Allen Family History

Sources of information: 1. South Stoneham, Hampshire Parish Registers (FHL #1041740) 2. International Genealogical Index 3. Hampshire Burial Index 4. South Stoneham, Hampshire, England Poor Rate Books (FHL#1041842)

Notes:

ROBERT ALLEN RESEARCH REPORT

[smith022505 / 0346] 29 March 2005

The objective of this research project was to continue work on the Smith pedigree in Hampshire. Ann Smith, wife of George Judd, was reportedly the daughter of Thomas Smith and Elizabeth. A christening for her was previously found in 1782 at South Stoneham.
Recommendations from previous research included searching the Hampshire Burial Index for the burial of George Judd after 1820, and searching the civil registration death indexes after 1840 for the death of Ann Judd in the South Stoneham registration district. Before doing this, recently received correspondence was analyzed. Correspondence with the Hampshire Marriage Index located several marriages of a Thomas Smith to an Elizabeth during the years 1765-1785 [document #1]. The seven Thomas Smith marriages were plotted on a map of Hampshire parishes [document #2]. Two marriages, Thomas to Elizabeth Simmons in 1771 at Hamble, and Thomas to Elizabeth Judas in 1778 at Southampton St. Michael were most intriguing, as both are within six miles of South Stoneham. Attempting to prove which, if either, of these marriages was ancestral became the focus of this research project. To begin, a copy of each of the marriages was sought. The marriage of Thomas to Elizabeth Simmons was obtained by correspondence. It indicated both were of this parish, and were married by banns [document #3]. The witnesses were William Bearce and John Faithfull. The Southampton St. Michael Parish Registers were turned to next for the marriage of Thomas Smith to Elizabeth Judas [document #4]. They married by license, and the witnesses were Ann Judas, Rose Smith and Daniel Judas. The Hampshire Burial Index was examined next for the burials of George and Ann Judd and for Thomas and Elizabeth Smith. The index is supposed to be complete up to 1837 except for the Isle of Wight. A review of the George Judd burials revealed none in South Stoneham [document #5]. Two were at Broughton, where George Judd supposedly died in 1832. However, one was four years old, and the other was 68, putting his birth year about 1745, which is much too young. The 50-year-old buried at Portsmouth in 1828 had the most appropriate age. The other possibility is George lived beyond 1837, and would not show up in the index. For Ann (Smith) Judd, no burials were found at South Stoneham either. Two were found at Broughton. One was a child; the other was aged 74 in 1829. This indicates a 1755 birth, which would make her too old to be the mother of the children. Again it is likely the ancestral Ann died after 1837, and her burial is not found in the index. Thomas and Elizabeth Smith were looked at next. All burials between the years 1750 and 1837 for those names were obtained. Starting in 1782, the Thomas Smith burials were analyzed first for any at South Stoneham or Hamble [document #7]. The following burials of interest were found: Date Name Age Parish 27 Nov 1788 Thomas Smith Hamble 1 May 1799 Thomas Smith Hamble 14 Jun 1806 Thomas Smith 34 Hamble 30 Nov 1824 Thomas Smith 84 South Stoneham

The 84 year old in 1824 would have been born about 1740, which would be a bit old, but still possible for the father of Ann Smith. Elizabeth Smith burials were also sought and the following from Hamble or South Stoneham were noted: 1 Nov 1800 Elizabeth Smith South Stoneham 11 Apr 1807 Elizabeth Smith South Stoneham 14 Jun 1839 Elizabeth Smith 72 Hamble

The 72 year old Elizabeth would have been born about 1767, too late for the 1771 marriage at Hamble. This means the two best burials were found at South Stoneham. Those in Southhampton were not analyzed at this point, as researching the Smith family will be extremely time-consuming. Instead, wills were sought because of their ability to most readily create a relationship between Ann Smith Judd and Thomas and Elizabeth Smith. The main courts with jurisdiction in Hampshire at the time were the Archdeaconry Court of Winchester, the Consistory Court of Winchester, and peculiar courts for parishes not covered by the former. Separate indexes exist for all three, and each was searched for Judds at South Stoneham and Broughton and for Smiths at South Stoneham and Bramble.
The Archdeacon's court was searched first because it had jurisdiction over Hamble. Two Smith wills were found at Hamble, including one for the Thomas who was buried in 1788 [document #9]. The Consistory Court of Winchester was searched next and two Smith wills at South Stoneham were uncovered, neither for a Thomas [document #10]. Lastly, the index to wills in the peculiar courts contained five wills for Smiths at South Stoneham, including one where West End was specifically given as the residence [document #11]. This was the residence of the Judds within the parish. The will of this John Smith in 1811 was read first. In it he named his brother Levi as executor, and left everything to him [document #12]. A review of the Smiths extracted from the South Stoneham Parish Registers readily identified John and Levi as sons of James and Mary Smith [document #12b]. John was baptized in 1788 and was only about 23 years old at the time of his death. No mention of Ann, Thomas, or Elizabeth was made. The will of Thomas Smith of Hamble in 1788 was read next. He named several people but only one specific relationship was given [document #13]. His cousin was John Woodridge of Gosport, and he also mentioned a George Woodridge. Henry Bedbrook was a witness and a John Beadbrook was also mentioned. It would seem they were cousins, but the relationship is unclear without additional research. The will of Henry Smith of South Stoneham was then examined. Henry named his wife Elizabeth, nine children, and a grandson [document #14]. His oldest son was Thomas Smith of Moorgreen, yeoman. It is possible this Thomas is ancestral, because he has a grandson Thomas Smith who was not yet 24. Assuming the grandson to be at least 21, he would have been born about 1787. This could make him a brother to the ancestral Ann. No other information was provided to help us immediately make a connection. To this point, no connection had been made between either Thomas Smith to Elizabeth marriage, and the ancestral couple at South Stoneham. Therefore, the other names associated with both marriages were pursued. For the Hamble marriage these were Elizabeth Simmons, William Bearce and John Faithfull. For the Southampton St. Michael marriage they were Elizabeth Judas, Ann Judas, Rose Smith and Daniel Judas.
The International Genealogical Index was examined for christenings for Elizabeth Simmons at Hampshire from 1730 to 1765. Seven christenings were found, though none were at Hamble or South Stoneham [document #15]. The closest was about three miles away across the Southampton Water (or channel leading into Southampton). William Bearce christenings were also sought in the International Genealogical Index. Anything from 1700 on, in Hampshire was of interest. The Bearce spelling of the name was not found in Hampshire. The International Genealogical Index variant which was located was Burr or Bear. These were not pursued. John Faithfull christenings from 1700 and marriages from 1725 were reviewed next. Again, none were at South Stoneham or Hamble [document #16]. John, the son of a Lamuel [sic] Faithfull, was baptized at Botley, which borders South Stoneham, but it was in 1760, which would make him too young to be a witness. The marriages were likewise inconclusive. Only the marriage of John in 1725 at Fareham was within ten miles. The Hampshire Burial Index was examined for the same names. A search for William Bearse, including possible variant spellings, resulted in an extensive list [document #17]. Those prior to 1771 could be eliminated. Further review found the following to be of some interest: Bears, Willliam 12 Feb 1802 Gosport Bowars, William 9 Jul 1812 Titchfield Bruce, William 4 Feb 1800 Gosport Burris, William 28 Nov 1788 Gosport

Still, none were at Hamble or South Stoneham, nor was the surname Bearce so it was impossible to draw any conclusions. The same search was conducted for John Faithfull. A number of entries were located, although only a few were of interest [document #18]: Faithful, John 30 May 1777 Bursledon Faithful, John 31 Oct 1812 Titchfield

Both of these are within five miles of Hamble and South Stoneham. Again, without either being at Hamble or South Stoneham, it was difficult to determine a relationship. Faithfull burials at South Stoneham were sought, and three were listed, though all were before the marriage [document #19]. Turning to the Southampton marriage, three of the names on the marriage were Judas. Curiously, in searching the International Genealogical Index for Judas, the surname Judd appeared. The specific spelling of Judas was not found in any of the records. The search for Elizabeth Judas christenings, from 1730 forward, only found an Elizabeth Judd christening in 1748, an excellent time period for the 1778 marriage of Elizabeth Judas [document #20]. The Judd name is also obviously in the family later, perhaps suggesting a distant cousin relationship. Likewise, Ann Judas entries were sought from 1700 on. None were found in the time period of a sister, and as Ann Judas or Judd could have been the married name, this was less reliable [document #21]. Rose Smith and Daniel Judas were also sought without success. Again, the Hampshire Burial Index was examined. As the female witnesses may or may not have been married, it was difficult to justify spending time to locate them. However, the name Rose Smith successfully listed several burials [document #22]. Unfortunately, none of them were within ten miles of South Stoneham. All Judd and Smith burials in the parish of South Stoneham were extracted [document #23-24]. It was hoped the ancestral marriage of Thomas and Elizabeth Smith could be identified. Both the Simmons and Judas/Judd surnames were analyzed for a relationship to South Stoneham. A relationship is needed to show one or the other is ancestral. Also, the witnesses were analyzed for a relationship, but none was obvious. If the surname Judd and Judas are synonymous, the best clue is that an Elizabeth Judd was baptized at South Stoneham parish in 1748, which is about when the ancestral Elizabeth, wife of Thomas Smith would have been born. Future research needs to establish the possible connection between the two names. The Hampshire Marriage Index should also be searched for Judd/Judas and Simmons marriages between 1765 and 1790, for potential siblings to both Elizabeths. Search should then move on to original parish registers, and to wills beyond the parishes of South Stoneham, Hamble and Broughton. We hope you are pleased with the progress of this research project. Solving the problem will take time due mostly to the surname of Smith but success is likely. We look forward to continuing research according to your instructions. _2005 Price & Associates Incorporated DSP/mh

ALLEN (SMITH) RESEARCH REPORT

[smith063005 / 0346] 15 July 2005

The objective of this research period was to extend the pedigree of Ann Smith to her four grandparents. Ann Smith's christening took place at South Stoneham in 1782, daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth Smith. Previous research focused on attempting to determine if one of two marriages of Thomas Smith to Elizabeth is ancestral. Research to this point was inconclusive. To help identify Smiths to whom Thomas might be related, the Hampshire Marriage Index was searched by correspondence. A request for all Smith marriages from 1770 to 1782 resulted in a list of 302 male entries alone during that time [document #1]. Female marriages were not obtained. Obtaining copies of all Smith female marriage would be ideal, but impractical. At the same time, Judd, Judas, and Simmons marriages were also sought in the index for the years 1765 to 1790 [document 2]. Further analysis on these marriages was not conducted at this point. The list was reviewed for all Thomas Smith to Elizabeth marriages. Five marriages were identified: Year Groom Bride Place 1771 Thomas Smith to Elizabeth Simmons Hamble 1772 Thomas Smith to Elizabeth White Portchester 1772 Thomas Smith to Elizabeth Orpin Portsea St. Mary 1778 Thomas Smith to Elizabeth Judas Southampton St. Michael 1779 Thomas Smith to Elizabeth Mortemore Portsea St. Mary

All Smith marriages in South Stoneham during this time period were also extracted as follows: 1776 George Smith to Eleanor Cleverly South Stoneham 1777 John Smith to Ann Lipscombe South Stoneham 1781 James Smith to Mary Harvey South Stoneham 1782 Andrew Smith to Patty Snugs South Stoneham

It was curious that none of the Smith male's names, including Thomas, were the same, creating the possibility they might be brothers.

As for the direction to take from here, there were two puzzling questions yet to be answered. First, what happened to Ann Smith Judd - when and where did she die? She was living with a son in the 1841 census. Did she die in 1857 as family records stated? If so, could she be found in the 1851 census, confirming where she was born, and providing us with her age? Second, if she was the daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth, it is very unlikely that they had just one child. If so, where are the christenings?
As for the marriage information above, the marriages to Elizabeth Simmons and Elizabeth Judas had been researched in some detail. The remaining three marriages were all 10 to 14 miles east of South Stoneham. The original records of each need to be reviewed in any case, because a residence could be listed in the record. Clearly, a mention of South Stoneham would be important. After reviewing previous research, it was determined the South Stoneham parish marriage registers had not been searched; therefore, each of the Smith marriages also needed to found in the original register for clues. Because the entire 1851 census for the county of Hampshire has been indexed, parish by parish, it was decided the value of information gained by finding Ann Smith was worth the search. Most volumes were searched in their entirety. A map of Hampshire parishes was used to note the parishes searched. The entire southern two-thirds of Hampshire, including the Isle of Wight, was searched without finding an Ann Judd who was the appropriate age. The oldest was an Ann in South Stoneham, age 57, born in Stiffkey, Norfolk, who has already been identified as the wife of Edward. The marriages above were reviewed next. First, the original entries for all Thomas Smith to Elizabeth marriages from 1770 to 1782 were checked [document 4]. Unfortunately, none of the marriages refer to South Stoneham. The closest two marriages are the two which were analyzed during a previous research project: Thomas to Elizabeth Judas in Southampton, and Thomas to Elizabeth Simmons in Hamble le Rice. A map of southern Hampshire shows the proximity of each of these to South Stoneham [document 5]. Based on distance alone, the Southampton marriage is the best. The possible Judas/Judd name connection also makes this intriguing.
The International Genealogical Index (IGI) was checked for children of Thomas and Elizabeth Smith, born in Hampshire between the years 1760 and 1800. A printout of this list revealed 33 christenings [document 6]. Five could be attributed to Ann Smith of South Stoneham, although two of these recorded Ann's birthplace as Hamble, with the same date as the South Stoneham entry. In other words, previous researchers had attempted to put the two together. During the previous research period, Hamble parish register transcripts were searched without finding any children of Thomas Smith and Elizabeth Simmons. Clearly, the Hamble entries in the IGI were an error. A review of the remaining entries attempted to assign the children to the couples as follows:

Thomas Smith and Elizabeth Simmons Hamble 1771
- no children

Thomas Smith Elizabeth White Porchester 1772 1) Thomas Smith chr. 24 Jan 1773 Porchester 2) Elizabeth Smith chr. 9 Oct 1774 Porchester 3) Sarah Smith chr. 26 Jan 1777 Porchester

Thomas Smith Elizabeth Orpin Portsea St. Mary 1772 - no identifiable children

Thomas Smith Elizabeth Judas Southampton St. Michael 1778 1) William Smith chr. 10 Nov 1783 Southampton St. Thomas

Thomas Smith Elizabeth Mortemore Portsea St. Mary 1779 - no identifiable children

Portsea had many transient residents, partly because it is a port, which may explain why no children were found to these couples. Otherwise, Ann could fit into any of the families. No children are found to the Hamble le Rice couple; it would be strange for them to not have any children until Ann in 1782. She could have been born before William, son of Thomas Smith and Elizabeth Judas, but if so, the family returned to Southampton for the christening of the next child, leaving one to wonder why they went back and forth. She could also fit on the end of the Porchester family. Using the Hampshire Burial Index, a list of Smith burials in South Stoneham was compiled [document 7]. The burial for the ancestralThomas seems to be the one in 1824 at the age of 84. This puts his birth year at 1740, meaning he would be 42 at the time of Ann's christening. Two possible burials were found for Elizabeth, in 1800 and 1807. These burials were reviewed. Neither Elizabeth Smith burial contained additional information. The Thomas Smith burial added his residence was Westend, the residence of the Judds. Still, no connection could be made to any of the marriages, making it virtually impossible to extend Elizabeth's line. However, a review of Thomas Smith christenings in Hampshire was completed. A search of the IGI for a twenty-nine-year time period from 1735 to 1755 resulted in a list of 126 entries [document 8]. Of these, a few referred directly to a Thomas Smith, christened in 1740 at South Stoneham, son of Abraham Smith.
Continuing in the IGI, children of Abraham Smith, born/christened in Hampshire were sought. Three children in South Stoneham were listed, Abraham, Thomas and Francis [document 9]. A review of the parish registers referred to each of the three children exactly as recorded in the IGI. Thomas christening was copied [document 10]. Abraham is an unusual name for that time period. It was noted during the previous research period that John Smith's 1811 will left everything to his brother Levi. They were both from Westend. Levi and Abraham are unusual biblical names, indicating a possible connection. Use of biblical names may also indicate non-conformity (not Church of England). Abraham Smith marriages were sought, and about 10 were found in Hampshire. None of these were immediately identified as ancestral. Next, a review of records available for South Stoneham parish was conducted. The Family History Library Catalog shows parish records, other than parish registers, are available which might add to our understanding of the Smith family there. Records range from cemetery to taxation [document 11]. Of these, the church records were reviewed. Other than the parish registers, there was an excellent collection of poor rate books ranging from 1677 to 1875 and settlement examinations from 1778 to 1782 [document 12]. Poor rates are essentially a tax on the parish to pay for support of the poor. They list the annual contributions made by those who were able to contribute. These records were searched from 1783 to 1819 [document 13]. They were organized by tything or tithing, an area within the parish. Thomas Smith did not appear until 1788, when he was listed in Bittern tithing. In 1814, he was in Allington tithing, and remained there through 1819. During the five-year-period, he was consistently listed with a John Smith. Most of the other Smiths were in Shamblehurst tithing. An attempt to locate a tithe map at the Family History Library or on-line was unsuccessful. Knowing where Allington and Shamblehurst tithings were, in relation to the rest of the parish would be helpful. Lastly, the settlement examinations for South Stoneham from 1778 to 1782 were searched. Settlement examinations were documents which allowed people to move into another parish. They provide the names of the settlers, including children in the family, with ages and the parish of origin. The records do not survive on a consistent basis. This included about 20 documents in all for the above time period but no Smiths were found. A great portion of this project was spent looking for Ann (Smith) Judd in the 1851 census. She was not found, and it is very possible she died before 1851, and that the year reported in family records is wrong. She also could have left the mid- and southern Hampshire area, and gone elsewhere. It is likely the 1851 census will be imaged, indexed, and available on-line, as the later censuses are now. In any case, we still believe the christening of Ann in 1782 at South Stoneham is ancestral.
Also, it is likely the christening of Thomas, son of Abraham Smith is ancestral. Determining the correct marriage of Thomas Smith to Elizabeth is a difficult problem. The difficulty arises mostly because of the commonness of the surname. Additional research in South Stoneham parish registers to uncover every Smith entry from 1730 to 1813 is necessary. This should include christenings, marriages, burials, witnesses to marriages, additional poor rate records, and monumental inscriptions. A will for Abraham should be sought in Hampshire probate records. It may also be wise to search non-conformist registers, including those of the Society of Friends (Quaker) records, because of the apparent lack of children to Thomas and Elizabeth other than Ann, and the use of names such as Abraham and Levi. Another research project or two should allow these searches to be completed. We hope you are pleased with the progress of this research period and look forward to continuing according to your direction.

DSP/dr

ROBERT ALLEN RESEARCH REPORT

[juddsmith102505/0346] 29 November 2005

The objective of this research project was to extend the pedigree of Robert Allen to the eighth generation by locating the marriages of William Judd to Elizabeth, and Richard Carey/Garey to Elizabeth at the eighth generation, and Thomas Smith and Elizabeth at the seventh generation, and extending the pedigree of Thomas Smith and his wife another generation. Since the previous research project, we have received reports from England. The Hampshire Marriage Index was searched for all Judd and Simmons marriages from 1765 to 1790 [document #1]. The objective of the search was to locate the marriages of siblings of Thomas Judd, and gain clues about Thomas Smith and Elizabeth Simmons who married at Hamble in 1771, and are perhaps the best fit as parents of Ann Smith of South Stoneham. Of Thomas three known siblings, only the marriage of Edward in 1783 at South Stoneham fits reasonably well. Edward would have been 37 at the time. There were some marriages for Elizabeth Judd and one for a Jane (Jenny). Because of the number of Elizabeth Judd marriages, it was not obvious which was ancestral, and since this is a collateral line, it was not pursued at this time. The one marriage for Jane was too far away to be seriously considered.
Regarding the Simmons marriages, it was expected a connection with South Stoneham could be established, because the marriage was at Hamble, about six miles from South Stoneham. No other Simmons marriages took place at Hamble, which indicates the Simmons family was probably not native to that parish. Most Simmons marriages took place at Alverstoke, about ten miles southeast of Hamble, near Gosport. None of the marriages took place at South Stoneham or the parishes around it. There is no evidence to support the marriage as ancestral other than proximity, and even that relationship is not very strong. Considering the proximity of Southampton just a few miles south, it seems more likely a couple from South Stoneham would have gone there to marry. A second search in the Hampshire Marriage Index was also received. Previous research determined the surname Garey was synonymous with Carey. The christening of Sarah Garey was found at Wonston in 1749, the daughter of Richard and Elizabeth Garey. The marriage index was searched from 1730 to 1780 for all Garey entries, and from 1700 to 1730 for all Carey entries [document #2]. Including the search for Carey entries from 1730 to 1790 during the previous research project [document #2a], the time period 1730 to 1780 was effectively covered for both variant spellings and for bride and groom. No additional Carey or Garey marriages were found to have taken place at Wonston based on the new report. There were two marriages for a Richard; one in 1722 and another in 1776. The previous report uncovered one in 1750. The ancestral Richard and Elizabeth should have married from about 1740 to 1744 meaning none of these fit well. The Richard Garey marriage in 1776 may be for Sarah's brother. It took place at Stockbridge, six miles southwest of Wonston. The marriage of Richard to Elizabeth was not found. It should be noted the Hampshire Marriage Index is believed to be excellent, although it has been shown in other research to be incomplete. The last item was a search in the Chilcomb parish registers. All Judd and Cooper christenings, marriages and burials were sought from 1700 to 1780. Curiously, only four entries were found [document #3]. Fortunately, the marriage of William Judd to Elizabeth Cooper provided the necessary information to prove it was ancestral. The record indicated William Judd of Owslebury married Elizabeth Cooper of South Stoneham by license. Because William and Elizabeth Judd's four known children were all christened at South Stoneham starting in 1746, the marriage entry provided a direct tie to South Stoneham parish. Considering there is a five year gap between the marriage and the first known child, perhaps the Owslebury parish registers should be searched to see if any children were christened there. In any case, this completed the Judd pedigree to the eighth generation. The marriage license was not sought at this time. The remaining time was spent on the Carey and Smith portions of the pedigree. The map of Hampshire shows the locations of interest for the three families [document #4]. Generally speaking, the locations run on a north-south axis with Wonston the furthest north, north of Winchester and South Stoneham on the south end, just north of Southampton. Chilcomb is just to the east of Winchester, and Owslebury just a few miles south of there. The International Genealogical Index (IGI) was searched next for all Carey/Garey marriages at Hampshire from 1720 to 1750. Only extracted entries were considered, resulting in a list of ten [document #5]. Six of these took place in southeast Hampshire in the heavily populated (and transient) Portsea and Portsmouth area. One took place at Winchester, the nearest city to Wonston. The others were scattered, and were plotted on the map of Hampshire. A similar search was conducted in the Vital Records Index - British Isles database. Four additional records were identified in the 1720 to 1750 time period, which were also plotted [document #6]. None of these entries was for the ancestral Richard Carey/Garey. Also, none were at Wonston, though a few were at Stockbridge, about seven miles west.
Preparations for an area search were made by using the Parish Locator program to identify all parishes within eight miles of Wonston [document #7]. The list of 63 was then sorted, based on distance from Wonston. The initial focus would be on the parishes within five miles, which includes seventeen parishes. Records for three of these were not available.
The search began in Wonston parish. A published record of the marriages was available. Beginning in 1735, the marriages were reviewed, and the desired marriage found in 1739 [document #8]. It was recorded as: Richard Geary & Elizabeth Hall, lic. 29 Sept. 1739 A copy of the original entry was sought in the Wonston parish registers. The surname Geary was a bit difficult to read, as there was significant ink bleed through from the other side of the page [document #9]. It was clear enough in any case, and indicated they married by license. Based on the location of the marriage (Wonston), the timing (1739, with the first child born in 1741), and the relatively unusual name of Richard Garey (Geary), the marriage was accepted as ancestral. A copy of the marriage license was not sought because the stated objective had been achieved. The christenings, marriages and burials of Garey/Geary/Carey's were double-checked in the register from 1739-1744 with nothing additional being found. Having accomplished two of the three stated objectives, attention was turned to the pedigree of Ann Smith. Previous research recommended a complete search of the South Stoneham parish registers for all Smith christenings, marriages and burials from 1730 to 1813. Portions of this time period had been examined but no comprehensive search completed. A search of christenings turned up sixty one Smith entries between 1730-1790. Based on the volume of entries and the time-consuming nature of the search, it was halted at that point [document #10]. Christenings of note include the children of Abraham Smith: 28 Oct 1738 Abraham Smith 3 Aug 1740 Thomas Smith 30 Nov 1745 Francis Philip Smith

It was somewhat unusual to have only three children at that time. Most important was the christening of Thomas in 1740. There was another Thomas Smith christened in 1756, son of Henry & Elizabeth. Their family included: 7 May 1754 Anna Smith 20 Apr 1756 Thomas Smith 16 Apr 1760 Mary Smith 26 May 1762 Tabee [Phoebe?] Smith 27 Feb 1764 Charity Smith 12 May 1766 Lucy Smith 17 Sep 1767 Fanny Smith 21 Apr 1769 Judah [Judith] Smith (daughter) 31 Dec 1770 Henry Smith* 4 Jan 1773 Stephen Smith* 7 Oct 1774 John Smith* 4 Sep 1777 Charity Smith* * The name of the mother is not given for these christenings

The ancestral Ann Smith is shown with her christening in 1782, daughter of Thomas and Elizabeth. Attempts to find the ancestral marriage of Thomas and Elizabeth have as yet been unsuccessful so far. Previous research tried to prove the marriage of Thomas to Elizabeth Simmons at Hamble was ancestral. The location is reasonable, but the chronology does not fit. It took place in 1771, and Thomas and Elizabeth's activities in the interim, including children, are unknown. If the 1771 marriage is ancestral, the most logical christening for Thomas is the earlier (1740) one. If not, the second entry (1756) is actually at a better point in time, as Thomas would have been 26 at the time of Ann's birth. While conducting this search, two Judd christenings where found which did not appear on the family group record of William and Elizabeth (Cooper) Judd. These records were added to the family group record [document #12]. It was anticipated the marriage search would shed some additional light on the problem. The search also covered 1730 through 1790. Any marriage where a Smith was married, or was a witness, was extracted. The latter could help establish relationships between Smiths which may not be otherwise apparent. Thirty-five marriages in all were extracted, including eighteen where a Smith was either bride or groom [document #10]. The marriages of Abraham Smith and Henry Smith were not found. Abraham Smith appears as a witness on a few of the marriages, as does Henry Smith later.
The first marriage of interest is that of Thomas Smith, a minor of Bishops Stoke in 1760, to a Sarah White of South Stoneham by license. There seemed to be an outside chance this was the Thomas Smith christened in 1740, but the Smith name is so common that additional research would be needed to prove this. Thomas appeared to be a witness on the three marriages following his own. As expected, there was not a marriage of a Thomas Smith to an Elizabeth anytime before the christening Ann Smith in 1782. A few of the marriages seemed clearly applicable to the children of Henry and Elizabeth listed above. Before conducting further analysis, the burials were extracted, so a more complete picture of the Smith family in South Stoneham would be available. All burials from 1730 to 1790 were extracted, twenty-one in all. Of these, the burial of Abraham Smith in 1788 was the most noteworthy [document #11]. It should also be noted two Thomas Smith burials occured after 1740; one in 1742 and another in 1767. It seems either could apply to the Thomas Smith christened in 1740. The register was inconsistent in providing the name of a parent in the case of a child being buried. Recognizing there were likely more clues to be found amongst the Smith christening, marriage and burial entries, it was decided to press on to probate records for Hampshire. Solving the Smith pedigree problem will take significant evidence gathering. There were essentially four courts with probate jurisdiction over South Stoneham. South Stonham was a peculiar court, meaning the rector actually had the ability to prove wills for those in his parish. For probate matters including South Stoneham, but also perhaps matters outside that parish, the court with first jurisdiction was the Archdeaconry Court of Winchester. Above this court was the Court of the Bishop (or Consistory Court) of Winchester. Any will outside these three could only have been proved by the Archbishop's Court (Prerogative Court) of Canterbury. Card indexes exist for the first three courts, and were searched for the Smith surname, beginning with the Index to Hampshire Peculiar Court Wills. The time periods were mixed depending on the peculiar court, so all cards were copied [document #13]. Smith wills at South Stoneham were noted in 1682, 1684, 1709, 1771, and 1811. The latter of these was for John Smith of Westend, the known residence of Ann Smith, and had been read previously. The index cards for Smith wills proved in the Archdeacon's Court were similarly copied [document #14]. None of these was for individuals from South Stoneham, although a will for a Thomas Smith of Hamblerice in 1788 was noted. Several others were for parishes in the vicinity of South Stoneham. In a similar fashion, the index cards for Smith wills proved in the Consistory Court of Winchester were copied [document #15]. None appeared to be of immediate interest. Also, no mention of a will for Abraham Smith was found. Before reading any wills, there was one last set of records available for the parish of South Stoneham which could shed light on the Smiths. Poor rate books, beginning in the 1600s and going well into the 1800s, were available. A poor rate was a tax assessed to those who could afford to pay to help support the poor. In the case of South Stoneham, the records were organized by tithing, a rural land division anciently referring to a group of ten land holders.
Six tithings were enumerated for South Stoneham, and Smiths were noted in each of the years searched, from 1730 to 1783 [document #16]. In fact, in 1730, three Thomas Smiths were recorded. Two of the burials found in the parish registers and noted above in the report, could be for two of these three Thomases. Curiously, Abraham failed to appear in any of the assessments. Likewise Henry Smith failed to show in the 1760 and 1783 assessments even though, based on the marriage records, he was mentioned several times. Staying true to the Smith research objectives from the previous research, a quick check for Quaker records and Smiths was undertaken. Quaker Meeting Houses of Britain was consulted for a report of the Quaker meetings at Hampshire. The closest one to South Stoneham was at Winchester [document #17]. Surprisingly, there was not one at Southampton. In any case, records of the Dorsetshire and Hampshire Quarterly Meeting were sought. The Quarterly Meeting records typically combined those of several monthly meetings. A search for Smith births, marriages and burials from 1730 to 1800 found in the monthly meetings of Winchester, Swanmore, Portchester and Fordingbridge proved inconclusive, because the records were mixed up and incomplete. If this angle is to be pursued in the future, the digest records of the Dorset and Hampshire Quarterly Meeting will need to be searched. These are a copy of the various originals but usually better organized. Two of the three objectives were successfully accomplished. The marriage of William Judd to Elizabeth Cooper was identified as ancestral, completing research on the Judd line to the eighth generation, and the marriage of Richard Garey (Geary) was identified, adding the Hall surname to the pedigree and completing the Garey line to the eighth generation. Continued progress was made on the Smith pedigree by completing an extensive search of the South Stoneham parish registers, poor rate books and relevant will indices. Future research should continue on the Smith pedigree by reading all relevant Smith wills. The will of Thomas Smith of Hamble in 1788 should be read first, followed by that of Richard Smith of South Stoneham. The marriage license of Thomas Smith of Bishops Stoke in 1760 should also be examined. It would also be wise to search the surrounding parishes for Smith christenings from 1770 to 1790. It is highly improbable Ann Smith had no siblings and the real solution to the problem lies in finding a Thomas and Elizabeth Smith family into which Ann Smith fits. We hope you are pleased with the progress of this research period and look forward to continuing according to your direction. 82005 Price & Associates, Incorporated DSP/dr