Page 1 of 1

Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 26 Aug 2013 11:10
by graleystives
Please

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 26 Aug 2013 12:01
by dickiesam
Hi,
Where was Thomas born and can you give the census page reference for the Grayley family in 1871?

Also having trouble locating their 1867 marriage... The nearest I have found is this one:
Marriage: MCGRALEY, Thomas and MCGREAV[E]Y, Mary
Registration district: Liverpool
Year of registration: 1865; Dec qtr
Volume no: 8B; Page no: 196

From LancsBMD: MCGRALEY, Thomas and MCGREAVEY, Mary - Liverpool, Our Lady & St. Nicholas & St. Anne, Liverpool.

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 26 Aug 2013 12:43
by graleystives
Apologies - that is the correct marriage. I am away from home at the moment and dont have my papers with me and remebered the date incorrectly.
Also, I cannot find the Graley family on the 1871 census either.
However I do know that in 1872 when Their second daughter called Mary was born ( the first Mary died of malnutrition In 1868) the family were living at 12 Bridgewater Street, Liverpool.
In 1868 they were in Lower Myrtle Street.
The father Thomas was born on 16th January 1845 and baptised at St Peters Priory. In 1851 his family were living at 31 Gilbert Street.
Many thanks.

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 26 Aug 2013 12:55
by Bertieone
Name:
Thomas McGraley Full, Bach, Gilbert St, Labourer
Age:
Full Age
Marriage Date:
22 Oct 1865
Parish:
Liverpool, St Nicholas
Spouse's Name:
Mary McGreavy, Minor, Lower Myrtle St
Father's Name:
James McGraley Labourer
Spouse Father's Name:
Michael McGreavey Labourer

Witnesses,
Thomas Mcgreavy, Mary Noon.


http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/2197/ ... turnRecord

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 04 Sep 2013 09:11
by graleystives
Many thanks. That is their marriage.
I wondered whether, as Thomas is missing from the 1871, 1881 and 1891 census he may have been homeless/looking for work and out of touch with his family as he is recorded as deceased on his son's marriage cert. having said that, Thomas and Mary had children together until the late 1870s so must have been together in 1871.
I had also wondered whether he had been at sea. However on all the birth certs I have for his children he is a warehouseman/carter.
On the 1901 census he is a Marine Broker- not sure what that is!

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 04 Sep 2013 12:12
by dickiesam
Re:
On the 1901 census he is a Marine Broker- not sure what that is!
I saw that in 1901 and it did puzzle me to the extent that I wondered if it was the right Thomas McGraley.

My understanding of a Marine Broker is the same as that of a Ship-broker. Good explanation here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shipbroking

That's a big come-up-in-the-world from being a labourer in 1865. I wonder did he leave his family, go abroad, did well and made some money and greatly improved his social standing to fit with his 1901 profession? 'Social standing' may have made him drop the Mc prefix as well. Sounds much less Irish.

When his son James married in Bury in 1894, to an Annie Lancaster, James may well have thought his father was dead.

You say that when Thomas dies a few months after the 1901 census a Mary Graley is listed as the informant on his death certificate. Is she shown as 'wife' of the deceased and is her home address given?

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 04 Sep 2013 21:10
by graleystives
Many thanks for your reply.
I think this is the right Thomas Graley ashe is living withhis brother.
When he died in July 1901 his address is still 13 Fletcher Street but his occupation is given as dock labourer. So it may be the census entry of marine broker is a mistake. (?)
under informant it says
" the mark of Mary Graley widow of deceased present at the death 13 Fletcher Street Toxteth Park"
Where was she in March 1901?
It seems that Thomas was a dock labourer/carter throughout his life so I cannot understand why he is missing from many of the censues as is Mary in 1871 1891 and 1901.
With regard to Thomas being listed as deceased on His sons 1894 marriage certificate I have just looked at the other siblings marriage cert (Mary). She married a Matthew Otty in Everton in May 1894. But on her marriage cert it does not say that Thomas is deceased and lists his occupation as a carter. This does rather disprove my theory about Thomas being lost to his family.
So maybe it was James who had lost touch with the family(although I know he was known to my grandmother so contact must have been reestablished at some point).
It Sometimes feels that the more you find out the less you know!
Thank you so much for helping me try to piece this together.

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 08 Oct 2013 11:38
by colette
Hi just wondering who are Maria Graley and children (DEAM) age 3 and Alfred age 15 months living with Thomas's brother Robert in 1871 Upper Frederick St.

Its the DEAM name could it be Susan ?

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 08 Oct 2013 11:48
by Tina
GR8 to see you back Col!!

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 09 Oct 2013 12:30
by colette
Hi
Can you give us the address on birth certs for son James and daughter Mary, also what address did Mary give when she married Matthew Otty ?

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 09 Oct 2013 13:06
by dickiesam
colette wrote:Hi just wondering who are Maria Graley and children (DEAM) age 3 and Alfred age 15 months living with Thomas's brother Robert in 1871 Upper Frederick St.

Its the DEAM name could it be Susan ?
Re: RG10 Piece: 3776 Folio: 135 Page: 61
Address: 123 Upper Fredrick Street, Liverpool.
That surname for Maria looks like Otte not 'Ditto' and she is a lodger. There is this birth that fits for one of her children...
Births Jun 1870: Otte, Alfred Joseph - Liverpool 8b 198

The other child looks like Leanne? Is she one of these two...?
Births Jun 1866: Otte, Annie Liverpool 8b 67
Births Mar 1868: Otte Mary Helena Liverpool 8b 155

With this death I'd say the 'Leanne' could be a 'familiar' for Helena...
Deaths Jun 1871: Otte, Helena [3] Liverpool 8b 109

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 09 Oct 2013 14:28
by colette
Hi

Think you are correct on the Otte's so we can rule them out still Thomas & Mary should be around somewhere, Susan is the key to searching but there is nothing showing up at all in 1871.

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 09 Oct 2013 15:04
by colette
Hi
In 1891 at 3 Brighton Street

Mary Graley b 1849 Lpool Hubby at sea
Charles b1879
James b 1882
Catherien b 1884
Sister in Law Mary Graley b1853 single ?? is this not Mary.

As in 1901 13 Fletcher St
John & Mary John being Thomas's brother have Thomas living with them aged 56.
Mary's age is out in 1891 but that's not unusual, saying she is single sounds better, looks like they have separated late 1870s and are floating around staying with various family or Institutions.
If Mary is saying she is single in 1881 she could well have met another man and be using his surname in 1891 & 1901.

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 11 Oct 2013 16:45
by colette
Hi is this your Mary Graley.

Record source: A Calendar Of Prisoners Tried At The Assizes

First name: Mary Last name: Graley

Age: 29

Year of birth: 1851

Occupation: Works In Factory

Court: Liverpool

Area of court: Lancashire

Victims: Joseph Camm

Tried 10 Feb 1880 before I Temple, Esq Q.C.

Found Not Guilty by jury of unlawful wounding and discharged.

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 12 Oct 2013 15:55
by colette
Hi what connection is Thomas McGreveay who marries Isabella Rooney in 1865 ? his address from marriage is also Lower Myrtle St, Mary & Thomas have a Thomas McGreveay as their witness at their marriage, Thomas McGreveay's dad was called Thomas was Mary's dad Michael and Thomas's dad Thomas brothers maybe ??? making Thomas her cousin..

Re: Do you think my theory could be plausible?

Posted: 09 Dec 2013 06:36
by graleystives
Many apologies for not responding - i had not spotted the replies.
I had always wondered about the Maria with "Deam". I could not find a birth for an Alfred so could not link it. Thank you Dickiesam for finding the Alfred Otte birth - that does seem to confirm that these are not my ancestors. That is really helpful as I did keep wondering about that entry.

Thank you Colette too for your help. I think there must be some link with the Marys you refer to on the 1891 census. I cannot think who the single Mary is as I am not aware of a Mary Graley born around 1853. The reference to single could just be a mistake I suppose. However Mary did marry in 1865 so if her birth date on the census is anywhere near correct she would only have been 12 in 1865. I do know however that she was under 21 when she married and she was pregnant. She also ,married at St Nicholas' even though she was Catholic so it was obviously a rushed marriage.
I have also wondered whether the Mary whose husband is at sea is "my"Mary.

In 1881 I think I have found Mary at Brownlow Hill Workhouse.

I suspect, Colette, that you are right and the criminal records could well be "my" Mary. I cannot be sure.

I am not sure of the connection of Thomas McGreavey to Mary. I cannot find anything relating to Marys early life pre her marriage. As you say she lists her father as Michael but I cannot find a Michael McGraevey. I wondered whether Thomas was her brother even. I will have a think about this one.

With regard to the addresses for Thomas and Mary when their children were born i have the following:

1866 9 Court, Lower Myrtle Street

1872 12 Bridgewater Street

I will find my other certificates and post any other addresses i have.

With many of the children I only know they were born due to baptism records. I cannot trace birth records. Does this suggest they were living on the edge to you?

As mentioned, when Thomas died in 1901 the informant was Mary his wife even though she wasnt living with him on the 1901 census (I dont know where she was). There is a death for a Mary Graley in 1909 and her address was The Workhouse. I wondered about sending for this cert but if she died in the workhouse it may not help me confirm whether this js my Mary.

Many thanks for all your help.