| Welcome to The Briercliffe Society Forum http://www.briercliffesociety.co.uk/talkback/ |
|
| Death of Samuel Lockett http://www.briercliffesociety.co.uk/talkback/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=3942 |
Page 4 of 6 |
| Author: | Gloria [ Sat Oct 29, 2011 7:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
The death certificate has arrived for the 1yo I was hoping had been wrongly transcribed---------It was right---back to the drawing board and the headache. |
|
| Author: | Mel [ Sun Oct 30, 2011 5:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
Oh dear! So it's probable that he wasn't transported as a convict but what about passenger lists? Have you looked to see if he ventured off? |
|
| Author: | Gloria [ Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
I have looked on Ellis Island and there is one Samuel Lockett who sailed in 1916 aged 41yrs, it doesn't give his home town. My Samuel would have been 65yrs or so then. There is a family of Locketts from Burnley who went in 1897 so it would be feasible that he could have gone at some time as they all seem to be related. Any other ideas what site to look at for these? I have ancestry and be it I may be in my dotage (ha ha), but all I can find are incoming passenger records. I am sure they must have the outgoing ones somewhere but they aren't easy to find. |
|
| Author: | Mel [ Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
Not sure, I've only ever looked at Ellis Island. Have you looked at Armed Forces deaths? There is a Corporal Samuel Lockett in 1918 but it doesn't give an age. Perhaps you might find something in the Army records on Ancestry? His number is 275319, Manchester Regiment. Scratch that....just compared it to the CWGC database and he was only 22. 
|
|
| Author: | Mel [ Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
OK....an attempt at a different angle....did they have any children that died young? If yes, could he have been buried with them? If no....back to the drawing board. I'm starting to agree with you....he's at the bottom of the canal! |
|
| Author: | Gloria [ Sun Oct 30, 2011 2:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
Thanks for trying to help Mel, I feel I am going round in circles--how does someone,, from so recently not leave a paper trail? All the deaths I can find were put in a public grave at Burnley cemetery. What puzzles me a bit is On the 1891 census it gives his wife Elizabeth Lockett as a widow living with her children and a John Whitaker as boarder. I have the youngest child's birth (9months) cert and there is no father named. On the 1901 Elizabeth Lockett is married, with her children, and John Lockett as head----must be John Whitaker. On 1911 John Whitaker is head, Elizabeth Whitaker is wife, and her children. They have been married 9yrs. The only marriage I can find for them was in March qtr 1920. Elizabeth Whitaker died June qtr 1920 John Whitaker died Sept qtr 1921 I think this family told packs of lies after bumping Samuel off and dumping him in the canal.  Something somewhere doesn't add up. I have back tracked, checked, and double checked but cannot find any discrepancy. 
|
|
| Author: | mosiefish [ Mon Oct 31, 2011 12:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
Hi Gloria, Well, I have been following this from day one and he has all of us stumped! Elizabeth would surely have married John earlier if she had truly been a widow, so Samuel must have upped and left. I notice that John the Lodger had both feet firmly over the doorstep in the 1881 census too  . Anyway, I did check Scotlands People - just in case, but the only one I could find was a Samuel Lockett who died in Lanarkshire 1928. The downside is that he was born c.1845. Sorry I don`t have credits for this site, but I thought I should let you know. I just can`t find the so and so in any of the Scottish census to rule him out. Arghh! I think another problem is that L`s and S`s were often mistranscribed, so I have also been looking for Sockett etc. too. No joy there either. I am with you - he is definitely in the Leeds and Liverpool canal Mo |
|
| Author: | Mel [ Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
When I have a little moretime, I'm going to do a newspaper search to see if that throws anything up. I too looked at Sockett....on one census I even searched just for Samuel with variants and just for Lockett with variants. Even that didn't find him
|
|
| Author: | Gloria [ Mon Oct 31, 2011 10:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
Thankyou both so much for trying---and trying it is I have tried every which way juggling with first names and surnames. Maureen found a puzzling one in the 1881 up in Durham. As he had been there in the previous census that could be him, and Elizabeth decided to add him in Burnley to save face if she was living with John. In fact I wonder if he ever came to Burnley?????? I think I will try that tack. |
|
| Author: | Mel [ Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
Which begs the question...how were you related to him? |
|
| Author: | Gloria [ Mon Oct 31, 2011 2:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
He is "supposed" to be my 2xgt grandfather. His eldest child is my gt grandad born Durham. I have just looked to see if John Whitaker was in Durham 1871 census, when Samuel and Elizabeth were there, but drew a blank. Both Samuel and John were coal miners and that is what would have brought them to Burnley. Elizabeth wouldn't have had any other reason to come down to Burnley from Durham other than to be with her husband, or she ran off there with John. There is only one piece of evidence that says Samuel Lockett was in Burnley and that is the 1881 census, bearing in mind that Maureen found a Samuel Lockett as a boarder in Durham at that time, that could quite likely be him and wifey Elizabeth is telling porkies. I suppose she could have answered the enumerator's question about her marital status and given the impression that he was there. I think Elizabeth left Samuel in Durham and fled to Burnley with John Whitaker. |
|
| Author: | Mel [ Mon Oct 31, 2011 8:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
So, could you be descended from John Whitaker instead  
|
|
| Author: | Gloria [ Tue Nov 01, 2011 10:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
I don't think I am as I think Elizabeth's first born was Samuels but the rest very well could be. They got married in Sept 1872 at the registrar and had James in March 1873, so that was quite a rush wedding. The 2nd one was born 1875 Durham and the 3rd 1877 Burnley. I wonder if 3rd was john Whitakers and they ran off to Burnley together. BUT, to put another spanner in the works, I cannot see John Whitaker in the Durham area in 1871 census, but he could have been there later. AND, at least one of her later children doesn't have a father on the cert. She had 11 children and no I haven't got the certs for them all. Do you think she rode on a bike all the way from Durham
|
|
| Author: | Gloria [ Sun Jun 03, 2012 10:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
Whilst trawling through this again I found something, the age varies a bit but discounting that, this could be him. I have sent for the death cert. Burial: 10 Jan 1907 Burnley Cemetery, Burnley, Lancs. Samuel Sockett - Age: 44yrs Abode: Adelphi Street Grave: 4471 Gender: M Register: Burials 1904 - 1909, Page 172, Entry 67095 Source: Original Registers Book 9 |
|
| Author: | Mel [ Sun Jun 03, 2012 10:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Death of Samuel Lockett |
Fingers crossed!
|
|
| Page 4 of 6 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|