Find Ancestors

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Electoral Rolls

Looking for living relatives?

Search our UK Electoral Rolls (2002-2013) and find your living relatives today.

Search Electoral Rolls

New electoral roll records

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Parents of Charles Fooks and Charlotte Fooks

Page 0 + 1 of 3

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. »
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Michael

Michael Report 3 Mar 2013 20:54

Many thanks again for all your help guys, I will go over all of this with a 'fine tooth comb' . I have learned a lot from you. Not only the obvious information, but also ideas as to where I might find further information myself. I only have access to Ancestry via the local library - which is 10 nmiles away - and luse genesreunited at home. So my research is 'intermitant' at best. Many thanks.

Michael

Michael Report 3 Mar 2013 20:45

Hi Dea
"I have no idea where Michael got 'Elaine' from though as she does not appear !!! " Elaine appears in the 1841 census listing Joseph and Hannah Stone and family - but she doesn't appear in the 1851 census - so far - so she may have left before 1851 or married.
She could be working elsewhere.

MarieCeleste

MarieCeleste Report 3 Mar 2013 10:53

Thanks Mary - me specs must need cleaning!

Mary

Mary Report 2 Mar 2013 21:41

On Ancestry MC

Maryb

MarieCeleste

MarieCeleste Report 2 Mar 2013 18:13

That looks a much better fit Mary - where did you find it?

There are a lot of trees on Ancestry have opted for that 1810 baptism (or have copied it from each other)

Mary

Mary Report 2 Mar 2013 17:50

This one??
Charlotte Fooks bap 27/12/1812 at Symondsbury Dorset by Robert and Charlotte Fooks.
Ann Fooks bap 9/9/1808 Symondsbury
Charles 23/1/1814 crideock
Elizabeth Stone fooks 27/7/1816 Crideock
Robert stone fooks 1/6/1823 Chideock Dorset.

Maryb.

MarieCeleste

MarieCeleste Report 2 Mar 2013 16:45

The 1810 baptism in Whitchurch Canonicorum that's been attributed to Charlotte may be incorrect. She married in 1833:

Dorset, England, Marriages and Banns, 1813-1921
Name: Charlotte Fooks
Marriage or Bann Date: 12 Feb 1833
Parish: Burton Bradstock
Spouse's Name: Peter Hallett

The witnesses were Thomas Fooks and Mary Hallett.

On the original register it states they were married "with consent of parents" (that part hasn't been filled in on other marriages). Now, if she was born 1810 then she would be 23 and I would guess wouldn't need parental consent?

Also, her birthplace on census is Symondsbury, I know the two parishes are only 5 miles apart but I'm not sure now about that baptism.

Mary

Mary Report 2 Mar 2013 14:49

???
Robert Fooks married Charlotte Stone in Burton Bradstock 16/2/1808.Witnessed by John Fooks and Ann Stone.(Ann Stone baptised 1791 (Charlottes sister maybe married Thomas Bunn)

Thomas Stone Fooks born 1811 parents were Robert and Charlotte.
Thomas was brother to Charles and Charlotte.

Robert Hallett born 1835 son of Charlotte and Peter was at the home of Thomas Stone Fooks 1861 or 1851 census

Thomas Stone Fooks married 23/3/1842 to Frances Neale,he them married Jane Keech in 1848.

Charlotte Stone baptised Burton Bradstock by Thomas and Ann Stone

Daniel Joseph Stone born 10/8/1830 to Joseph and Hannah Stone.
Joseph Stone baptised 12/9/1784 in Burton Bradstock by Thomas and Ann Stone

Thomas Stone married Ann Gundry 30/12/1781 in Burton Bradstock.

Maryb.

Dea

Dea Report 2 Mar 2013 13:12

Yes Reggie - It was 'supposed' to be for the over 15's but not all the enumerators seem to have understood that because I very often find that they have done the same to the children ;-)

However, having looked at the image, I note that he hasn't rounded down the ages of the other children so the 10 years on these children is probably correct and Daniel and Mary may well be twins? - I have no idea where Michael got 'Elaine' from though as she does not appear !!! :-S

Dea x

Michael

Michael Report 2 Mar 2013 13:07

Thank you to all those who have helped with this thread. I have to leave the computer at this time. If there are further comments I will answer them if I can when I next log in.

Michael

Michael Report 2 Mar 2013 13:01

Dea - now that I did not know. I presume that practice ended after 1841? I was surprised to find tham all listed as the same age I must admit. Thank you.

Reggie

Reggie Report 2 Mar 2013 12:59

The rounding-down in 1841 was supposed to be for the over-15's

Dea

Dea Report 2 Mar 2013 12:57

Michael - ages on 1841 census were usually rounded down to the nearest 5 years so the 3 children marked as aged 10 could each be of different ages i.e. 10 or over but not yet 15 !

Dea x

Michael

Michael Report 2 Mar 2013 12:56

Reggie - I am not a fast typist - I apologise for that. I am grateful for your help. As I said , I will go over all of it from the printout later and do some careful analysis of what has been gevin to me.,

Michael

Michael Report 2 Mar 2013 12:54

Thanks Marie Celeste - that last bit about the name Wightman could be very useful. I had thought that there was a link there because of themiddle name.

Reggie

Reggie Report 2 Mar 2013 12:50

The marriage was posted at 12:11

Michael

Michael Report 2 Mar 2013 12:48

Reggie - many thanks - I am sorry if I am unablbe to keep up with the pace of information which is coming my way. I will have to go over all of this later and analyse it . I am very grateful for all your help.

Michael

Michael Report 2 Mar 2013 12:46

I think that three of the stone children were probably triplets. They are all listed as 10 yrs in the 1841 census, and that includes Daniel Joseph Stone, Elaine and Mary his sisters.

Reggie

Reggie Report 2 Mar 2013 12:41

Are you not going to comment on the info about the Stone/Fooks marriage........and all the Stone baptisms?

Michael

Michael Report 2 Mar 2013 12:39

Soory yes - my fault. Charlotte and Peter.