Accession

When new materials are received, the first thing an archivist does is record:

• where it came from
• who it belongs to
• roughly what is included
• any legal agreements or conditions of use imposed by the donor

My parents gave me a box of genealogical goodies few months back as they had moved to a smaller residence without stairs.    Dad said he doesn’t mind what I do with it.  These statements comprise a very informal, and somewhat vague, accession record.  When presented with such a collection, we often do not make notes of the provenance or context of the acquisition, but we should.

Accession information is generally included in archive catalogues only as a reference or access category, as some of it may be private e.g. the donor’s identity.  Acquired collections may resemble an auction job lot you bought for the one item that was not junk, so they need to be sorted and organised.  In archival terms, the collection needs to be arranged.

Arrangement

Archival arrangement collects items together in a way that preserves the provenance and context in which they were created and used.  The arrangement is reflected in the structure of the catalogue.  Each item is assigned a logical position within a hierarchy of categories.  Taking an example from my personal archive, the marriage certificate for Joshua Arthur Smith & Beatrice Elizabeth Davis (RWC/1/4/4), was acquired as part of a discrete bundle from Winifred Clarke (RWC/1/4) in connection with the death of Raymond Walter Coulson (RWC) and filed by his administrator (RWC/1).  I sorted the items in Winifred’s bundle by date of creation, as they weren’t in any order.

In a big archive’s online catalogue, you might only see the entry for the marriage certificate, but you need to check the hierarchy to get the full story.   My personal catalogue looks like this.

Description

Archival description pulls together the information needed to identify, manage, locate, and interpret the contents of a collection and explains the context of a collection’s creation and functions.  Information that applies to a whole group of items is included in the record for that level, becoming more specific at deeper levels of arrangement.  My example includes an item level description of the marriage certificate, and how and why it was acquired (i.e. the context) in other levels of the hierarchy.

Genealogical citation geeks may recognise many of the elements of a genealogical citation are included in my catalogue.  That makes me wonder why catalogue details are not embedded in digital images of documents we routinely download.  Now that would really add value to online data offerings.

Detailed description takes lots of time and archives receive many accessions, so do not expect archive catalogues to contain item level descriptions with names of people.   Only very important collections may be fully described.

Winnie’s collection

The collection accumulated by Winifred, known as Winnie, is an excellent springboard for researching her family, particularly the Smith side.  If you want to put a face to the name, she featured in ‘Is it George or Jack?  Engagement photograph identification’.  This collection identifies her parents, grandparents, and all 4 great-grandfathers.

Chart showing Winnie’s ancestors and the relationships of custodians of her collection

The chart presents Winnie’s relatives and shows people who have had custody of her parent’s marriage certificate (green), and the person whose death lead to its acquisition (red).  A bread crumb trail of custody is:

Beatrice & Joshua > Winnie > elderly residential home > Dad > Me

Marriage Certificate – Joshua Arthur Smith & Beatrice Elizabeth Davis

Bride: Beatrice Elizabeth Davis, aged 26
Groom: Joshua Arthur Smith, aged 41
Date: 23 May 1904
Location: St Saviours, Saltley, Warwickshire

Beatrice and Joshua appear on the 1911 census at 13 Ash Tree Cottages, Alum Rock Road, Saltley, Birmingham.  The household was headed by Clara Smith, Joshua’s mother and included 4 year old Winifred, the couple’s daughter.  I can’t help wondering if the mystery photo of an old woman and baby might be Winnie and her grandma Clara.

The National Archives reference for this census record is RG 14/18172/25.  Fancy trying out the catalogue?  Can you work out what each of the reference elements means?

The 25 item refers to the number marked on the schedule, a form comprised of one sheet of paper.  The catalogue does not include any item level information i.e. individual schedules, but the group of schedules.

© Sue Adams 2013

Marriage Certificate – George Adams & Elizabeth Clifton

Bride: Elizabeth Clifton
Groom: George Adams
Date: 13 May 1852
Location: Edgbaston, Warwickshire

Err, no fathers named!

Elizabeth’s age ‘minor’ indicates that she was under 21, which fits the Elizabeth in the census.  Her age consistently indicates a birth date of ca. 1833, so she was 19 or 20 at the time of the marriage.

George’s occupation as a tailor fits, but the age ‘full’ does not confirm he is the right George.

Were there other tailors named George Adams in Birmingham?

The nineteenth century method of googling a tradesman was to consult a trade directory, which were usually published annually.  Some entries were free, but many were paid for, so trade directories did not include every business.   The ‘UK, Midlands and Various UK Trade Directories, 1770-1941’ collection on Ancestry looks promising.  However, Ancestry does not give a list of the directory titles included, so I can’t assess the relevant coverage of the collection.  The data is derived from a third party company that scans old books, produces indexes using optical character recognition (OCR), offering the result on CDs and online subscriptions, Midlands Historical Data.  OCR is not completely accurate and renders some text as gobbled gook, which has been transferred into the Ancestry database.  Consequently, some entries will not be found.  I would like to search on the street address to check for entries missed and confirm someone else occupied premises before and after my target, but Ancestry’s search does not accommodate this search.

A search of the Ancestry collection using search terms George Adams and tailor yielded these results:

White’s 1855 directory lists 2 tailors named George Adams, but the other directories only list one.  The 1858 listing identifies the Branston Street and 14 Northampton Street tailors as the same person.   Are the later listings at 24 Northampton Street and Hockley Hill also the same person?  Is this the George who married Elizabeth Clifton?  Census addresses give further insights:

The 1873 directory listing gives a home address in Crompton Road, which ties in with the 1881 census address.  The National Probate Calendar confirms George’s death:

Adams George of 161 Hockley-hill Birmingham tailor died 23 January 1899 Probate Birmingham 27 February to Elizabeth Adams widow Effects £69 13s 2d

On the 1901 census Elizabeth’s was a tailor and her son, Ernest Clifton Adams, was a tailor’s assistant.  So, the 1903 directory listing indicates the business was still in operation, not that George had been resurrected!  Elizabeth probably died in 1904 (FreeBMD death index, 1904 Jan-Mar quarter, Birmingham, Vol 6d, page 84), which is consistent with no further entries in the Handsworth area.  The tailor in Sparkbrook, on the other side of Birmingham, is clearly a different person.

Taken together, the census and trade directory information support one another and give a career history for George.  Even though the evidence is indirect and I have not searched the records as thoroughly as I would have liked, I am reasonably convinced this George is the brother of Edward John/James Adams.

A possible candidate for George, aged 18, on the 1841 census, resided in Steelhouse Lane with probable Adams relatives, Sarah (aged 60), Alexander (20), Phoebe (16), Catherine (11), William (7), Sophia (4) and Fanny Plant (11).  Unfortunately the 1841 census does not give relationships and only approximate ages.  Sarah could be the mother of Alexander, George and Phoebe, but not the younger household members.   So Edward John/James Adams’, father was possibly James Adams and George Adams’ mother might have been Sarah.  Maybe I should look for baptisms for children of James Adams and Sarah. Big Maybe.

© Sue Adams 2013

Bride: Emily Olive Pee
Groom: Mathew Lancelot Wilson
Date: 6 May 1913

If you have been following the 50 Marriage Mondays series, you will have seen a few examples of verifying such information using civil registration and census returns.  Sure enough, the marriage index confirms the marriage was registered in the King’s Norton district (part of Birmingham) in the  April-June quarter of 1913 (Vol 6d, page 181).  The 1911 census places 26 year old Emily in her parent’s home at 86 Wenman Street, Balsall Heath, and 24 year old Matthew in his cousin George Herbert Simms’ household at 214 Station Road, King’s Heath.  Census records for 1921 and later are closed for 100 years, so I can’t use them to verify the couple’s residence.

Fortunately, electoral registers are an alternative source, which reveal three residential addresses for Matthew and Emily.  Searching Ancestry’s “All Midlands, England, Electoral Registers, 1832-1955” collection yielded the results below:

Franchise

The Representation of the People Act, 1918 removed property requirements for qualification to vote, which extended the franchise to men aged 21 resident in the constituency; and introduced voting rights for some women aged over 30, who met property criteria in their own right, or as the co-resident wife of a man registered to vote.  Emily was aged about 33 in 1918, so she met the age criteria, but may not have qualified because Matthew was an absent voter.  From 1920 to 1927, she qualified to vote through her husband’s qualification.  The Representation of the People Act, 1928 equalised the franchise for men and women, so from 1930 onwards, Emily qualified to vote by being a resident in the constituency.

By 1939, John Simms Wilson, son of the couple, had come of age, so joined them on the electoral roll.  In 1925, when Matthew and Emily had moved to Oakfield Road, George Pee was the elector at 175 Edward Road.  Could he be Emily’s brother, recorded on the 1911 census, aged 20?

All three of the electoral roll addresses are close to Cannon Hill Park, so that piece of folklore is accurate.  On a virtual stroll along the streets of residence using Google maps, I found two of the houses.  I did not find 175 Edward Road as the area where it should be has been re-developed.  Oakfield Road has a variety of styles of terraced houses. No 97 is the house with the white door on the right, assuming the street has not been re-numbered.

Beaconsfield Crecent, tucked in off Beaconsfield Road, is a terrace of 5 houses, so my guess is that no 3 is the centre one.

Home Owner?

Did Emily and Matthew own any of the houses they lived in?  Land Registry records property transactions, but registration on sale has only been compulsory in Birmingham since 1966. Voluntary registration could potentially take the title history back to 1862.

Matthew died in 1969 (1969 Jan-Mar quarter, Birmingham, Vol 9c, page 590) and Emily’s death is recorded in the July-September quarter of 1973 (Birmingham, Vol 9c, page 577).  No 3 Oakfield Crescent, the central house in the terrace, was first registered on 8 January 1974, shortly after John Simms Wilson sold the property on 17 December 1973 (Title no WK226049, Register Extract, Coventry Office, Land Registry), having inherited it after his mother’s death.  The property had not been sold between 1966 and 1973, so we know that Matthew and Emily bought it sometime before then.  Although they moved in between 1935 and 1939, we do not know if they bought the house at that time.

© Sue Adams 2013

Marriage certificate – William Dunsdon & Eliza Ellen Kembry

Bride: Eliza Ellen Kembry or Kembrey
Groom: William Dunsdon
Date: 29 April 1871
Location: parish church, Fyfield, Berkshire

A quick recap on the registration system:  Two registers kept by the church where filled in as the marriages occurred. Every quarter, copies of the marriages were made and sent to the General Register Office (GRO), which prepared a national index of all marriages.  This is the index that is widely available online (e.g. FreeBMD) and on microfiche, and is the one I consulted to order the certificate.  Once the registers were full, one was sent to the district registrar, who created their own index of registers in their keeping, which is different from the GRO index.  Some of these indexes have been published and are searchable at UK BMD, but Fyfield parish is not yet included.  The second register may remain at the church, but most have been deposited at County Record Offices or Archives.

The April-June 1871 GRO index entries for this marriage provide this information:

The certificate is a handwritten transcript of the register.  The superintendent registrar, who is obliged to ensure that certificates are accurate copies of the register, included a note pointing out that the bride’s name was spelt differently, Elisa Ellen Kembry.

How might the discrepancy have arisen?

The GRO index has at least two copying events in its provenance (copy of original register submitted, details copied on creation of the index), the certificate just one.  Does that mean the certificate is more reliable?  We do not know if the two original registers are identical, so there is a possibility that the bride did not consistently spell her name.  How was her name recorded on other records?

Is there a correct spelling?

Usually it is fairly easy to find alternative forms of a surname through one of the websites that gives statistics on surname frequencies and origins such as British Surnames and Surname Profiles or PublicProfiler gbnames.  However, Kembrey and Kembry are not listed.  Similarly a search on Ancestry’s ‘Learn about the history of your surname page’ indicates a mere 757 census and voters roll records spread across time, so it seems the name is rare indeed.

The Kembrey name could be a corruption of something that sounds similar, which is something I should bear in mind when I try tracing earlier generations.  Soundex provides a means of comparing phonetically similar names.  The soundex code for Kembrey/Kembry is K516 or C516 if you replace the K with a C.  RootsWeb’s Soundex Converter suggests other surnames sharing these soundex codes:

Kemper, Kempers, Kimber, Kimberlin, Kimberly, Kimbrell, Kimbro, Kimbrough, Knepper, Knippers, Camber, Cambridge, Chamberlain, Chamberlin, Chambers, Comfort, Comper, Confer, Conibear, Conover, Conpropst, Converse, Convery, Coomber, Cumberland

© Sue Adams 2013

The Marquis

The 1841 census records both Mary and Robert working as domestic servants in the same household[3].   This census does not distinguish between types of servants, but the near to last or last position in the list of servants suggests junior posts.  Even taking into account that they were in their early twenties, this appears to be a decline in status to working class.  Well, until you consider that Henry, Marquis of Anglesey was their employer and the address, Uxbridge House, Old Burlington Street was the aristocrat’s rather grand London house.

The Earl

The 1851 census reveals that Robert had risen to the position of valet, the Marquis’ personal assistant and a senior post in the household[4].  Mary is found at her brother-in-law’s (James Simms who married Anne Lamb) house in Bromsgrove with her unmarried sister Sarah[5].  Both Mary and Sarah’s occupations were recorded as housekeeper.  As part of the extended family, I think it more likely that the sisters were visitors than employed by James. The housekeeper was the most senior female position the household who supervised servants and kept the household accounts.  I do not know where Mary was housekeeper, but it was not Uxbridge House as that position was occupied by Jane Wilkins.

Evidence of Mary Lamb’s connection with another aristocratic family has been passed down through Mary Louisa Wilson, grand-niece and benefactor of Mary Lamb:

• A photograph album containing pictures annotated with names of several children of Charles James Fox Stanley and Frances Augusta Campbell, featured in Cartes de Visite album links to the Stanley family and Earls of Derby.
• A lavishly illustrated New Testament with hand written annotation on the fly leaf

Mrs Lamb-Mrs Stanley annotation

M^rs Lamb
with M^rs C. Stanley’s kind regards
and best wishes for
Jan^ry 1^st 1853

The status of Mrs

Now, you may ask, who were the Mrs Lamb and Mrs C. Stanley referenced in the annotation?  First, we need to consider some 19^th century naming conventions[6]:

• Mrs has not always denoted marital status, but denoted social status in the sense of a mistress who governs servants or business.  Consequently, Mrs was applied to unmarried housekeepers into the mid 20^th century to distinguish their social status from the under servants.  Mary Lamb is a good candidate.  I can rule her mother, a Mrs by marriage, who died in 1851, but not her housekeeper sister Sarah.
• The form of address for a married woman using her husband’s first name appeared in ca. 1800 in the upper classes and became common in all social strata.  So Mrs C. Stanley in 1853 is consistent with being Frances Augusta, the wife of Charles Stanley.

In 1851, Charles James Fox Stanley and his family resided at Knowsley Hall, Lancashire, in the household of his father, Edward, the Earl of Derby.  This very grand household lists 66 servants, but no housekeeper.  Could Mary Lamb have been the absent housekeeper?

Moving up the social and economic scale

As live-in servants, Robert and Mary could potentially have saved a large proportion of their earnings.  I don’t have any direct evidence of their annual income, but Mrs Beeton’s famous book gives an idea of the range.  Using the Measuring Worth website gives an indication of the modern equivalent using the 2011 average earnings for a conservative estimate.  Working for high ranking aristocracy, it is possible that they achieved the upper end of the range.

After at least 13 years in service and both having risen to senior positions, it is likely that Robert and Mary were well placed to marry.  On 22 April 1854 Robert obtained a marriage license from the diocese of London in person.  He swore that there was no impediment to the marriage and that Mary Lamb

“hath had her usual place of abode within the said Parish of St Margaret Westminster for the space of fifteen days last past”.

The choice of church was aspirational as St Margaret’s is right next to Westminster Abbey.

Marriage Certificate – Robert Fleming & Mary Lamb

Bride: Mary Lamb
Groom: Robert Fleming
Date: 25 April 1854
Location: St Margaret’s, Westminster
Bride’s address: 32 Abingdon Street
Groom’s address: 10 Half Moon Street, Piccadilly

The bride’s address, within a stones throw of the church, may have been a matter of fulfilling the residence requirement of the marriage license, rather than a permanent residence.  The groom’s address is the location of Flemings Hotel.  Robert and Mary’s combined resources, skills and experience made a formidable team in a business targeted at serving the aristocracy.  The marriage was almost certainly a fundamental in the success of the hotel.

By the time of Robert’s death in 1891, his estate was valued at £29,487 8s 2d[7], equivalent to at least £2.6 million using the most conservative measure[8].

Respectable and hard working.  Definitely middle class.

© Sue Adams 2013