| Welcome to The Briercliffe Society Forum https://www.briercliffesociety.co.uk/talkback/ |
|
| Kippax https://www.briercliffesociety.co.uk/talkback/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=591 |
Page 2 of 4 |
| Author: | portia [ Thu May 08, 2008 10:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
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? |
|
| Author: | Gloria [ Fri May 09, 2008 8:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
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. |
|
| Author: | Annie29750 [ Fri May 09, 2008 11:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hi Gloria Does that mean that the child was in the work house if the township supported them? Annie |
|
| Author: | Gloria [ Fri May 09, 2008 1:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
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. |
|
| Author: | Mel [ Fri May 09, 2008 1:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Would it? Could they have not received some sort of benefit but be living as a lodger or something? |
|
| Author: | Mel [ Fri May 09, 2008 1:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
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. |
|
| Author: | Gloria [ Fri May 09, 2008 2:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
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. |
|
| Author: | Mel [ Fri May 09, 2008 2:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
She could have married in between his birth and the census perhaps? |
|
| Author: | Gloria [ Fri May 09, 2008 4:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
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. |
|
| Author: | Gloria [ Fri May 09, 2008 4:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
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. |
|
| Author: | Annie29750 [ Fri May 09, 2008 10:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
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. |
|
| Author: | Leaver [ Sat Aug 09, 2008 4:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Kippax |
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? |
|
| Author: | Gloria [ Mon Aug 11, 2008 8:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Kippax |
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. |
|
| Author: | Gloria [ Mon Aug 11, 2008 11:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Kippax |
This is him http://www.clarets-mad.co.uk/news/loadf ... &id=343937 |
|
| Author: | Gloria [ Mon Aug 11, 2008 1:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Kippax |
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. |
|
| Page 2 of 4 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|