In a couple of posts on this blog I have alluded to the possibility that the James/Anne Swarbrick line may be part of the Samlesbury line.
I have been able to trace the paths of all of the children of Robert and Mary Watson, with the exception of James. The theory is that James was the son of Robert Hubberstey and Mary Watson and the brother of Richard (b.1788), Edmund (b.1782), Thomas (b.1778), John (b.1774) Robert, Catherine and William. This post will look at the evidence that I have so far.
1. The Grimbaldeston connection:
In 1851 Richard and John (both unmarried) were living at Hubberstey Fold. By 1861, a family of Grimbaldestons was living with Richard at Hubberstey Fold. The Grimbaldestons were John and Mary and their children. The connection is that Mary was daughter of James Hubberstey and Anne Swarbrick. So it would make sense if they were living with Richard (and in the census Richard is listed as a landed proprietor) that there would be some relationship. If James had been Richard's brother, then Mary would have been Richard's niece.
In 1861, Richard then 83, was still living with the Grimbaldestons, but at a different location, again implying some kind of ongoing relationship.
2. Salford
In the 1861 census, Robert Hubberstey (son of James) was running an inn at #11 Salford Street, Blackburn. At the same time John Hubberstey, son of Thomas Hubberstey and Barbara Hawksworth, was living at #82 Salford street with his family. Thomas was also a son of Robert and Mary, so this would make Robert and John first cousins, if James had been Thomas' brother.
The remaining is mystery is the other John Hubberstey that was living with Robert's family at the inn. Aged 30 and born in Broughton, I have not been able to pin down his relationship. The closest match seems to be John, son of Thomas and Alice (Taberner) see post. Although this line is not directly related we do see that later on 2 other children of Thomas and Alice end up living next door to Robert (a decendant of Wlliam (son of Robert and Mary) and Deborah), again making a tangental link to the Samlesbury line.
3. Naming the children:
James and Anne had three children (that we know about) and they named them Robert, Maria, and Helen. The source of Robert and Mary is obvious, but Helen is not, although Thomas and Barbara (Hawksworth) also named a daughter Helen, thereby possibly adding one more small clue.
If we look at possible brother William (who married Deborah Whittle) we see similar naming a patterns. James and Anne's first son (b.1820) was named Robert. William's first son (b.1823) was named Robert. James' first daughter (b.1821) was named Helen, but his second daughter (b.1823) was named Mary as was William's daughter born 6 months later in 1824. William's second son was also named James. The two families also appeard to live quite close by each other.
4. Helen.
As mentioned in the point above, James and Ann had a daughter Helen. In the 1841 census we had a Helen Hubberstey (age 15) living with Catherine Teebay (aged 65). Catherine Teebay is very likely Catherine Hubberstey (daughter of Robert and Mary) that married George Teebay in 1806. If it is a match then Helen would have been Catherine's niece.
The problem is that Helen's birthdate was 1821 (per baptismal records) which should have made her 20, not15. Later at the 1851 census Helen (age 25, born Fulwood) is living with Mary (age 24, born Fulwood) in Preston where both were dressmakers, so the age is consistent from census to census, but not with the birth records (neither is Mary's for that matter, which is also off by 3 years). Either we don't have the right match, or the girls have "adjusted " their ages for some reason. I tend to think the match is correct because they list their birth place as "Fulwood" and are the only Hubbersteys to do so at that time (along with brother Robert - who does list his age correctly).
5. Descendants of James and Anne eventually ended up in Blackpool and one of their sons emigrated to America (John Joseph). I actually heard about this from my father who told me about a family legend of a Hubberstey going to America, striking it rich and having a huge farm. As my line comes from Thomas a possible brother of James, there is again a circumstantial connection.
6. In Blackpool another Hubberstey family (descendents of another possible brother - Robert) knew the decendents of James and Anne, again implying some sort of connection.
Issues:
1. If this was the James in question then he would have been a bit old to be getting married, born in 1780 the first child was born in 1820. That said, William was probably even older when he fathered his three children.
2. There was another James Hubberstey, the same age, christened at Fernyhalgh (1780), which is also where the children of James and Anne were christened. This James was in turn the son of James Hubberstey and Joanna Whittle, who were the first Hubbersteys to appear in the Fernyhalgh records. James (married to Joanna Whittle) could have been the cousin of Robert (married to Mary Watson) - both grandsons of Robert and Mary (Culcheth). So the actual link between the lines may be one generation further back.
Conclusion:
I still don't have adequate confirmation, but circumstantially it certainly appears there is some sort of relationship.
No comments:
Post a Comment