in which they, their ancestors and many of their descendants lived their lives have completely disappeared. More astonished still, perhaps, to know how much information about them we are able to put together two hundred years later, how could they have imagined such interest in them and their lives?

But these small hamlets and the people who lived in them will not be forgotten, at least by me!

Rowley Regis Hospital Sunday 1898

County Advertiser 24/9/1898

I have transcribed this article here:

“On Sunday afternoon the annual friendly societies’ Sunday service, on behalf of the hospitals, was held in a field at the back of Mountford House, Siviters Lane, Rowley, kindly lent for the occasion by Dr. J. G. Beasley. The members of various societies met at their headquarters, and were formed into a procession as below.

The Blackheath Village Band started from the WHEAT SHEAF INN, Turners Hill at one o’clock, with the Church of England Friendly Society, and proceeded through Portway and Perrys Lake, calling at the BULLS HEAD INN for the Sick Club, at the WARD ARMS INN for Court Foresters’ Pride, at the KINGS ARMS INN for Lodge Working Man’s Friend. It then proceeded by way of Ross, Holly Road, Tump Road, and John Street, to the GEORGE AND DRAGON Ground.

The Woodgate Brass Band had in the meantime covered its route from the OLD BUSH INN, Powke Lane, with Court Little Band of Hope, calling at the MALT SHOVEL INN for Lodge Lily of the Valley, the VINE INN for Court Mistletoe Bough, proceeding along Station Road to the RAILWAY INN for Court Britannia’s Pride, thence through Halesowen Street, Tump Road, and Hackett Street, meeting the other Courts at the GEORGE AND DRAGON Ground.

A united procession was then formed, and marched to Siviters Lane, reaching the ground at three o’clock. The proceedings opened with the hymn ‘All people that on earth do dwell,’ after which the Chairman (Mr. E. Pewtress, CC) delivered a short address.

The Rev. C. W. Barnard, MA, Rector of Kings Norton, then addressed the meeting, after which the hymn ‘Lead, kindly light,’ was sung. Addresses were also delivered by the Revs. W. Hall and N. Haigh, of Blackheath.

At the close a collection was taken on behalf of the Dudley Dispensary and Birmingham Eye Hospital. It amounted to £11 9s 5d.”

When I came across this article in the local paper, I was interested that there were so many active friendly societies in the area so I found out a bit more about them. The internet is my friend…!

Friendly societies, in those days before general employment benefits and social security, were mutual aid societies which provided social and financial support to their members when they were affected by illness, unemployment or death, when widows were supported. Originally they were associated with trade guilds but later became independent organisations. They also organised social events such as the one above which must have been quite a colourful sight. I suspect most of the societies would have had their own banners and there was probably some friendly rivalry, too. Like Building Societies – such as our very own Rowley Regis Building Club which built the Club Buildings, these societies mushroomed during the late 18th and 19th century.

Many of our forebears in this area and period would have lived in dread of ending up ‘on the parish’ or, even worse, in the Workhouse, being ill or injured and unable to support their family or having a ‘Pauper’s funeral’. Membership of a Friendly Society offered some hope of avoiding these fates.

There were thousands of different friendly societies, of different sizes and not all of long duration. Smaller and early societies could struggle to calculate their insurance risks fully and to build up sufficient reserves. Events such as epidemics of infectious disease or mass unemployment could lead to the closure of such societies and the loss of members’ contributions which must have caused great dismay.

There were three main types: trade societies, local societies and interest-group societies. Some ‘Orders’ such as the Ancient Order of Foresters, which started in Yorkshire, opened branches in towns and villages across the country which allowed members to move their membership if they moved for work and also enabled risk to be spread, such as if a large employer closed suddenly. These branches were usually known as Lodges but the Foresters called them Courts and there are several Courts mentioned in the list in the article.  Some local friendly societies still exist and others moved into more formal life insurance.

To become a member, men (women were not admitted, at least until the late 1800s) had to formally apply, be proposed by an existing member who would propose them and another who would second them. They had to complete declarations about health, including whether any near relatives had died of tuberculosis or if they had had certain other diseases, such as gout, rheumatism, smallpox, etc. The club doctor would also examine candidates and admission depended on his approval, all of this to limit calls on club funds arising from chronic illness. Some societies only admitted members with a weekly wage of at least 22 shillings and many trades were excluded as “any other occupation that the committee may conceive dangerous or injurious to health”. It seems to me that most of the occupations of local residents in Rowley came under this last definition but nevertheless there were clearly enough members to support a number of local societies.

I would hazard a guess that most of the societies listed in the article were, apart from the Church of England Friendly Society, fairly small local organisations. The six main large societies were the Royal Standard, the United Kingdom, the United Patriots, the London Friendly, the Royal Oak and the Hearts of Oak. None of these was mentioned in the description of the march but probably the poor wages of nail makers working from home and the hazardous working conditions in quarries, mines and foundries precluded many local people from membership, even if they could afford the contributions but smaller local societies were perhaps more flexible.  

In the late 1800s clubs began to be set up exclusively for women who earned an income independent of their husbands. These clubs paid out on confinement with a child but again strict rules were set out and unmarried mothers were usually excluded.

Legislation

The administration of these friendly societies was regulated through legislation, including the Registration of Friendly Societies Act 1793 and the Friendly Societies Act 1855 which established a Register of such societies. More legislation in 1875 was aimed at protecting the members and ensuring the funds were kept safe. This latter legislation defined the purposes of friendly societies as “the relief or maintenance of the members, their husbands, wives, children, fathers, mothers, brothers or sisters, nephews or nieces or wards, being orphaned, during sickness or other infirmity, whether bodily or mental, in old age (which shall mean any age after 50), or in widowhood, or for the relief of the orphan children of members during minority.”

Each month members paid into the Society, often at a meeting in a pub and in return, payments from the funds were made to ill members and widows. Some societies had initiation and other ceremonies, certificates, passwords and handshakes, – which only paid up members would know – rituals, oaths, parades and feasting, such as the one described in this article, even costumes. Annual feasts were held with processions, banners and dinners, some of which may have got a little over-exuberant. Membership must have brought a real sense of belonging to a community, of brothers, of people who looked out for you. Some societies had funeral processions and graveside duties. To try to protect their funds, many societies had cash boxes with three locks and three keyholders to prevent theft by officials of the society.

And membership, based usually on a subscription basis, provided sickness or injury benefit or contributions to funeral expenses. Some, such as Oddfellows, established in 1810 and still going, had a surgeon at every lodge or branch, who members had access to.  Others, like the Rechabites which I have mentioned before, as my mother was a member, were more concerned with alcohol avoidance and ‘wholesome living’. And churches, chapels, businesses and other bodies began to run their own societies. Some societies donated to charities, for hospital beds, convalescent homes and even lifeboats. There were annual conferences, often held at the seaside, giving men the opportunity to take their part in democratic decisions, even before many of them had a vote in ordinary politics. They gave a sense of belonging and community.

However, the introduction of Lloyd George’s National Health Insurance Act in 1911 led initially to a further growth in membership as ‘state members’ were created, as the Act was largely administered through friendly societies and insurance companies. But this meant that the social side became less important and women, in particular, often did not care to go to meetings in pubs, preferring to pay their dues to the “man from the Pru” on his house visits. The loss of thousands of members in WW1 was also damaging for many societies.

By 1945, when the NHS was being set up, the membership of the friendly societies was estimated at 8,500,000, a significant proportion of the population. One estimate is that about 80% of male workers were members. However, the creation of the NHS, grants for funeral costs and changes to National Insurance took many of the functions of the societies away and led to many closures.

Since reading about this, I can remember my father being offered membership of what must have been such a society in the 1950s, perhaps the Order of the Buffalos, but I can remember my parents being somewhat puzzled about what this society was for and why he had been invited to join. And who had put his name forward?  He declined in the end, possibly because he suffered chronic ill health and could have ill afforded the membership fees. Perhaps by then, the membership was becoming more of a social commitment and the requirements as to health less stringent as most people received treatment under the NHS.

I found this subject very interesting and enjoyed finding out more about it. I would have loved to see the processions with their bands and banners and no doubt excited children, and local people gathering to watch. Although it is difficult to imagine it now, before the days of radio and television, many people learned to play instruments and to sing to amuse themselves and bands, often sponsored by the big employers, provided companionship and pride and a sense of belonging – they often provided instruments, too and to this day brass bands encourage junior musicians to belong and often have strong family involvement. So I would imagine there could well be numerous local bands who could be called upon to lead processions.  

Copyright Anthony Page.

This photograph from Anthony Page’s collection shows the Blackheath Town Band at a somewhat later date, perhaps the 1930s. But their uniforms were probably the same and one or two of the members may even have played for Hospital Sundays!

There were traditional gathering places, too. Apparently the Hackett family who kept the George and Dragon had a field at the back (mentioned in the article above) where fairs and gatherings were held and the frontage of the George and Dragon remained a stopping place for processions until within living memory.  I can picture the bands playing and puffing their way up Ross, leading the procession to Siviter’s Lane from the George and Dragon! And although a whole new housing estate was built in the area between the George and Dragon and Birmingham Road in the 1920s and 30s, this spot also was not very far from Britannia Park and the fields which were there before the park was laid out.

The only processions I can remember in the 1950s were the Whit Sunday Processions which were organised by the churches around Blackheath and ended up in Britannia Park, with games and sandwiches and cakes for tea (all in a brown paper bag for each child, if memory serves!) with orange squash or cups of tea for everyone. This spot would, of course, be just below the grounds of Mountford House and may even have been the very same field that was used then – a traditional gathering spot for celebrations!

More reading:

‘Who do you think you are?’ Magazine has an excellent article here:

https://www.whodoyouthinkyouaremagazine.com/feature/friendly-societies

The Wellcome Collection has a most interesting and full account of friendly societies here:

https://wellcomecollection.org/stories/the-friendly-societies-and-healthcare

The HistoryHit has another interesting account here:

Wikipedia even has a list of ‘friendly societies’ still operating today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Friendly_societies_of_the_United_Kingdom

Families of the Lost Hamlets – the Hill family 5 – Elizabeth

Here is the next instalment about the Hill family, about Elizabeth, the next daughter  of Timothy Hill and Maria Hipkiss. It was going to be about Elizabeth and her sister Jane but was too long and complicated before I had even finished Elizabeth so Jane will be in the next instalment.

ELIZABETH HILL (1806-1892)

Elizabeth was the first member of the Hill family that I researched when I started my family history journey in 1980. She is my great-great-great-grandmother. And, because she lived in Gadd’s Green she was perhaps the start of my interest in that place and therefore planted the seed which grew into this One Place Study all these years later. So I have a fondness for Elizabeth.

Elizabeth was born, probably in 1806 or thereabouts and was baptised on 16th March 1806 at St Giles, the daughter of Timothy and Maria Hill. There were no details in the Register at this period of abodes or occupations.

On 26 December 1825, at Tipton church Elizabeth married Thomas Moreton  (thought, by me at least, to be Ralph Thomas Moreton, born in Harborne – see my previous article on this[i]). The witnesses were Henry Whittall, her brother-in-law, who had married her older sister Mary in the same church two years before. The second witness was Thomas Shorthouse.

Many marriages at this time took place on Christmas and Feast days as they were the only days working men got holiday. The 25th December 1825 was a Sunday so presumably men got the Monday off instead.

I do not know why several weddings of Rowley people took place at Tipton at this time, there may be family connections in this case.

Another Moreton wedding at Tipton

And in November 1826, another wedding took place in this church which was of Phebe Moreton, (sister to Ralph Thomas Moreton) who married James Hipkiss. Another Hipkiss connection! The witnesses at this wedding were Thomas Moreton (brother of the bride and my 3xgreat-grandfather) and another familiar name – Thomas Shorthouse, presumably the same Thomas Shorthouse who had witnessed Elizabeth’s wedding a year earlier! Thomas Shorthouse does not appear on my family tree. Yet!

James and Phebe Hipkiss then settled – where else? In Finger I’ the Hole, later known as Gadd’s Green, just a couple of doors away from David and Ann Priest, and Phebe’s brother and sister-in-law Thomas and Elizabeth Moreton and their family.

Phebe Moreton, (also born in Harborne parish to Francis and Ann Moreton, like Ralph Thomas) had given birth at the Poorhouse in Rowley in 1822 to a ‘base-born’, an illegitimate son Thomas, according to the record of his baptism on 24 February in 1822. So Phebe had been in the Rowley area for several years. And Harborne was not as far away as it sounds – the parish of Harborne stretched right out to parts of Whiteheath so the family might have been there. This Thomas was living with Phebe and James on Turner’s Hill in 1841 so he had evidently not been cast off when his mother married.

Back to Elizabeth:

Elizabeth and Thomas Moreton had several children. The first, Emma, was baptised on 15 October 1826 at Dudley St Thomas, the daughter of ‘Thomas and Betsey Morton of Dixon’s Green, labourer’. Dixon’s Green is just past Oakham on the way to Dudley, so very close to home. Their next daughter Mary Ann was also baptised at St Thomas on 16 August 1829 but this time the parents were shown as Thomas and Elizabeth Moreton of Rowley. After that came Maria (1831) and Ralph Thomas (1832) and William, my great-great-grandfather who was baptised on 2 April 1837 . William was a posthumous baby, his father Ralph Thomas had died and was buried on 2 October 1836 at St Giles, aged 36 and of dropsy, according to the burial register. So Elizabeth was left with five children to bring up.

However Elizabeth went on to have three more children in the years after Thomas’s death – Elizabeth in 1839, Eve in 1842 and Edward in 1844. No clues exist in records as to the identity of their father but family legend has it that all three were the children of George Smith, of Oakham (just up the hill) who was the famous (or infamous) hangman. The other legend about him is that he sold, as grisly souvenirs, pieces from ropes he had used to hang people, allegedly giving rise to the phrase ‘money for old rope’.

Elizabeth continued to live in Gadd’s Green until 1871 when she is found living in Siviters Lane with her daughter Mary Ann, Mary Ann’s husband Joseph Taylor and their five children. But by 1881, she was back in Gadd’s Green, living with her daughter Eve and her husband Joshua Taylor and nine of their fourteen children. Elizabeth was also living with Eve and her family in Gadd’s Green in 1891.

Of Thomas and Elizabeth’s children:

Emma Moreton (1826-1895)

Emma was baptised on 15 October 1826 at Dudley St Thomas. Her parents may have been living in Dixon’s Green at this time. She had an illegitimate son John Moreton,( sometimes later known as Priest or Redfern – it’s confusing!) John was baptised on 13 June 1847 at St Giles. There is no indication who his father was.

Emma married Thomas Priest,( sometimes known by his step-father’s name of Redfern, just to add to the complications), on 10 June 1850 at Dudley St Thomas. Thomas was the illegitimate son of Ann Maria Priest, he was born in Rowley in 1826 and was living with his mother and stepfather on Turner’s Hill in 1841, listed as Thomas Priest.  In the 1851 Census, Emma and Thomas were living in Gadd’s Green with Emma’s son John Moreton, now aged 4 and shown as Priest, their eldest child Sarah, then aged 1, in the household of Ann Hipkiss, aged 73 and Paul Hipkiss aged 32, although I have not yet worked out whether there is a connection with the other Hipkisses in this family group. It seems quite possible if I can just untangle it!

By 1861 Thomas and Emma had moved to Turner’s Hill where they lived between Thomas’s Redfern step-father Joseph Redfern and his half-brother – also Joseph Redfern. In this census Thomas Priest is listed as Thomas Redfern but as his family of Emma, John and their other children are living with them, it is clear that this is the correct family. I suspect that, living in a family group, the Enumerator Richard Bate who was local, perhaps knew that Thomas had grown up in the Redfern family, probably thought of Thomas as a Redfern and listed him accordingly! Or he may just have made an error in transcribing his notes.

Thomas and Emma Priest had nine children together: Sarah’s birth was registered in the first quarter of 1850, so just before Thomas and Emma married and she was registered as Moreton so she was illegitimate. It is quite possible though that Thomas was her father and she appears as Sarah Priest in 1851, 1861  and 1871Censuses. However, I have not been able to trace Sarah after that 1871 Census, neither death, censuses nor marriage as either Priest or Moreton so she will have to remain a mystery for the moment.

Thomas and Emma Priest’s other children were Joseph (1854), Thomas (1857), Ann Maria (1858-1858), Elizabeth (1859), Ann Maria (1859), Mary Ann (1862), Eliza 1864) and Emma (1867-1944).

Mary Ann Moreton (1829-1886)

Mary Ann, Thomas and Elizabeth’s second daughter, was baptised on 16 August 1829 at Dudley St Thomas.

This is getting to be a familiar start to these pieces – it appears that Mary Ann’s daughters Hannah (1853) and Sarah (1856) were illegitimate, born several years before Mary Ann married in 1859. Certainly the birth registrations for both girls showed no name for the father and were both registered under the name Moreton, although later they appear to have used the surname Taylor, their stepfather’s name. I cannot find a baptism for Hannah or Sarah. Although the family were living next door to the Methodist chapel between Perry’s Lake and Gadd’s Green at this time so it is quite possible that they were baptised there. Records for that chapel have never been traced.

I also noted the birth of an illegitimate Eliza Moreton in the second quarter of 1852 in the Dudley Registration area and her death in the last quarter of that year. I could not find a baptism for this child, but I found her burial at St Giles, aged 8 months, of Gadd’s Green. So I did not know who the mother of this child was. I was tempted to send for a digital copy of the birth certificate, as this would tell me. But frustratingly, the GRO Website told me that technical reasons, a digital copy was not available so I would have to send for a more expensive paper or .pdf copy. Then I thought of buying a digital copy of the Death Registration as with luck, this would fill in the gaps. And it did. Eliza was the daughter of Mary Ann, the first of her children. She had died at only 8 months of a ‘bowel complaint’ with no medical attendant involved. Poor baby.

There was also a baptism on 10 July 1859 at St Giles, for an Emma Moreton, daughter of Mary Ann Moreton of Gadd’s Green. It was one of two Emma Moreton’s born that year, both with no father shown so perhaps two of the Moreton sisters had daughters called Emma that year. Since this child does not appear with Mary Ann or in the area in the 1861 Census or thereafter, I suspect that she may be the Emma Moreton whose Death Registration was in the last quarter of 1860, aged 1. This Emma Moreton was buried at St Giles, on 11 November 1860, aged 1 year and 5/6, that is 1 year and ten months which would put her birth in something like September 1858, which fits with the second illegitimate Emma Moreton registered that year in the last quarter of the year. I have not yet discovered who the other illegitimate Emma Moreton was!

It seems that it was quite usual for the Moreton girls to have one or two (or more!) illegitimate children before they got married, whereas their mother had three after she was widowed! With Mary Ann, however, she had four which may all have been the children of one relationship or may suggest a certain promiscuity, or even that Mary Ann was following the ‘oldest profession’ before she married. I hope I do not offend any other Hill family historians with that observation but the family patterns do seem to indicate a fairly relaxed attitude towards extra-marital encounters and the outcomes!

Mary Ann Moreton then married Joseph Taylor, at Dudley St Thomas on 18 December 1859. Thomas was a Boilermaker and gave his abode as Dudley. The witnesses at the marriage were Eve Moreton, the bride’s half sister and Joshua Taylor. In fact it was a double wedding because Eve Moreton married Joshua Taylor the same day and Mary Ann and Joseph were the witnesses to their wedding! From their respective father’s names Joshua and Joseph were not brothers but may well have been related in some way. Research continues on that.

In 1861 Joseph and Mary were living in Gadd’s Green and all the surviving children were shown as their children and listed under Taylor but by 1871 they had moved to Siviters Lane where Mary Ann’s mother lived with them for a time, I also found the family there in 1881 although by that time Elizabeth Moreton had returned to Gadd’s Green to live with daughter Eve.

In all, Joseph and Mary family consisted of six children, five daughters and one son (only the latter four of these were apparently Joseph’s). These were Hannah (1853), Sarah (1856), Ann Maria (1864), John (1866), Elizabeth (1868),and Mary Ann (1869).  (Hannah later married a Job Taylor, too – the mind boggles, I have not done any work on that generation yet!)

Mary Ann Taylor, nee Moreton died in 1886 and was buried at St Giles on 8 November 1886, aged 57 and ‘of Rowley village’. Joseph Taylor died in 1901 and was buried at St Giles on 7 November 1901, aged 70.

Maria Moreton (1831-?)

In the course of my researches into infant births in the Hill family, I found a baptism at St Giles for a Sarah Moreton on 26 Jun 1854, an illegitimate baby and her baptism gives her mother’s name as Maria Moreton of Gadd’s Green, who was Mary Ann’s next sister. Unfortunately I can find no trace of Maria after that census. It is possible that she married but if so, I cannot find the Civil Registration entry for it. Nor can I find a death. Perhaps Maria went into service elsewhere, although I have not found her in any censuses, I suppose it is possible that she emigrated, although the family seemed to stick very close to Rowley. Nor can I find any trace of Sarah after her baptism, no census entry in the next census in 1861, no death entry, just another brick wall. Watch this space!

Various trees on Ancestry appear to confuse Mary Ann Moreton and Maria but they are definitely separate people, both appear on the 1841 and 1851 Censuses and were each baptised on different dates.

Ralph Thomas Moreton (1832-1894)

Thomas Moreton was born to [Ralph] Thomas and Elizabeth Moreton in 1832, this is the approximate year which computes from six censuses and his death registration.He was not baptised, however, until 2 April 1837 when he was baptised at Dudley St Thomas at the same time as his younger brother William. By this time his father was dead, having died in October 1836. In most records he was recorded as Thomas Moreton but not all, at baptism he was baptised as Ralph Thomas, his death was registered as Ralph Thomas and he named his son Ralph Thomas, it seems to have been a family name!

Thomas was at home in Gadd’s Green with his mother and siblings in the 1841 and 1851 Censuses. On 6 September 1857 Thomas married Mary Ann Siviter at Dudley St Thomas.

Mary Ann Siviter was a minor, according to the record and no details were given of her father in the marriage record so she was presumably illegitimate.

Mary Ann’s year of birth has been a puzzle to work out. In all of her records Mary Ann gave her place of birth as Rowley Regis. But her age varies between censuses. In 1841, she was five months old, giving a birth year of 1841which is, let’s face it, most likely to be accurate, it is difficult to make a mistake of several years at that point! And in 1851, she was ten, then in 1861, 1871, and 1881 her age gives a year of about 1835 – but in those years she was shown as being the same age as her husband Thomas so this may have been an error or whoever was completing the form genuinely believed they were the same age. In 1891, the birth year is about 1841, in 1901, she was noted as 57, giving 1834 again and in 1911, it is back to 1841.  But in 1911, she is listed as an Old Age Pensioner and to claim that she would have had to prove her date of birth. So it seems likely that this is the correct year. And there is an illegitimate Mary Siviter born in the last quarter of 1840 which would tally with the 1840/1 date. And this would make her seventeen at the time of her marriage so she was indeed a minor.

And I did find a baptism for a Mary Ann Siviter, born to Judith Siviter. This baptism was at St Giles on 12 November 1843 and Judith Siviter was the only parent listed. In 1841 Judith Siviter was living in Treacle Street which was in Springfield, with three children Elizabeth, aged 5, Samuel, aged 3 and Mary Ann. Judith was also from a Rowley family. So Mary Ann grew up close to the Moretons, who were living just up the hill in Gadd’s Green.

[Ralph] Thomas and Mary Ann Morton (at about this point the name began to be spelled without the ‘e’) lived in Cock Green, later described as Dudley Road, Springfield and had eight children. These were: Emma (1853), John (1855), Eliza (1860), Joseph (1864), Ralph Thomas (1866-1923), Sarah Ann (1869), William (1871) and Samuel (1877).

Ralph Thomas Morton’s death was registered under that name in the first quarter of 1894 and he was buried at St Giles on 28 March 1894, aged 58 and of 102 Dudley Road. His widow Mary Ann Morton died in February 1913 and was buried at St Giles on 18 February 1913.

William Moreton 1837-1899

William Moreton was my great-great-grandfather on my dad’s side. He was baptised on the 2 April 1837  at Dudley St Thomas. William’s father had been buried in October the previous year so he never knew his father. But his family continued to live in the Hill enclave in Gadd’s Green!

In 1841 and in 1851 the Moreton family, with the widowed Elizabeth as the Head of the household, were in Gadd’s Green, in 1841 with a couple living with them as lodgers. In 1851 Frederick Whittall, Elizabeth’s nephew and his wife and two young children were living with them. It must have been quite crowded with twelve living there. William was 15 in 1851 and working as a coal miner.

On the 4 April 1858 William married Elizabeth Beet at St Giles and their first daughter Mary Jane (also known as Polly) was born in August 1858. William and Mary eventually had thirteen children: Mary Jane (Polly) (1858), Emma (1861), Ralph Thomas (1863-1863), Elizabeth (1864-1865), Ann Maria (1866-1866), Alice – my great-grandmother – 1868-1902, Joseph (1871-1871), Sarah (1872-1872), William (1873-1928), Hannah (1876-1953), Ann Eliza (1878), Minnie (1881-1956, and Edward (1885).

Elizabeth Beet was born in 1839, the daughter of Joseph and Mary Ann Beet (nee Parkes). The Beet family were originally from the Nuneaton area but had been settled in Rowley Regis since the early 1800s. They were distantly related to John Beet, the ‘Squire’ who had also been born near Nuneaton and who lived at Rowley Hall until his death in 1844. Whether it is coincidence that Elizabeth’s father at one time lived in Spring Row which was apparently ‘retainer’s cottages’ for Rowley Hall or that they later lived in Beet Street, I do not  know. Certainly John Beet’s widow was described in 1851 Census as the ‘owner of Land and houses’ so it is possible that she developed the land off the Causeway that became Beet Street, and allowed Joseph to rent a house there. Or it might simply have been that the street was named for a local family as so many were in Blackheath – Darby Street, Hackett Street, etc. My distant cousin (through the Beet family) Margaret Thompson will no doubt have more information on this than me! Our great-grandmothers were sisters.

 In 1861, William, Elizabeth and Mary Jane and Emma were lodging in Rowley village. By 1871, they had moved to the fast expanding new town of Blackheath and were living in the Causeway, although this may have been what later came to be known as Beet Street, which was off the Causeway, as this was where they lived later.  In 1881 and 1891 they were living at 14 Beet Street.

Health – Drainage and water supplies in the area

You may note from the lists of children that several of William and Elizabeth’s children died in infancy in the 1860s and 1870s. I do not know the specific reasons for the individual deaths but am reminded of a Report which I found in The National Archives a couple of years ago. This Report, entitled “Dr Ballard’s Report to the Local Government Board on the Sanitary Condition of the Registration Sub-District of Rowley Regis” and was dated April 1875. This Report was commissioned as part of the Government’s efforts to prevent Cholera outbreaks. Fortunately it is a typed copy of the report, rather than manuscript. Most of the correspondence in this file is manuscript so I’m not sure how this came to be typewritten but very grateful it is!

I will at some point do an article on the whole report because it gives a detailed account of how our ancestors in Rowley Regis were living but one paragraph had stuck in my mind. It is discussing the contamination of water sources in various places but singles out Causeway and Beet Street in Blackheath.

It reads:

“In one well in this village [Blackheath] where the surface of the water stood at a level  of 8-10 feet from the surface of the earth, I was told that there was scarcely any water to be had in the summer time. It was situated in ‘The Causeway’, in an undrained, unpaved yard abounding in surface nuisances [Nuisances in this context has a specific meaning relating to sources of contamination], with a large accumulation of sewage water in one corner, and a row of leaking overfull privies at one side of it. In Beet Street, the pump well for the supply of a row of cottages is situated in a narrow passage between the cottages and a row of nail-shops. Slops and sewage were stagnant in an imperfect channel close to the pump, and the inhabitants told me that the water could not be drunk on account of its sickly and bad flavour and that they got water where they could. Not far from this place in High Street, I found in a yard a well about 40 feet deep to the surface of the water but water was trickling in from the surface soil through the brickwork at a depth of about 6 feet. The quality of this water thus polluting the well may be estimated from the fact that a few yards off from the well there were a privy ashpit full of excrement, an enormous heap of filth, and accumulations of sewage water, besides other surface nuisances.”

This Report was written by an experienced medical professional who had carried out inspections all over the country and prepared many such reports. The language may read more like a sensationalist report in a newspaper but I found it sobering to realise the terrible conditions our ancestors lived in and surprising, quite honestly, that so many survived at all. It is not a criticism of the inhabitants who were clearly doing what they could to obtain potable water and in another section Dr Ballard notes “Many of the cottages in the District are clean and decent, and if it were not for want of proper drainage and of good water supply, and for the abominable privy nuisances and filth about them, would be wholesome residences enough.”

So perhaps the high rate of child deaths should be viewed in the light of these findings. The yards the children, often barefoot I imagine, (and adults) had to walk through and play in were a constant threat to their health, it seems and there would have been little clean water for washing. It was to be more than twenty years after this report before any substantial improvements to drainage and water supply in the area were made and then only at the continuous strong urging of the Government officials. Cholera, enteric fever and similar diseases continued to be a problem in the worst areas during that time, the great frustration of the officers of the Government Health Ministry is apparent in the correspondence in the files at Kew between them and local officials. 

Willliam died and was buried at St Giles on 18 March 1899, aged 63 and of Blackheath.  In 1901 Elizabeth was living at 28 Hackett Street, a widow and the head of the household, with her sons William and Edward and her married daughter Minnie and Minnie’s husband Richard Woodward and their son Aaron. Elizabeth died in 1909 but I have not been able to find a burial for her.

Elizabeth’s other children

Now we come to Elizabeth’s other children Elizabeth (1839), Eve (1842-1912) and Edward (1844). As previously noted, I have been told that the father of all three of these children was George Smith, the Dudley hangman, who lived at Oakham. I have no proof of this but family stories often have more than a grain of truth.

Elizabeth 1839- ?

Elizabeth appears with her mother in the 1841 and 1851 Censuses at Gadd’s Green, aged 2 and 12 respectively.After that things are less clear. I suspect that it is this Elizabeth who married Frederick Parsons in 1860 at Dudley St Thomas, where no details are shown for the father of the bride.

In 1861, this couple are living in Blackheath where Frederick is shown as being born in Chadwich, Lancashire. However, in the 1841 and 1851and several later Censuses, there is a Frederick Parsons of the correct age who was born (and living in the first two censuses mentioned) in Chadwich, Bromsgrove, Worcestershire! Which is just a few miles away and seems a lot more likely than Lancashire.

I am fairly confident that this is the right couple as, in 1861, they have a lodger who is Pheby Moreton, Elizabeth’s aunt, previously living on Turner’s Hill. But by 1871 Pheby is living in the Causeway, as the head of her own household.

But of Frederick and Elizabeth Parsons, I can find no trace after that. I can find no children born to the pair, nor a death registration for a Frederick of the right age.

In the 1871 and 1881 Censuses, there is a Frederick Parsons of the right age, born in Bromsgrove, living with a William Parsons and his wife in Aston, Birmingham. But he is described as unmarried. Could the marriage have failed and Frederick moved away? Or had Elizabeth died? In 1882 this Frederick Parsons married Harriet Haynes in Aston and they continued to live in Erdington with their several children until I last found them in 1911. By 1921 Harriet was a widow but I have not been able to identify a likely death registration for Frederick. There is a death of a Frederick Parsons in the Aston Registration District in the first quarter of 1910 which is for a man of the right age but since our Frederick was alive in the 1911 Census and indeed completed and signed the Census form, it cannot be him. Another unresolved life.

So what happened to Elizabeth Parsons, nee Moreton? I cannot find any trace of her after 1861. She does not appear to have died or remarried and I cannot find her under either name in any of the later censuses. But, unless they obtained a divorce, how was Frederick able to re-marry? Perhaps, as people often did in those days, they split up, pretended to be unmarried or widowed and went through a form of marriage with someone else. Or Elizabeth may have been living with someone else, recorded under his name, there is no way of checking that. But she does not appear to be with any of her close family in later censuses so must remain a puzzle.

Eve Morton 1842-1912

Eve was baptised, the daughter of Elizabeth Moreton, on 16 March 1845 at St Giles. A note on the entry in the Baptisms Register says that she was aged 3 years but I cannot find any trace of her birth being registered in or around 1842. She was baptised on the same day as her future husband Joshua Taylor, I noticed when I looked at the register, who was six years old then, she was three! Their first meeting?

The rest of her life, however, is much better documented.

Eve Moreton married Joshua Taylor at Dudley St Thomas on 18 December 1859 when she would have been 17. The witnesses at the marriage were Mary Ann Moreton , Eve’s half sister and Joseph Taylor. In fact it was a double wedding because the two couples married the same day and were the witnesses to each other’s weddings! From their respective father’s names Joshua and Joseph were not brothers.

Eve and Joshua had twelve children, according to the 1911 Census (which asks how many children have been born alive to their marriage): Fanny or Frances (1860), Elizabeth (1861), Mary (Polly) (1862), Ann Selina (1864), George (1866), Elizabeth (1869), Emma (1870), Samuel (1873), Sarah Ann (1875), Eleanor or Ellen or Nelly (1879), Anne (1883), and Harry (1884). This last child is shown in the 1891 and 1901 censuses as the child of Eve and Joshua but his birth registration and baptism show that he is the son of Fanny, their eldest daughter. This leaves only eleven children that I have found birth registrations for. There are Birth and Death Registrations for a John Taylor in 1865 who may be the twelfth, although I cannot find a burial to confirm this.

The 1901 Census shows a Henry Taylor (aged 17), Mabel Taylor (7) and Ivan Taylor (1) all as children of Joshua and Eve. In fact, as noted above Henry is the son of Fanny, and was baptised as such on 16 April 1884 so he was their grandson. Ivan, whose birth was registered in 1899, again as an illegitimate Taylor birth, was baptised as Ivan Gould Taylor on 4 June 1899, the son of Nellie Taylor of Gadd’s Green so he was also a grandson.

Mabel Taylor proved difficult to allocate to one of the daughters, although her birth was registered in April 1894 again as an illegitimate Taylor birth, I could find no baptism for her to give me a clue, although I found quite a lot of other information. Mabel married Charles Knight (of Perry’s Lake, of course!) on 13 June 1915 at St Giles. He was killed in a mine explosion and buried at St Giles on the 27 October 1915, only four months later, his abode given as Perry’s Lake. There are numerous reports of the accident and a couple of reports of the funeral, one of which notes that Mabel was supported by her mother but the mother is just about the only person in the report who is not named! Mabel probably needed that support because she was heavily pregnant, giving birth to their daughter Edith Eva Knight on 19th November 1915, only a couple of weeks later. Mabel re-married on 28 April 1919 at St Giles, to – ah, another Ingram connection! – Ernest Reuben Ingram of Tippity Green. All very close to home as usual. At the time of the marriage, Mabel’s abode was shown as the Portway Tavern, Perry’s Lake. They had a son Jack in 1920.

So who was Mabel’s mother? I had to buy the birth certificate to get the answer. Mabel’s mother was Emma Taylor, Eve and Joshua’s daughter, so again she was a grandchild, not a daughter as shown in the census.

Copyright: GRO. Do not reproduce!

But it does appear that Eve and Joshua were very happy to help raise their grandchildren and it is possible that some of them believed Eve and Joshua to be their parents.

Eve Taylor, nee Moreton, died and was buried at St Giles on 20 June 1912, her address given as Gadd’s Green where she had been born and where she lived her entire life. Joshua Taylor had died the previous year and was also buried at St Giles, on 26 Sep 1911, aged 71. 

Edward Moreton 1845-1909

The last lap of what has been a complicated research project and the last of Elizabeth Moreton, nee Hill’s children.

Edward was baptised on 16 March 1845 at St Giles, the son of Elizabeth Moreton, father unknown but possibly George Smith.

Edward married Mary Ann Nock in the last quarter of 1867, at Dudley St Thomas.  Mary Ann’s son George had been born in the Dudley Registration District, in the first quarter of 1867, so it was not clear whether Edward was his father. Nevertheless George is shown in the 1871 Census, in the Causeway, Blackheath, listed as George Morton, living with Edward and Mary Ann and their daughter Elizabeth, then 7 months old. They had also had a son Joseph in 1869  who had died in the same year.

Mary Ann Moreton died in the second quarter of 1872, aged 28. I have not been able to find a burial for her but it seems quite likely that she was buried at St Paul’s, Blackheath and those records have not yet been added to FreeREG.  Baby Elizabeth Moreton also died in the third quarter of 1872, leaving only George of their children.

Edward re-married on 16 August 1874 at Halesowen, to Sarah Stokes. Sarah had been born in Cradley where she and Edward later lived but her parents Benjamin Stokes and Mary Bridgwater were both born in Rowley Regis.

I think this is the same Edward, he was aged 30, a miner and a widower which all seem to fit.  In the 1881 Census this Edward was shown as born in Rowley which also fits. With Edward and Sarah in Overend, Cradley were Sarah’s son Arthur Stokes, aged 9 and Thomas (3) and Harry Morton (9 months).  

Not listed is George. Nor can I find any trace of George Moreton or Morton after the 1871 Census. I cannot find a death, a burial, marriage, a census entry, he has disappeared. Perhaps he was taken in by a relative, an aunt or grandparent and appears in censuses under their name, but as I am not sure which of the several Mary Ann Nocks was his mother, I am unable to look into this at the moment.

At least, that is what I wrote then, anyway. But, as you know, I enjoy a challenge…

Where was George?

I thought that perhaps George had been taken in by family after his mother’s death in 1872 and that I might find him with family in the 1881 Census. And it has become clear that this extended family is usually very ready to take in any number of grandchildren!

But which family? I had checked all the likely Moreton parents, grandparents and siblings, no sign of George there. Hmm, perhaps his mother’s Nock family? Since I knew Mary Ann’s approximate year of birth was 1845, (from the 1871 Census and her age at death) I looked for the baptism of a Mary Ann Nock in Rowley in 1845 and there was, on 16 March 1845, a baptism of a Mary Ann, daughter of Hannah Nock of Yew Tree. This tallied with a birth registration in the last quarter of 1844 for an illegitimate Mary Ann in Dudley Registration District. So this seemed a reasonable possibility to look at first.

Now I already had some Nocks in my tree so I rootled around those and found that there was one branch which was in Yew Tree Lane. And, curiously this family – William Nock, a nailer of Yew Tree and his wife Mary had had three daughters baptised in one ceremony on 1 July 1845, with their ages shown in the Register entries. All were adults or at least teenagers, Eliza (13), Martha (17) and Susannah (24). This was just a couple of months after Mary Ann had been baptised. Another family, Titus and Phoebe Newton, a farmer of Blackheath, also baptised six adult children the same day and three other teenagers were also baptised. How odd. But no Hannah listed there with the other baptisms.

So I checked the 1841 Census for William’s family, and there was Hannah listed, aged 15 and with her younger sisters Martha and Eliza. The 1841 Census, remember, rounds ages down to the next five years so Hannah could have been up to 19. Were Susannah and Hannah the same person? I have sometimes seen Rosanna spelled Roshannah in local registers, might this name have been the same, a pet name, abbreviated?

So I decided to investigate Susannah a little more. She married Joseph Portman on 5 December 1847 in  Christ Church, Oldbury and I was able to find them in 1851 in New Ross, Blackheath with their son William James, in 1861 in Shepherd’s Fold (very possibly the same place as 1851 with a new name and both of them yards away from Yew Tree Lane and Susannah’s family), with daughters Elizabeth, Susanna, Parthenia and Ellen, in 1871 in  Halesowen Street, Blackheath with the same girls plus Samuel, and in 1881 now living in Coombes Wood Cottages, Gorsty Hill, with Ellen, Samuel, and – oh, look – her grandson George Nock, aged 14 and a labourer at the Tube Works! Bingo! So perhaps George was not Edward’s son, and his grandmother took him in when his mother died.

However George had survived to marry Mary Ann Oliver in 1896 at St Giles and they had six children, eventually moving to the Quinton area. George was a socket maker at the Tube Works, in the 1911 census he names this as the Anchor Tube Works but the enumerator has crossed the name out and added ‘Iron and Steel’. So perhaps not Coombs Wood, although he may have worked there earlier when he was living in Coombs Wood Cottages. I have been unable to trace any of the family after the 1911 census and wonder whether they emigrated as there is a George Nock, mechanic, on a ship sailing to Canada in April 1914. But it was satisfying to track George down to his maternal family and expand that Nock twig on the family tree.

Back to Edward and Sarah Morton who lived most of their married life in Overend, Cradley and went on to have more children, nine in all. These were Thomas Henry (1878), Harry (1880), Mary Elizabeth (1882), Leah (1885), Harriet Lily (1886), Katie Ann Eliza (1888), James Edward (1890), Howard (1892) and Francis William (1896). In the 1911 Census Sarah, by now a widow, states that she had eleven children in this marriage, of which one had died but I have been unable to find any other birth registrations. She may have included her son Arthur in her total. The family continued to live in Cradley until at least 1911.

There is a death registration for Edward Morton of a similar age in 1909 in the Stourbridge Registration District which I think is this Edward but I have not been able to find a burial for him. Sarah died in 1927, aged 75 but, again, I have not found a burial record for her.

ELIZABETH MORETON, nee HILL died in February 1892, fifty six years after her husband and was buried at St Giles on 14 February, aged 87 ‘of Gadd’s Green’. She had had 8 children and at least 71 grandchildren, most of them staying in the lost hamlets, or in Rowley village and Blackheath.

You really could not be much more a part of the Lost Hamlets than this family.

The next instalment is about Jane Hill, the next sister.


[i] https://rowleyregislosthamlets.uk/2024/11/03/chipping-away-at-the-brick-walls/

War Time Memories and VE Day celebrations

In the late 1970s, I persuaded my mum to write down her memories of her life. I was so glad she did this as within a few years she developed dementia and lost all of this. These are my mum’s vivid memories of life in Blackheath, during the war and on the celebrations locally when the war ended.

Strictly, this is a little self-indulgent because it is not limited to the lost hamlets area but she mentions the gun emplacement and army camp on Turner’s Hill so I’m sneaking it in. And I think it gives a very personal and vivid account of what life was like then.

The picture of Mum is the one my father carried with him throughout his service as a Sapper (Royal Engineers), slightly dog eared but treasured.

War Time and VE Day Memories by Hilda Hopkins

During the war, each Friday night, I, together with Stella Hancock, Mabel Hooper and Mrs Southall, slept at the local clinic ‘on duty’ in case of air-raids. We were supplied with biscuits and a drink for supper-time and slept on camp beds with blankets. We had our personal Gas Masks which everyone carried around in those days, disguised in boxes with shoulder straps.

We laid out First Aid Equipment in case of air raids, there were de-contamination showers in case of gas attacks. There were air raids most nights and some in daytime. There were casualties and local people were killed, quite a few, but in our clinic area there was nothing like that.

At this time, men at home worked all day and some of them then ‘fire-watched’ or were Air Raid Wardens, all night, as we did, as part of a great rota. Often a policeman or Air Raid Warden would pop in to see if all was well and to see also if our blackout was secure. A cup of tea was always appreciated.  We were each paid 10/- (Ten shillings, 50p in today’s money) for a night’s ‘duty’.

Turner’s Hill, the highest hill for miles around, was a gun battery, and a military camp. The guns from here could be heard for miles. There was a wonderful camaraderie during these times.

There were air raids and very often people had built air raids in their gardens. One evening, I was in the Rex Cinema when the screen notice said there was an air raid, in case anyone wished to leave. Some did but most people stayed. It appeared that incendiary bombs had been dropped, some on the cinema, and quite a few local people were killed, some at Rowley, near to the Grammar School, and one lady in Green Lane.

Copyright: Glenys Sykes, not to be used without my specific permission.

1945

It must have been very late in the evening that the Radio News reported that the War was over – because we were all in bed at home and John’s sister Alice came along to Birmingham Road  and ‘knocked us up’ (a real Black Country expression – used to get workmen up in the early hours). Off I went with Alice to join a procession of ‘Blackheathans’, some with torches and all singing and calling out to each other with joy! We marched to Regis Road and walked up waking people up all the way with happy singing as we went along, the younger folk among us very quickly. It was so sudden – I just couldn’t believe it that the war was really over! The throng was led on and on, walking at will through blacked out streets, using our ‘Ever Ready’ torches as we sang our way and the atmosphere was so full of joy and for some sleepyheads like me a real awakening in every way. We circled the town and woke people up who were still in bed. Everyone was so excited. The joy was intense – we sang, we shouted and walked and walked – it seems like a dream now.

On the Radio news next morning all was happily confirmed and we weren’t alone in our carousing – it happened everywhere, I believe. The day folk had longed for for dreary hard worrying years had come.

VE (Victory in Europe) Day was formally announced on radio and in newspapers to be joyfully celebrated at a later date with great happy crowds, all over our land. Joyce Goreham, Ruth Gallagher and I went off by bus to Birmingham and met there – I never knew quite how because in the city thousands of people, young, old – all wildly  happy – were dancing and singing. I am sure Queen Victoria’s statue smiled at this sight – Victoria Square will never look like this again. We did manage to meet Josie, Kathy’s sister who had previously booked theatre tickets for us. All we had to do was fight our way there through crowded and thronging streets. Through the human mass, singing or just being literally carried along by the excited crowds. Bells rang, crowds shouted and sang for sheer joy. Kathy and Josie had a brother who would now be coming home soon – each one in that massive crowd had someone to come home, sooner or later. This night in a blaze of light in Victoria Square (we hadn’t seen lights like this for years!) was a mighty outpouring of joy and thankfulness after so many years of wondering and waiting – now we knew loved ones would, in time, be coming home.

There was dancing and singing in the city streets, streams of happy people in a great surge of unbridled joy. People climbed lamp-posts to shout and sing, strangers joined hands and danced around in small groups – a very emotional and exciting time I will ever remember.

And the war was over, a new era ahead, a time of homecoming and home making. A new beginning for each person and every nation and Peace in our time, always.

Families of the Lost Hamlets – the Hill family 1 or ‘The Hills are alive…’

The Hill family were in Rowley Regis for several centuries, (and still are) and can also be found in the surrounding parishes, from Dudley, Halesowen, Cradley, Warley, Halesowen, Tipton, Sedgley and some even further afield in Wolverhampton.

Hill is not an easy name to research in the Parish Registers. The early Registers, with their lack of place names are not too difficult – if you search the first section of the St Giles digital register for Hill, you have to skip over all the Phillips and Phillises, and most of the entries then are for members of the Hill family. But once places of residence start to be regularly recorded there are hundreds of them – Turners Hill, Gosty Hill, Reddall Hill, Old Hill, Darby’s Hill, Kates Hill, Hyams Hill – very frustrating to plough through the later records only to find that the entries contain an abode or place name, rather than a family name which includes Hill!

The Hailstone (Copyright Glenys Sykes) was close to where the Hill family lived and would have been a familiar sight to them, until it was taken down.

The first entry relating to the Hill family in the Rowley Parish Registers was in the  preface written by Henrietta Auden, who was a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, and who apparently transcribed many other parish registers as well as Rowley Regis. Her father was the Rev. Prebendary Auden. Miss Auden notes that in 1604, in the first parish register, John Hill is noted as ‘owner’. This makes me wonder whether, at the time when surnames began to be formalised, this John had owned land on and lived on Turner’s Hill, as many later generations of Hills did, and he became known simply as John of the Hill, then John de Hill, and then John Hill? As I set out in my piece on Hall houses[1], I think it is likely that the Hill family was wealthy enough at one time to build a Hall house in what later became known as Gadd’s Green and certainly some branches of the Hill family locally were well-to-do even centuries later, as I have discovered from various Hill Wills in the 1700s and 1800s. But that is possibly simplistic thinking on my part.

An early postcard image of Turner’s Hill, copyright unknown.

Other early Hill entries in the Parish Registers

Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Hill was baptised in September 1604 and the John Hill mentioned above was buried in the following March. In 1607 Lucy, daughter of Christopher Hill was baptised at Rowley and in 1612 Elizabeth, daughter of Francis Hill so it appears that there were in the early 1600s  several Hill families – fathers Thomas, Christopher, Silvester, Francis, Richard and William – living in the parish and of an age to be baptising children, perhaps brothers or cousins. And a John Hill of Warley had married Anne, daughter of William Darby which was another family of some standing in the area. 

The Hills had some common but regularly used names such as Thomas, Richard, Joseph and William but it also used several more distinctive names – Silvester, Jerome, Timothy (especially Timothy!), Francis, Daniel   – and Elizabeth, Ann and Rebeckah also recur amongst the women which can be useful in spotting likely connections between branches of the families.

There was an entry for the marriage of Thomas Hill and Ann Cooper at St Giles on  26 June 1687 but there is no indication where either of them came from, nor does there appear to be a baptism for either of them nor a baptism for An, daughter of Pheles (Phyllis is the modern name) who was buried on 29 February 1687/88. After that there are baptisms for John and Ann Hill, a burial for Selvester and for Thomas Hill in 1689, a burial for Elizabeth Hill, widow in 1691, baptisms for William and Hannah Hill and a burial of a Rebeckah Hill, widow in 1694. In 1695 a burial of a son John for Thomas Hill describes Thomas as from Upperside. In 1696.a child Hannah, daughter of John Hill, has a note saying ‘by non-conf.’ so perhaps the family were early dissenters or non-conformists although there  are no consistent indications of this. But certainly there appear to have been several branches of the Hill family in the parish at this time. The Registers at this date do have gaps and missing pages and the entries were by no means detailed so it is not possible to know whether this was one family who had moved into the parish from elsewhere or whether they had been in the parish for some years and earlier records baptisms are lost.

In 1717 an Ambrose Hill of Dudley married Esther Dudley at St Giles, Rowley Regis. In 1723 a Job Hill married Jane Dudley at St Giles so that was two Hill grooms marrying brides named Dudley in six years, so they may well have been related to each other. And my research indicates that there are many later connections between Hill families in Dudley and Rowley Regis.

It is not feasible in this article to describe all the people named Hill in the hamlets and villages over the centuries, there are simply too many of them and some very complicated family trees. There are 123 entries for Hills in the first section of the digital parish register alone, and another 35 in the next section, before place names start to appear which adds to the number. So between the first Hill entry in1604 and 1721 (when place names start to confuse the issue) there are 158 entries in the St Giles Registers for people named Hill.

So I will concentrate on some of those Hills who were in the Lost Hamlets in the 1841 Census, and their families which I will expand in a later article.

Timothy (1763-1831) and Maria Hill nee Hipkiss (1782-1855)

Timothy, that favourite Hill name, was my 4xgreat grandfather. He had been baptised at Dudley St Thomas in 1763 and Maria Hipkiss was a Rowley girl, baptised in 1782. Maria was Timothy’s second wife but he appeared, at first sight to have had no children with Ann Priest, his first wife. Ann was also a Rowley girl and her marriage took place in St Giles, and she appears to have been buried at Dudley in May 1800. I have a little more to say on this in my next piece. Timothy made up for it with Maria, who he married at Halesowen in September 1800 and he had at least seven children, four daughters and three sons with Maria.

Timothy is a particularly commonly used Hill Christian name and can make it difficult to decide which branch of the Hills particular Timothys belonged to.

This Timothy died in 1831 so was not listed in the censuses but Maria appears in the first two – 1841 and 1851, both times living with one of her children, the first time (1841) with her youngest son Samuel when they were living in Blackberry town which appears to have been in Springfield below the Hailstone quarry, and in 1851 she was living in Perry’s Lake with her widowed daughter Mary.

Maria’s family, the Hipkisses, like the Hills, are another of the ‘core families’ of the hamlets who appear in all the censuses there between 1841 and 1881 and later, and although I have not yet transcribed the later censuses I strongly suspect that I will find them in the later censuses, too. Another of those families who lived in these small hamlets for at least three hundred years and possibly much longer, with numerous intermarriages contributing to the complex web of relationships between the core families.

Timothy Hill (1763-1831) was baptised in Dudley, the son of Joseph Hill (1720-?) and Jane Bridgwater, the grandson of Samuel Hill (1684-?) and Martha Wright, and great-grandson of Samuel Hill (1660-?) and Issabill ?(Dates unknown) These earlier Hills had connections in Dudley and possibly, before that, in Oldswinford. But that is a tentative theory at present and there are numerous Hill families in the area so it is possible that is a different family. At some point, when time permits, I will research whether these people appeared in later registers in Oldswinford as that may rule them out. But there are so many Hills in the Dudley and Sedgley area, this might not be possible. But Timothy married two Rowley girls.

Maria was the daughter of John Hipkiss (1744-1818) and Mary Worton (1742-1832). Maria was baptised on 15 September 1782 at St Giles Rowley Regis and her forebears also go back in Rowley Regis for several generations and earlier in Dudley,too.

So this pattern is emerging of close kin living together in Gadds Green and Perrys Lake whose descendants continued to live there or very close by for several generations afterwards.

I have also noticed in the course of my research that often people from the Turner’s Hill/Oakham area used Dudley church, rather than St Giles and it may well be that many of these residents regarded the area on and below Turner’s Hill as separate communities, rather than a hamlet of Rowley Regis, even though most of this area was in Rowley parish.

I shall continue this theme on the Hill family with more posts to follow on the children of Timothy and Maria Hill.

The children of Timothy (1763-1831) and Maria Hill nee Hipkiss (1782-1855) – details of these will be the subject of my next articles.


[1] https://rowleyregislosthamlets.uk/2024/12/01/a-hall-house-at-gadds-green/