Sources of information:
1. Chilcombe, Hampshire Parish Registers, Christenings, Marriages and Burials 1700-1780, correspondence.
Notes:
ALLEN (CAREY)
RESEARCH REPORT
[JuddCarey063005]
18 Jul 2005
The objective of this research period was to identify the parents of Sarah Carey of South Stoneham, Hampshire, and locate the marriage of William Judd to his wife Elizabeth, also of South Stoneham.
Since the end of the previous research period, correspondence had been received in response to requests for searches in the Hampshire Marriage Index andin the Owslebury, Hampshire parish registers.
The Hampshire Marriage Index was searched for all Reading/Ridding marriage entries from 1740 to 1825, and for all Dash, Judd, and Carey entries from 1730 to 1790. First all Reading marriages recorded in Owslebury were sought [document #1]. There was only one for Mary, sister to the ancestor Robert Dash.
Next, the marriages for other children of John and Martha (Annel) Reading were sought in conjunction with the Owslebury, Hampshire parish registers (by correspondence) [document #2]. Upon reviewing this correspondence, four children were added to the family of John and Martha Reading. A search of their marriages noted several possibilities for John, Ann, and Elizabeth (Betty) Reading, and the definitive marriages for Judah (Judith) and Mary.
Marriages for siblings at the next generation were also sought in the Hampshire Marriage Index. Using a similar strategy as above, marriages for William, Ann, and Lucy, children of Robert and, siblings of the ancestral James Reading were indentified. Each of these marriages needed to be reviewed to see if James was a witness. Although we are fairly convinced James belongs to this family, his christening has not yet been found, and any additional connection with them would help support the link. A search of the Otterbourne and Bishopstoke parish registers provided us with the marriage dates, but otherwise did not mention family members [document #3].
Continued review of the marriage index, next for the Dash surname, uncovered the marriages for perhaps two siblings of the ancestral Jane Dash. Also, there is an apparent marriage of James Kimber to Ann Dash in 1739, the same year the ancestral James Dash married Ann Kimber. The second James and Ann would be siblings of the first (or the index has a mistake in it). Further research is needed on these Dash names, however, as the Dash family was not part of this research project.
Judd marriages from the index were reviewed next. Of particular interest was the marriage between William Judd and Elizabeth. This couple resided at South Stoneham, and had children there in 1746, 1748, 1754, and 1756. The only marriage of a William Judd to Elizabeth at an appropriate time took place in 1741 at Chilcombe, a parish just five miles north of South Stoneham. Elizabeth=s maiden name was Cooper.
The Chilcombe parish registers needed to be searched for any information they might provide. Unfortunately, the parish registers are not available at the Family History Library, and will need to be searched by correspondence. A request was made to have this done. The Bishop=s Transcripts, an annual copy of the register sent to the diocese, are available only for the years 1780 to 1882. In any case, the marriage is at an excellent time to be ancestral.
Research moved on to the last set of marriages in the correspondence, and the primary focus of this research project, the Carey family. Because the christening of Sarah Carey has not been found, the marriage information was used differently. Considering Sarah was married in 1773 at Wonston, her estimated year of birth is 1750. It is therefore likely her parents married during the 25 years prior to 1755. Using a parish map of Hampshire [document #4], the male Carey marriages were plotted by parish to determine which were closest to Wonston. The marriage of John Cary to Jane Prangnell took place in 1743 at Chilbolton, just three miles west of Wonston. As Thomas Judd, Sarah=s husband, was from South Stoneham, it is also worth noting a Thomas Cary married Jane Bevis in 1736 at Durley, bordering South Stoneham on the east.
A copy of the marriage of Thomas to Sarah was re-examined from the previous research period [document #5]. It was noted Richard Bonner appears as a witness both for this marriage and for a Lucy Carey to James Witts five years later in 1778. The Sarah Judd burials from the Hampshire Burial Index were also re-examined [document #6]. It was hoped Sarah=s age at burial could be determined. None of the burials for Sarah took place at Wonston. In 1805, a Sarah Judd was buried at Wherwell, a parish about five miles west of Wonston, and bordering Chilbolton. A review of the original record provided no additional information, so it may, or may not, be ancestral.
Also found in the last research period was the list of Carey burials from the Hampshire Burial Index [document #7]. There were four burials in recorded in Wonston:
15 May 1750 Carey Mary Wonston
12 Jan 1766 Carey, Richard Wonston
13 Mar 1769 Carey, Mary Wonston
16 Feb 1783 Carey, Elizabeth Wonston
Perhaps the most encouraging of the four is the burial of Richard in 1766. Thomas and Sarah (Carey) Judd named their third son Richard.
Before deciding which direction to take in pursuing the ancestral Sarah=s christening, a few more searches were conducted. Four different will indexes cover all probate courts with jurisdiction over Hampshire parishes. Each of these was searched for the Carey surname for the years 1660 to 1845. Hampshire Peculiar courts, the Archdeacon of Winchester=s court, and the Consistory (or Bishop=s) court of Winchester were searched, and eight wills identified [document #8]. None of the wills were from Wonston or South Stoneham. The closest was for a Thomas Carey at Winchester in 1780. It could be of some interest but was not read at this time.
The last court with any jurisdiction in Hampshire is the Prerogative Court of Canterbury. A similar search was conducted with similar results [document #9]. None of these wills were of immediate interest.
The Witt burials were reviewed in the Hampshire Burial Index for the burial of Lucy Carey, wife of James Witt. Her burial took place in 1809 at Rockbourne [document #10]. She was 79 years old, which calculates to a birth year of 1730. This actually makes her old enough to be Sarah=s mother. Sarah=s youngest known child, Richard, was christened in 1789. Since relatively few women give birth to children after the age of 40, Sarah was likely born no earlier than 1749. Thinking that perhaps this marriage was the second for Lucy, the Carey marriages in the Hampshire Marriage Index were reviewed, but none of the Carey marriages were to a woman named Lucy.
There were, however, two Lucy marriages; one to Edward Dove at Boldre in 1734, and another (for Lecee) to James Moore at Portsmouth in 1759. Neither are close to our areas of interest.
Having gathered the Carey surname in Hampshire from various county-wide sources, it was clear there was not one central location for the family. It was not a common name in the county, but was found in most corners of the county. With this understanding, the search for Sarah Carey=s christening began in earnest.
The International Genealogical Index (IGI) was searched for all Sarah Carey christenings in Hampshire. There were only two found between the years 1730 and 1812. Information was gleaned on the families of each, though the only one with real possibilities was for Sarah, daughter of John Carey and Elizabeth of Longstock, Hampshire [document #11]. She was christened in 1748, which is close to the window we have established for her birth. Returning to the Hampshire Marriage Index, there is one other Sarah Carey marriage of note, in 1781 at Leckworth. Leckworth borders Longstock parish to the east. Though Sarah would have been 33 years of age, this marriage fits very well, and may eliminate the christening as ancestral.
While searching the IGI, the family of John and Jane (Prangnell) Carey of Chilbolton was also sought. Five children were found to the couple, with no daughter Sarah, and no gaps among the children for one.
The British Vital Records Index was also searched for Sarah Carey. None of the entries were deemed relevant [document 13].
The Wonston parish registers were next searched. A search of christenings was begun in 1730. In 1744, a Lucy Gary was baptized [document 14]. This was intriguing because of the marriage for Lucy Carey at Wonston in 1778. Then a christening for Sarah Garey was found in 1749 [document 15], the daughter of Richard Garey and Elizabeth. As has been noted, this was about the earliest year for her christening, which could have been expected, but still within our birth window. Also, the ancestral Sarah Carey named her third son Richard. Perhaps the only question revolved around the Garey/Carey connection. This was answered with the christening of Richard ACarey or Garey@ in 1752 [document 16]. Clearly the two names were used interchangeably by this family. A search for the marriage of Richard Garey or Carey to Elizabeth was unsuccessful.
Not having researched this variant, the IGI was re-examined for Richard Garey/Carey christenings in Hampshire. The marriage of a Richard Carey in Wherwell was noted in 1722. It is too early to be ancestral, but it was only five to six miles away [document 17]. Otherwise, none of them fit. A request has been made to have the Hampshire Marriage Index checked.
Also while searching the IGI, a check for Richard Carey/Garey=s christening was pursued. There were some in Wherwell and Chilbolton, a parish which has been mentioned previously [document 18]. Chilbolton is only about four miles west of Wonston, and Wherwell is about six miles west. This may be where Richard is from, but it would be wise to locate his marriage record to Elizabeth before pursuing the christening.
The last search during this research project was back in the Hampshire Burial Index for Garey and Gary burials. This variation of the name turned out to be slightly less common than Carey, but common enough. The parishes of Longstock, Stockbridge, and Mapledurwell made up a majority of the entries [document #19]. Maplederwell is at least fifteen miles to the east, while the other two are in the neighborhood of Chilbolton and Wherwell. The burials of Richard and Elizabeth were also identified[document #7]. A review of these entries in the original record failed to provide new information.
The Carey line was successfully extended. The Hampshire Marriage Index provided excellent clues for future research, and a search of the Chilcomb parish registers for the surnames of Judd and Cooper has been requested. The Garey variant of the Carey surname has been identified along with a number of people with the name, and should allow for the pedigree to be extended. A search of the Hampshire Marriage Index should identify the maiden name of Elizabeth, and complete Sarah Carey=s pedigree to the eighth generation. The direction of future research will be based largely on the results of correspondence research.
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 B 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 B 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