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

Icons

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

Re James Burns b 1898, d 1901 Fylingdales

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Heather

Heather Report 17 Nov 2018 11:23

Trying to find a burial place for James Burns (aged just 3) son of Hannah and Thomas Burns, Raw, Fylingdales.

He was born 7/1/1898 and died 3/5/1901. His death notice was in the Whitby Gazette. His father Thomas died 1918 and is buried with his first wife in Old St Stephens graveyard. Not sure where James mother Hannah is buried she died in hospital in Scarborough in 1933. Have tried New St Stephens as James parents married there, no luck. These two would have been the local churches with any connections to the family.

Any help appreciated.

Maddie

Maddie Report 17 Nov 2018 11:40

James
Last name Burns
Birth year 1898
Death year 1901
Burial year 1901
Burial date 05 May 1901
Church St Stephen
Denomination Anglican
Place Fylingdales
County Yorkshire, Yorkshire (North Riding)
Country England
Record set National Burial Index For England & Wales
Category Birth, Marriage, Death & Parish Records
Subcategory Parish Burials
Collections from Great Britain, England

Cleveland Family History Society

MargaretM

MargaretM Report 17 Nov 2018 12:04

This family on the 1911 census seems to match. Residence is Raw, Robin Hood's Bay but Hannah says married 31 years, 3 children born, all still living.


Thomas Burns
in the 1911 England Census
Name:
Thomas Burns
Age in 1911:
68
Estimated Birth Year:
abt 1843
Relation to Head:
Head
Gender:
Male
Birth Place:
Northumberland, England
Civil Parish:
Fylingdales
County/Island:
Yorkshire-North Riding
Country:
England
Street address:
Raw Robin Hoods Bay RSO
Marital Status:
Married
Occupation:
Farmer
Household Members:
Thomas Burns 68
Hannah Burns 55
Lucy Burns 30
Matthew Burns 19
William Burns 15
Mary Wedgewood 68

Maddie

Maddie Report 17 Nov 2018 12:08

JAMES
Last name BURNS
Birth year 1898
Birth quarter 1
Registration month -
Mother's maiden name Wedgewood
District Whitby
County Yorkshire
Country England
Volume 9D
Page 485

THOMAS
Last name BURNS
Marriage quarter 2
Marriage year 1882
Registration month -
THOMAS BURNS married one of these people

Hannah Wedgwood, Francis Wrightson, Eliza Atkinson
District Whitby
District number -
County Yorkshire
Country England
Volume 9D
Volume as transcribed 9D
Page number 673

Record set England & Wales Births 1837-2006
Category Birth, Marriage, Death & Parish Records
Subcategory Civil Births
Collections from Great Britain, England

1901
Raw, Robin Hood's Bay, Fylingdales, Whitby, Yorkshire & Yorkshire (North Riding), England
Thomas Burns Head Married Male 57 1844 Farmer Yorkshire, England
Hannah Burns Wife Married Female 46 1855 - Yorkshire, England
George Burns Son Single Male 22 1879 Bricklayer's Labourer Yorkshire, England
Lucy Burns Daughter Single Female 20 1881 - Yorkshire, England
Matthew Burns Son Single Male 9 1892 - Yorkshire, England
Annie Burns Daughter Single Female 7 1894 - Yorkshire, England
William Burns Son Single Male 5 1896 - Yorkshire, England
James Burns Son Single Male 3 1898 - Yorkshire, England

MargaretM

MargaretM Report 17 Nov 2018 12:17

1901 census, same address:

Thomas Burns 57
Hannah Burns 46
George Burns 22
Lucy Burns 20
Mathew Burns 9
Annie Burns 7
William Burns 5
James Burns 3

This one says they were all born Fylingdales.

MargaretM

MargaretM Report 17 Nov 2018 12:38

1891 census. Why did she say in 1911 that she'd only had 3 children?

Thomas Burns 48
Hannah Burns 35
Margaret Burns 12
Susan Burns 10
Lucy Burns 10
Isaac Burns 8
Jacob Burns 8
Alice Burns 6
Robert Burns 4

KathleenBell

KathleenBell Report 17 Nov 2018 12:39

The burial that Maddie found seems to be the right one.

The image of the parish register is on Findmypast and the burial will be at the new St. Stephens which was built between 1868 and 1870. The old church closed in 1870. The vicar was one of the people who helped finance the new church and he is the same vicar who conducted the burial service - Rev. Robert Jermyn Cooper.

Kath. x

MargaretM

MargaretM Report 17 Nov 2018 12:44

So, he's a widower in 1881 and Hannah is his housekeeper.

Thomas Burns 39
Hannah My. Burns 11
John Harland Burns 9
Richard H. Burns 7
Sarah Ann Burns 5
George Burns 2
Margaret J. Burns 2
Hannah Wedgewood 24

KathleenBell

KathleenBell Report 17 Nov 2018 12:48

Perhaps Hannah didn't understand the question being asked on the 1911 census form and just meant that there were only 3 children living at home. ???

Kath. x

Heather

Heather Report 17 Nov 2018 15:34

Yes, I think the question was misunderstood regarding the number of children.

There were 8 children born to Thomas Burns and his first wife Sarah Jane and she died about 3/4 weeks after the last baby was born in Oct 1880. The two youngest children prior to that were 2 year old twins when their mother died, George and Margaret. On the 1881 census the baby (Susan) is living with the neighbours the Wherritt family next door though she is back with the family in 1891 census. The year after the 1881 census he marries Hannah (the housekeeper!) my 1 x gr grandmother and she has another 8 children to him (9 if a stillborn was tobe included), the first being another set of twins, boys. My grandmother Annie was the 4th youngest of this second family. As children she used to tell us about 'little Jim' so sad.

My problem I am afraid is while I have booklets of monumental inscriptions of both Old and New St Stephens churches Fylingdales, there is no record of either James from 1901 or Hannah in 1933. I now know they were both buried in New St Stephens, so does that mean neither have a headstone or were they pauper burials?! Thomas was buried in 1918 along side his first wife and both have headstones.

Sorry this is so long winded!

KathleenBell

KathleenBell Report 17 Nov 2018 15:45

Lots of people had no headstone in those days. There is also the possibility that James was buried with an adult who was being buried at the same time - another thing that happened quite often with young children.

If you could find the sexton's records from the church (often kept at the county records office which I think would be Northallerton) they might have the plot number of where he was buried. There should be a record somewhere

Kath. x

KathleenBell

KathleenBell Report 17 Nov 2018 16:03

I have just looked at the image of the burial record again and in the margin next to some of the burials are the letters NG followed by a number (the numbers are in sequence) although this is NOT next to James's entry. I just wondered if these numbers were plots that had a headstone or if it meant something else.

Would it be possible for you to contact the person in charge of the church today and ask their advice?

EDIT - these are the contact details for the vicar:-

Rev'd Simon Smale (Vicar)
St Stephen's House Laburnum Avenue Robin Hood's Bay North Yorkshire YO22 4RR
01947 880695

Kath. x

Heather

Heather Report 22 Nov 2018 14:29

I have been able to confirm that James Burns was both baptised on 6/2/1898 and buried on 5/5/1901 at New St Stephens Church Fylingdales (Fylingthorpe), yet it appears there is neither a record of a plot number/record of burial position in the graveyard and no gravestone and the current Vicar stated the following!

"Sadly in those days infants were often buried along the perimeters of churchyards and not recorded at all".

I'm very, very sad about this. It's almost like something from a Thomas Hardy novel.

Can anyone offer any suggestions or is this another brick wall?

ErikaH

ErikaH Report 22 Nov 2018 14:43

Infants were frequently buried with unrelated adults whose funerals were 'next in line' in the undertaker's premises.

Sadly, infant mortality was high, and the death of an infant or small child wasn't necessarily treated in the same way as it would be today. People accepted the event as a part of life. Quite often, it was looked on as 'one less mouth to feed'

Maddie

Maddie Report 22 Nov 2018 14:44

sounds like another brick wall im afraid