Leeds in the 1870s

Post by **cnosni** » Tue 22 Mar, 2011 11:44 am

Dakota wrote: I'm back.... actually I never left, just had challenges with getting back on, but I finally overcame them.Barlick Girl and I are still chasing down family lore and what not and have continually referred back to the information you all have provided through these posts. I've chased down one of the cousin's that was hanging back and he and his wife are coming to visit in mid April and supposedly bringing photos and documents for me to look at. And I'm still trying to pry photos and documents out of my 92 year old cousin. He keeps telling me if I come back to SD he'll let me look at them. I'm trying to covince someone that lives in South Dakota to scoot over and get them.So, just wanted to say thanks again! Are you scanning/copying any photos?If not then i would suggest you do as its a godd idea to have a central store of family pics with associated notes,its good for future generations

Dakota · Post by **Dakota** » Tue 22 Mar, 2011 2:08 pm

Yes, when either Barlick Girl or I get a photo or document we scan it, share it and post it on Ancestry.com. I spend a lot of time convincing some cousins/aunts that I'm not asking for the originals that they have, I just want a copy so I can scan it and that way everyone can share. It seems like some of the older folks think of pictures as "theirs" alone, when I think of them as something that everyone in the family should have access to. I have one cousin that grabbed all of the photo albums from his mother and is holding them hostage. I've pried two photos from him, which no one in the family had ever seen. Don't understand that sort of thinking, but I'm on a constant nag with people. My mother-in-law offered me 4 boxes of photo albums, many of them are from her parents' families from before her parents were married. She's 94 and an only child and of course, nothing is labeled. So next month when we go to visit, she and I are going to spend a day with a pile of sticky notes going through the albums so I can get things labeled and then will spend the winter scanning in the photos on that side of the family. Barlick Girl and I have a 92 year old cousin that is holding a big box of photos and documents hostage, telling me that if I travel about 1800 miles to see him, I might get to see them. Well, I did that last year and he didn't share, so I'm going to do the trip again and hope for the best. I'm also hoping to get another cousin in the area to go with me to see if we can't keep him focused and get the box opened. There is only him and my 85 year old aunt that would probably recognize the faces in the pictures so I'm anxious to get them out in the open. I have an album from my mom's side of the family with great pictures, but sadly no one knows who they are. It's frustrating, but at least I have photos!So, you all have been great resources for me and I do appreciate your interest and enthusiasm in helping me track down those who came before me, the more I learn of them and the lives they lead, the more impressed I am with them. Daily life had to have been such a daily struggle, yet they went on and on and made life better for each succeeding generation.

barlickgirl · Post by **barlickgirl** » Mon 07 Nov, 2011 11:12 pm

Hi All,I hope that you are all well and looking forward to Christmas.I haven't been back to this thread for a while, but just found another "cousin" from my Kirkstall posting and decided to drop in on this one and add a couple more queries for better brains than mine to decipher!I just got the Wills for Mary and Isaac Wells and found that our Ancestor John Wells, son of the deceased was listed as joint executor with brother Isaac both listed as Yeomen, this would have been in 1826ish. In 1798 in his Parish marriage banns his occupation was listed as Moulder. What would it mean to be a Yeoman in those days and how would one go from being a moulder (probably in iron) to being a Yeoman in that time? John b.1783 in Bowling, has been an something of an enigma, hard to find because his name is so common, but I think he is listed in the 1841, as a Moulder, living in Sticker Lane Bradford. does anyone know this area at all please? Why if he was a Yeoman in 1824 would he list himself as a moulder again in 1841.It seems that Isaac died intestate and Mary's signed a 'stat dec' regarding his goods and chattels, she conveniently lists all her children and grandchildren from deceased daughter Sarah, so a few more proven names for the tree now as well. In her own will dated 1824, 2 years before her death, Mary leaves 10 pounds each to these children. Does this say anything about the family's status do you think? My Mother says that land was about 1 pound an acre then. Would this suggest that Mary was a woman of means?Thanks as always for your help.regards,Jill

Cardiarms · Post by **Cardiarms** » Tue 08 Nov, 2011 9:31 am

I think Yeoman refers to status rather than profession and meant he owned some land which would entitle him to vote. I might be wrong.

Post by **cnosni** » Tue 08 Nov, 2011 11:33 am

barlickgirl wrote: Hi All,I hope that you are all well and looking forward to Christmas.I haven't been back to this thread for a while, but just found another "cousin" from my Kirkstall posting and decided to drop in on this one and add a couple more queries for better brains than mine to decipher!I just got the Wills for Mary and Isaac Wells and found that our Ancestor John Wells, son of the deceased was listed as joint executor with brother Isaac both listed as Yeomen, this would have been in 1826ish. In 1798 in his Parish marriage banns his occupation was listed as Moulder. What would it mean to be a Yeoman in those days and how would one go from being a moulder (probably in iron) to being a Yeoman in that time? John b.1783 in Bowling, has been an something of an enigma, hard to find because his name is so common, but I think he is listed in the 1841, as a Moulder, living in Sticker Lane Bradford. does anyone know this area at all please? Why if he was a Yeoman in 1824 would he list himself as a moulder again in 1841.It seems that Isaac died intestate and Mary's signed a 'stat dec' regarding his goods and chattels, she conveniently lists all her children and grandchildren from deceased daughter Sarah, so a few more proven names for the tree now as well. In her own will dated 1824, 2 years before her death, Mary leaves 10 pounds each to these children. Does this say anything about the family's status do you think? My Mother says that land was about 1 pound an acre then. Would this suggest that Mary was a woman of means?Thanks as always for your help.regards,Jill The National Archives old currency converter estimates that in 1820 £1 would be equivalent to £41.92 in todays money.This does not take into account how much things actually cost in 1820.Yeoman meant a number of things through the ages,there was still what was called "Yeomanry Cavalry" in the first world war,but basically it refers to someone who can live by their own income,not from working for someone else.This was applied to many farmers (prior to the land enclosure acts)who owned land,which they farmed themselves as well as employing others.There are however other examples of "Yeomen",such as Yeoman Clothiers in West Yorkshire,however this appears to have been a bit of a self titled agrandisement as when times were hard these chaps went back to labouring on farms etc.Yeomen were also supposed to able to provide for themselves in time of war/civil strife in the respects of horse and/or armament,and would also be called upon to act as militia locally (as was the case in Leeds when there was a potential uprising acrtoss the north of England by Irish immigrants,militia and cannon were deployed).I would imagine that in your case that the title of Yeoman would indicate that your relative had his own business and probably employed others to work for him

barlickgirl · Post by **barlickgirl** » Tue 08 Nov, 2011 12:19 pm

Thanks to both of you for your replies, this is really helpful. There's a lot of differing information on the internet. It's helpful to know what the word meant in a North of England context.I think the elder brother Joshua may have been killed in 1805. If I have the correct one he was listed as a soldier. Do you have any idea what a soldier in the area would be fighting for at that time in history please?Jill

Cardiarms · Post by **Cardiarms** » Tue 08 Nov, 2011 2:27 pm

The French were a bit uppity at the time with some bloke called Napoleon causing trouble. 1805 was notable for the naval battle of Trafalgar and the destruction of the French fleet. The Duke of Wellington was engaged in India and later in Northern Europe:"From 1797 to 1805, Wellington served in India, largely in Mysore and adjacent areas, taking a prominent role both in the campaign against Tipoo Sultan in 1799, at Seringapatam, and during the Anglo-Maratha war of 1803-5, winning notable victories at Assaye and Argaum, and bringing about the submission of Sindhia and of the Raja of Berar (WP1/7-163; WP3/1-3). After returning to England, Wellington commanded a brigade in the abortive expedition to recapture Hanover, December 1805 to February 1806."

Post by **cnosni** » Wed 09 Nov, 2011 10:38 am

barlickgirl wrote: Thanks to both of you for your replies, this is really helpful. There's a lot of differing information on the internet. It's helpful to know what the word meant in a North of England context.I think the elder brother Joshua may have been killed in 1805. If I have the correct one he was listed as a soldier. Do you have any idea what a soldier in the area would be fighting for at that time in history please?Jill He could well have been with the 33rd foot,later to become the 1st Battalion Duke of Wellington's Regiment (West Riding).The 33rd foot served with Wellington in India,though he could well have been in 76th "Hindoostan",which eventually became the 2nd Battalion of the Duke of Wellington's Regiment (West Riding)http://www.dwr.org.uk/dwr.php?id=207These two sections would seem to be the most appropriate to the time you are talking abouthttp://www.dwr.org.uk/dwr.php?id=64&pa=207http ... 3&pa=207My great uncle was in the 2nd Battalion in the First World War,killed 1st July 1916 near Serre.Si's grandad was in that Battalion as well (i think),not sure if he chased up any more on him. Am going back to Serre in April,so Si if you are reading then let me know if you did any more digging on your grandad,im sure some of you others will remeber Si's story about his grandad "nutting" a teenage mugger.

barlickgirl · Post by **barlickgirl** » Wed 09 Nov, 2011 10:54 am

Hi Cardiarms and Cnosni.Thanks so much for this information, I really should have listened better in history class.I'm busy cleaning up after a really bad storm and flash flood that has flowed through doors and window sills this evening, but will have a really good look at the information tomorrow hopefully.Again many thanks!Jill

Si · Post by Si » Wed 09 Nov, 2011 3:50 pm

Quote Cnosni:"Si's grandad was in that Battalion as well (i think),not sure if he chased up any more on him. Am going back to Serre in April,so Si if you are reading then let me know if you did any more digging on your grandad,im sure some of you others will remeber Si's story about his grandad "nutting" a teenage mugger."Hi Chris. Yes, he was. I haven't been able to dig up much more, I'm afraid, due to time and financial restrictions! Incidentally, it was my great grandad who was in the Dukes - one grandad was in the Black Watch, and the other was in a reserved occupation (cooper.) The "nutting incident" was my uncle.From the book "British Army Cap Badges of the First World War" by Peter Doyle and Chris Foster, I found this: "The Yeomanry was the cavalry of the Territorial Force in 1914. Yeomanry regiments had been raised through history to assist in the defence of the nation in times of crisis, particularly when there was a threat...from the French...In the First World War, many of the Yeomanry regiments would have to abandon their horses and fight as dismounted infantry."Yeomanry regiments still existed in the Second World War, for example, the 1st Northamptonshire Yeomanry who fought in Sherman tanks as part of 33rd Armoured Brigade.Sorry to go of topic a bit!