Welcome to The Briercliffe Society Forum

The forum is free to join and you do not need to be a member of the society. You will receive an email to activate your account before you will be able to log in. Please check spam filters and junk mail folders for this email.
It is currently Tue Dec 12, 2017 1:38 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 08, 2008 10:01 pm 
Sage of Simonstone
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 12:07 pm
Posts: 1600
Location: Burnley
Lancashire bmd has only 2 Spencer children registered in Burnley in 1837 - only one of them a male, Thomas. There were also 2 registered in Colne, again ony one male (Joshua).
There was one (William) in 1838, + 4 in Colne.
Does this get you anywhere?

_________________
Maureen
If you can't fight, wear a big 'at


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2008 8:39 am 
Computer Whizz
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:28 am
Posts: 3884
Location: Near Chorley
I don't think he would have been given Kippax as a surname, so you could be right with one of those Maureen.
I think this James Kippax may have been my 3Xgt grandfather. Before he married my 3Xgt grandmother he MAY have fathered some Leaver children, mother Betty. He then went on to marry her after his first wife died. Seems like he put it about a bit.

_________________
Gloria

I'd be dangerous with a brain.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2008 11:59 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:07 am
Posts: 34
Location: East Lancashire
Hi Gloria
Does that mean that the child was in the work house if the township supported them?
Annie


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2008 1:21 pm 
Computer Whizz
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:28 am
Posts: 3884
Location: Near Chorley
I would have thought so. The workhouse (and there may have been others) was the part of the General Hospital which is boarded up, and about to be pulled down.

_________________
Gloria

I'd be dangerous with a brain.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2008 1:27 pm 
Spider Lady
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:23 pm
Posts: 8054
Location: Staffordshire
Would it? Could they have not received some sort of benefit but be living as a lodger or something?

_________________
Mel

Searching for lost relatives? Win the Lottery!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2008 1:30 pm 
Spider Lady
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:23 pm
Posts: 8054
Location: Staffordshire
http://www.workhouses.org.uk/

The New Poor Law
The 1834 Poor Law Amendment Act

The 'Bastardy Clause'
One of the most controversial parts of the Act was the 'Bastardy Clause' (actually a sequence of several clauses) which made the obtaining of affiliation orders much more difficult and expensive than had formerly been the case. Previously, such orders were obtained through local Petty Sessions courts but after 1834 had to be heard at county Quarter Sessions and could only be initiated by Overseers or Guardians. Evidence of paternity claims now also had to be "corroborated in some material particular", something that was often impossible to achieve. The Act effectively made illegitimate children the sole responsibility of their mothers until they were 16 years old. If mothers of such children were unable to support themselves and their offspring, they would have to enter the workhouse. The 1834 Act, it was hoped, would make the consequences sufficiently unattractive to deter women from risking extra-marital pregnancy. Perhaps unsurprisingly, it was a highly unpopular and contentious measure and was diluted in 1839 by an Act (2&3 Vic. c.85.) which allowed affiliation claims to again be heard by local magistrates at Petty Sessions. The clause was effectively overturned by a further Act in 1844 (7&8 Vic. c.101) which enabled an unmarried mother to apply for an affiliation order against the father for maintenance of the mother and child, regardless of whether she was in receipt of poor relief.

One other important change relating to bastardy in the 1834 Act was that an illegitimate child now took its mother's settlement until it reached the age of sixteen or acquired settlement in its own right. The previous system, where such a child gained settlement from its place of birth, had sometimes led parishes to try and remove from within their borders heavily pregnant single women so that their children would not be a burden on the ratepayers.

_________________
Mel

Searching for lost relatives? Win the Lottery!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2008 2:21 pm 
Computer Whizz
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:28 am
Posts: 3884
Location: Near Chorley
I would have definitely thought he would have been put in the workhouse if she couldn't look after him. Mind you he was only months old so they would have needed a surrogate mother. Wonder what happened to him. I have looked on the 1841 for boy born 1837, either Kippax or Spencer and can't find one who shouldn't be with the family. Someone, somewhere will be stuck with him-------we've all been there.

_________________
Gloria

I'd be dangerous with a brain.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2008 2:27 pm 
Spider Lady
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 9:23 pm
Posts: 8054
Location: Staffordshire
She could have married in between his birth and the census perhaps?

_________________
Mel

Searching for lost relatives? Win the Lottery!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2008 4:37 pm 
Computer Whizz
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:28 am
Posts: 3884
Location: Near Chorley
Possibly, but she couldn't afford to keep him before, would they let him go back to her, AND, shouldn't he have kept the name Spencer/Kippax. I can only see one marriage and that is in 1844, and there are three options. I will have a look which ne she is with in 1851.

_________________
Gloria

I'd be dangerous with a brain.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2008 4:50 pm 
Computer Whizz
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:28 am
Posts: 3884
Location: Near Chorley
This may be them, all born Colne but living near Keighley, she is unmarried
Name Age
Ann Spencer 9
Nancy Spencer 29
William Spencer 15
The son would be "about" the right age. Not going to get a headache over this one as it is not really mine.

_________________
Gloria

I'd be dangerous with a brain.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2008 10:06 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:07 am
Posts: 34
Location: East Lancashire
Would the mother be
SPENCER NANCY F 22 LANCASHIRE COP ROW BURNLEY WHALLEY LANCASHIRE
in 1841 census?
She married John Edmondson in 1844 at St. James, Briercliffe - no mention of children born outside marriage though in 1851 & 1861 census.
Useless piece of info eh? - sorry.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kippax
PostPosted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 4:37 pm 
Willfinder General
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 4:51 pm
Posts: 3007
Location: Vancouver Island, Canada
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/LANCS-BURNLEY-FOO ... .m14.l1318

Signed on the back by: W Morris R Harrison A Woodruff Goe. Bray Reg Attwell Alan brown Jim Strong H Potts (Harry - later the manager) H Mather Jack Chew (?) F P Kippax

Gloria, is F. P. Kippax one of your relatives?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kippax
PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 8:11 am 
Computer Whizz
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:28 am
Posts: 3884
Location: Near Chorley
Hi Kris, he isn't directly one of mine. My Dad used to get asked if they were related to each other and always said no, but as you know, go back far enough and yes. All the Kippaxs in Burnley seemed to descend from the Briercliffe ones so there is probably a sideways connection, will have a furtle when I have time and see what I can find.

_________________
Gloria

I'd be dangerous with a brain.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kippax
PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 11:03 am 
Computer Whizz
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:28 am
Posts: 3884
Location: Near Chorley
This is him
http://www.clarets-mad.co.uk/news/loadf ... &id=343937

_________________
Gloria

I'd be dangerous with a brain.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Kippax
PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 1:43 pm 
Computer Whizz
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:28 am
Posts: 3884
Location: Near Chorley
Had a quick delve into this in between Olympic viewing. From his birth found his mother's maiden name, then found her marriage. From then on went down the censuses until 1841, then onto IGI and I am pretty sure that his 4xgt grandfather is my 5xgt grandfather. All that is speculation and not followed up with certs but it was an interesting exercise.

_________________
Gloria

I'd be dangerous with a brain.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group