Is this commonplace? - Genealogists' Forum

Merry · #1 13-08-13, 10:57

Nothing to add to BK6 from this thread

I'm aware that many people claimed false addresses when marrying, possibly in order to save the expense of having banns read in two parishes.

The family I've been searching for on my other thread "A disintegrating family" have a different scenario and I wondered if anyone else has noticed anything similar in their trees? These are some of the addresses I have for the family of Clark and Mary Matilda Cotton:

Birth of Lydia Eliza 18th Feb 1849 at 2 Mills Court, Spitalfields

Bap of Lydia Eliza 11th March 1849 at St Botolph's, Bishopsgate, City of London. Address given as 26 New Street

Birth of Clark William 23th Feb 1853 at 5 Mills Court, Spitalfields

Bap of Clark William 20th March 1853 at St Matthias', Bethnal Green, Middlesex. Address given as 26 Place Street

Birth of Henry Joseph 31st August 1855 at 5 Mills Court, Spitalfields

Bap of Henry Joseph 23rd Sept 1855 at St Matthias', Bethnal Green, Middlesex. Address given as 25 Duke Street

Another dau was born in 1857. I don't have her birth cert but her baptism took place at St Matthias', Bethnal Green, Middlesex and the address given was 24 Princes St

In 1861 the family were at Mills Court, Spitalfields.

So, why the different addresses for the baptisms if they seemed to spend so much time at Mills Court?

Any ideas??

Tom Tom · #2 13-08-13, 11:04

The only thing I can think of is that perhaps Mum went to stay with relatives after the babies were born and then had them christened from there? Seems unlikely though; would they have given their usual address had this been the case?

I've never come across anything like it before.

Merry · #3 13-08-13, 11:08

I haven't investigated her parents to see where they lived. Something to do whilst others are watching the TV this evening!

#4 13-08-13, 11:20

Could it have something to do with wanting to be a parishioner of a particular church and the Spitalfields address wouldn't allow it, or conversely not wanting to be a parishioner of the Spitalfield's church, either didn't like the vicar etc or the church had a scandal attached ?.

Merry · #5 13-08-13, 11:30

Goodness knows, Julie! I wouldn't have thought they would have been too worried about scandals, having plenty of their own to worry about!

I might take a look at 26 New Street in 1851 (if I can find it) to see who was living there. None of this family seem to have lived in the City of London as far as I know, so I don't know why they would suddenly have used St Botolph's Bishopsgate for a baptism?

Shona · #6 13-08-13, 11:35

Clark and Mary Cotton were living at Mill's Court in 1851, as well.

Merry · #7 13-08-13, 11:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merry

I might take a look at 26 New Street in 1851

Hmmm.......well it's on the current London street map right next to St Botolph's, but the only New St I can see in The City in 1851 is in the parish of Saint Ann Blackfriars. Maybe the parishes are next to each other?? Don't have time to look now, but will be back later......

Shona · #8 13-08-13, 11:42

It's about a half mile between St Botolph's and Spitalfields.

Shona · #9 13-08-13, 11:58

This is interesting.

http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/servi...%20Summary.pdf

There are some old maps in this document and it looks as if there is a boundary at the end of New Street. Some pics of entrances and courtyards in New Street in the document, too.

Lindsay · #10 13-08-13, 12:00

I have a branch which do the same thing.

I've never worked out why, but perhaps XX Court is off YYY Road (with another exit onto ZZZ Street) which is why any or all of the above might be used.