Barnett in 1901?

[Debra A]

Hi Deb

Interesting to read your previous posts about MAC.

Do you read anything in MAC and John Barnett being in infirmary records one after each other, or just co-incidence ?

Is there any record of MAC or Pearly Poll after 1889 ?

I wonder if she could have moved in with Joe and Cha fed her name to Louisa ?

Craig

Hi Craig

Between the two threads (long threads I know!) I linked to I had found Mary Ann Connolly aka Pearly Poll up to 1893.
Here's a summary from those threads of the various infirmary stays starting August 88 straight after the murder of Martha Tabram.
PP shifted base to St George in the East where she was staying at one point at 4 North East Passage, a lodging house associated with John Satchell and a place Joseph Barnett also stayed at at some point. I don't think there's any real connections to the Barnetts though. Just a couple of coincidences.

Debs

From August 1888 onwards (there are previous entries already posted elsewhere where PP is living in George St Spitalfields and at the Whitechapel Infirmary)

26/08/1888 to 06/10/1888 SGE Infirmary
20/12/1888 to 26/01/89 SGE Infirmary
14/03/1889 to 03/05/1889 SGE Infirmary
08/05/1889 to 18/06/1889 SGE Infirmary
02/08/1889 to 17/08/1889 Whitechapel Infirmary-no home
11/10/1889 to 12/10/89 Raine St (SGE) workhouse to Infirmary-admitted from 4 NE Passage
12/10/1889 to 18/11/1889 SGE Infirmary
28/01/1890 to 14/02/1890 Whitechapel Infirmary –admitted from 8 Whites Row
04/11/1890 to 01/12/1890 SGE Infirmary
24/12/1890 to 07/02/1891 SGE Infirmary
23/02/1891 to 01/05/1891 –Bethnal Green workhouse admitted from 5 Old Nichol St
04/05/1891 to 15/08/1891 Whitechapel Infirmary-admitted from 52 Gun St
12/05/1893 to 27/07/1893 Whitechapel Infirmary –admitted from 208 Cable St

[Craig H]

Just looking back at my notes from several years ago when I tried to identify who was Louisa Barnett ....

She said in the 1911 Census she was 55 years old. As that census was conducted April 1 - 2, that means she was born between
April 1855 - March 1856.

However, in the Raine St Infirmary records, she said she was born in 1856. Therefore she was born sometime Jan - March 1856.

People often stated an incorrect year they were born back then, so the actual year is not definite. However, people don't forget their birthday so I assumed she probably was born sometime January - March.

Louisa said in 1911 Census she was born in Bethnal Green, but in 1901 she said "St George in the East". I don't know local area but assume that's close.

Louisa is only named "Emily" in the 1901 Census; in future Census she is named "Louisa" (I couldn't find Joe or Louisa in the 1891 Census).

This could be an error by the Census taker. MayBea then suggested she could be named "Emily Louisa" or "Louisa Emily".

I then looked for "Louisa Emily" or "Emily Louisa" born in March quarter between 1855 - 1857 in the Bethnal Green & St George In the East area; and removed those who later married or died. A bit time consuming.

There were three I couldn't account for

Emily Louisa Smith bn Mar 1856 St George East

Louisa Emily Whitfield bn Mar 1856 in Shoreditch

Louisa Emily Taylour bn Mar 1857 qtr Shoreditch

It's possible she is one of these three. I do have more notes on them I need to review.

Other option is she was born before 1855 or after 1857.

Other option - if "Emily" was simply a census taking mistake - is we would need to look at all the Louisa's born in that quarter over multiple years.

Also, if she was born in "Jan-Mar", it is possible this was not recorded in BMD until April. In which case I'd need to look at Apr-June records.

[Craig H]

Just going back to my notes again ….. the one that stands out from above is Emily Louisa Smith.

She was born February 1856 in Parish of St George. Her father James John Smith was an engine driver at Gasworks; mother was Ellen Collins Smith (nee Bishop)

In 1861 Census, they were living in area – kids Ellen, Sophia, James, Richard, Emily.

In 1871, James is still at Gas works. Emily is a servant, brother James a plumber.

I can’t find Emily in 1881 Census or later, and no record she died.

There is an Emily Smith (bn 1856) who married Alfred Nicholls in April 1881 in Islington. Emily's father James was a railway official. This may be our Emily…. Not sure.

[MysterySinger]

In the 1919 Electoral Register there was a Joseph and Emily Barnett living at 126 Grove Buildings in Mile End. This is contrary to "our" Joseph and Louisa who were at 106 Red Lion Street at this time. I don't think Emily and Louisa are one and the same. As far as I know Louisa is Agnes Louisa Rowe but how much proof is there for that?

[Craig H]

Hi MS

Interesting to find the 1919 record. If that's the same Barnett, then it confirms that "Louisa" may been "Emily Louisa" and that the 1901 Census record was not an error.

Unfortunately, the "Agnes Louisa Rowe" - Barnett marriage is not ours.

I bought the marriage certificate.

A Louise Rowe married Jospeph Barnett in Sept 1887 quarter in Hackney Vol 1b 1884. However, this Joseph was a mariner or musician (can't remember now) and his father was "Michael Barnett".

Rgds
Craig

[Robert]

MS, I believe the family is the Joseph Edward Barnet who married Emily Steele 1899 and living 130 Grove Buildings in 1911. If you follow the electorals on you can see their children appearing as they reached voting age - John, Joseph Jr, Emily Jr.

[Debra A]

MS, I believe the family is the Joseph Edward Barnet who married Emily Steele 1899 and living 130 Grove Buildings in 1911. If you follow the electorals on you can see their children appearing as they reached voting age - John, Joseph Jr, Emily Jr.

I agree, Robert.
There was also another Joseph Edward Barnett b c 1853, a fish curer, in the records. He married a woman named Sarah H (forget the surname) but was still married to Sarah right into the 1920's when he appears frequently in the Mile End workhouse records.

[MrBarnett]

Hi All,

I've been following this with interest.

On the face of it Joseph's place of birth as shown on the 1901 census is a problem. He was born in Hairbrain Court which was in Whitechapel and not STGITE. With the exception of 1861, where it was given as Aldgate, his POB is invariably shown correctly as Whitechapel. Hairbrain court was on the boundary between St Mary Whitechapel and St Botolph without Aldgate, so the Aldgate reference is understandable. STGITE was further away, and I think it's unlikely that Barnett would have confused the two.

However, if you turn over the page of the 1901 census you will find two other lodgers of the Hostlers shown as simply 'Mr' and 'Mrs' Potling, places of birth NK.

It's possible that Mr Hostler was not very diligent when it came to providing census information.

Gary

[MysterySinger]

MS, I believe the family is the Joseph Edward Barnet who married Emily Steele 1899 and living 130 Grove Buildings in 1911. If you follow the electorals on you can see their children appearing as they reached voting age - John, Joseph Jr, Emily Jr.

Yes I agree and that's just my point.

Wouldn't Joseph (Edward) Barnet (note one t) who was born on 19/05/1852 and married to Emily (formerly Steele and possibly on her second marriage) be more likely to be the Joseph Barnet (note one t) who was a lodger with Hostler at 31 Old Gravel Lane in 1901 and aged about 48 than "our" Joseph Barnett (note 2 ts) who would have been around 42 in the 1901 census and was married to Louisa not Emily?

I'm saying the details of the 1901 entry probably fit Joseph Edward Barnet better than "our" Joseph Barnett.

Or to put it another way, I don't believe we've yet found "our" Joseph Barnett in 1901 (or 1891 either?).

[Debra A]

Yes I agree and that's just my point.

Wouldn't Joseph (Edward) Barnet (note one t) who was born on 19/05/1852 and married to Emily (formerly Steele and possibly on her second marriage) be more likely to be the Joseph Barnet (note one t) who was a lodger with Hostler at 31 Old Gravel Lane in 1901 and aged about 48 than "our" Joseph Barnett (note 2 ts) who would have been around 42 in the 1901 census and was married to Louisa not Emily?

I'm saying the details of the 1901 entry probably fit Joseph Edward Barnet better than "our" Joseph Barnett.

Or to put it another way, I don't believe we've yet found "our" Joseph Barnett in 1901 (or 1891 either?).

Where was junior JB in 1901 I wonder?
Wouldn't it be a massive coincidence if some other Joseph Barnett was staying in 1901 with the brother of a man our Joseph Barnett was recorded as staying with in 1897 in his brother Daniel's records?!

[Robert]

Hi MS

JEB in 1901 is down as 'Burnett' and is clearly part of the same household as 1911.

[Robert]

The age for Joseph Jr in 1901 is puzzling, but Joseph and Emily's ages and birthplaces and Joseph's occupation are evidence enough.

[MrBarnett]

Yes I agree and that's just my point.

Wouldn't Joseph (Edward) Barnet (note one t) who was born on 19/05/1852 and married to Emily (formerly Steele and possibly on her second marriage) be more likely to be the Joseph Barnet (note one t) who was a lodger with Hostler at 31 Old Gravel Lane in 1901 and aged about 48 than "our" Joseph Barnett (note 2 ts) who would have been around 42 in the 1901 census and was married to Louisa not Emily?

I'm saying the details of the 1901 entry probably fit Joseph Edward Barnet better than "our" Joseph Barnett.

Or to put it another way, I don't believe we've yet found "our" Joseph Barnett in 1901 (or 1891 either?).

Hi MS,

There was a Joseph Edward Barnett (two T's) born on 19/5/52 in Hope Place, Whitechapel. Is this who are you referring to above?

Gary

[MrBarnett]

Hi MS,

There was a Joseph Edward Barnett (two T's) born on 19/5/52 in North Place, Whitechapel. Is this who are you referring to above?

Gary

If so, I think this may be him in Old Church Road, MEOT in 1901:

[Debra A]

MS
Gary is correct. Going by his father's name and occupation, the Joseph Edward Barnett who was born in Hope Place 19/05/52 married Sarah Hepden in May 1877, his father, also Joseph Edward, was a butcher on the baptism and marriage entry. In 1871 the family were living at 2 Collingwood St BG where JEB Sr was described as a labourer, this same address given on the marriage entry for Joseph Edward Jr and Sarah Hepden in 1877.

I mentioned this couple earlier in the thread; in several 1910-1920 workhouse entries this Jospeph Barnett, fish curer all his life, gave his next of kin as S Barnett and the same couple were definitely still living together at Copley Street in 1911.