Hannah PENDLEBURY 1796-1857

[Wendyem]

Can anyone viewing this please give an opinion on its viablilty or not?

What I have, initially from IGI Family search, John Mitchell married Hannah Pendlebury- widow- 22 May 1822. St.Peters Liverpool. certificate- proven.
If Hannah was in fact a widow, a possible earlier marriage was to James Farley, mariner. Did he die early? If so why did Hannah revert to 'Pendlebury'?

Marriage: 11 Aug 1817 St Nicholas, Liverpool, Lancashire, England
James Farley - Mariner, Parish of Liverpool.
Hannah Pendlebury - Spinster, Parish of Liverpool
Married by Banns by: John Pulford B. D. Curate
Register: Marriages 1816 - 1819 from the Bishop's Transcripts, Page 33, Entry 359
Source: LDS Film 1068890
..................
An Hannah Pendlebury I've found was the dtr of Thomas Pendlebury & Jane Rawlinson.
Baptism: 19 Jun 1796 St Nicholas, Liverpool, Lancashire, England
Hannah Pendlebury - daur. of Thomas Pendlebury & Jane (formerly Rawlinson), his wife
Born: 3 May 1796
Abode: Fairhurst strt.
Occupation: Tailor
..........
Marriage: 10 Jun 1795 St George, Derby Sq, Liverpool, Lancashire, England
Thomas Pendlebury - Tailor of Liverpool
Jane Rawlinson - (X), Spinster of Liverpool
Witness: Robert Livesley; John Webster
Married by Banns by: Thomas Blundell
Register: Marriages 1777-1813, Entry 147
Source: LDS Film 1656195
....
Baptism: 7 Apr 1772 St Mary, Radcliffe, Lancashire, England
Thomas s. of Robert & Hannah Pendlebury - hatter.

rabid Speculation, but in desparation I cling to anything which may prove worthwile.

Can anyone offer other 'worthwhile speculation' please ?

These two signatures of Hannah Pendlebury are quite similar in different marriages. Sorry can't attach.
p.s. The names of Hannah & John's children follow those of Hannah's sibs.

Thanks for reading.
Wendy
#8458

[Bertieone]

Hi Wendy,

I can't convince myself they are the same signature,
the Farley marriage signature is more controlled, a better hand and letters closer together, also, Hannah Farley has spelt her name Pend(E)lbury, compared with the Mitchell marriage signature, Pend(l)ebury.

[Wendyem]

Taa Bert, that's just what I'm looking for.
I hadn't picked that up before.(duh)
even tho' OPCs marriage state Pendlebury. I can't alway spell correctly either.

Wendy

[Hilary]

I don't the two signatures are made by the same person. They are to me very different. The 1822 one is long and quite a scrawl. The 1817 is much neater, smaller and takes up less space. I would even suggest the 1817 was made by a much younger person than the 1822 one ie still as they were taught and before their own style had developed.

[MaryA]

The difficulty with those old marriages is the lack of evidence, have you tried searching for Wills or Marriage Licences, anything extra to add to the overall picture.

[Hilary]

Was John Mitchell a mariner? Is William Stampe Mitchell their child?
If he isn't please could you give the names of their children.

Do you have John or Hannah on a census?

[Bertieone]

Wendy referred to this 1841 before,

John Mitchall, 53, Mariner.
Hanah Mitchall, 44
Thomas Mitchall, 16 months,

HO107/565/10

[Bertieone]

1851

Hannah Mitchell, 58, head, widow.
Thomas, 11, son,
Thomas Rawlenton, 39, lodger,

Still living in New Bird Street, as in 1841

[dickiesam]

Coming in late on this one... Slept in!

Wendy, re:

These two signatures of Hannah Pendlebury are quite similar in different marriages. Sorry can't attach.

While you can't 'attach' images to a post you can 'insert' them into your message.

1) If you are not already a member click on http://photobucket.com/ or paste it into your browser and join the site. Photobucket is a free image hosting website.

2) Scan the relevant document in highest resolution you can manage. Make sure it is a reasonable size and is correctly orientated [not sideways or upside down!]. You MUST crop the image to show only the part that is being queried, such as a name, a date or signature. If you don't have a cropping utility there is one on the Photobucket site.

3) Follow the on-screen instruction to upload your scan image to the site. Save the image to your 'Album'. If you need to CROP, select EDIT at the top of the screen; then select the image to work on. Click Adjustment [bottom left]; then Crop [left hand side]. The image will appear with a small blue square in each corner. The cursor can move each square to adjust the area of image you want to post. Click 'Save as copy' [top left]. You can enlarge the image if necessary by moving the blue slider [top right]; then click 'Save as copy' again. Click Close.

Your cropped image will appear. When you run the mouse over it a short drop-down menu will open on the right. Left-click on the IMG Code in that menu. The IMG box will turn yellow, with the word Copied.

4) Now go to the 'Post a reply' box on the forum topic where you want show your image. Write your message then page down a line. Place the cursor at the left of the message window, right-click the mouse and select Paste. This will paste the code that you copied from Photobucket into your message. The image will not immediately appear. It comes up when you click Preview before you submit your message or click Submit to post the message.

[Hilary]

I'm assuming these are the children
Baptism: 12 Feb 1824 St Peter, Liverpool, Lancashire, England
William Stampe Mitchell - [Child] of John Mitchell & Hannah
Abode: Watkinson Street
Occupation: Mariner
Baptised by: J. Pulford Curate
Register: Baptisms 1823 - 1825, Page 194, Entry 1545
Source: LDS Film 1656418


Baptism: 9 Oct 1826 St Peter, Liverpool, Lancashire, England
John James Mitchell - [Child] of John Mitchell & Hannah
Abode: Watkinson St
Occupation: Mariner
Baptised by: Thomas Johnson Curate
Register: Baptisms 1825 - 1826, Page 378, Entry 3023
Source: LDS 1656419


Baptism: 10 Aug 1829 St Peter, Liverpool, Lancashire, England
Jane Mitchell - [Child] of John Mitchell & Hannah
Abode: Blundell St
Occupation: Mariner
Baptised by: Tho. Johnson Curate
Register: Baptisms 1829 - 1830, Page 26, Entry 205
Source: LDS Film 93878


Baptism: 7 Dec 1834 St Peter, Liverpool, Lancashire, England
John Pearce Mitchell - [Child] of John Mitchell & Hannah
Abode: Bittern St.
Occupation: Shoe Maker
Baptised by: Richd. Appleton Curate
Register: Baptisms 1834, Page 384, Entry 3068
Source: LDS Film 2045907


Baptism: 6 Jan 1840 St Peter, Liverpool, Lancashire, England
Thomas Pendlebury Mitchell - [Child] of John Mitchell & Hannah
Abode: Brick St
Occupation: Mariner
Baptised by: J. G. Headlam Curate
Register: Baptisms 1839 - 1840, Page 65, Entry 515
Source: LDS Film 1656423


Could the Stampe as William's middle name be significant?

[marchbird]

I've looked at both these signatures and think they could be the same - the first looks quite a childish hand and the second just an older hand. If you compare the capital 'P' of Pendlebury they look very similar, the upward stroke of the letter 'd' has the same hook at the top on both signatures and the 'y' at the end is very similar.

Marchbird

[Bertieone]

The lodger, 1851 census should read Thomas Rawlinson, transcription error, which gives a family connection to wife of Thomas Pendlebury, Jane Rawlinson, mother of Hannah.

[Bertieone]

Marriage, 1854, St Silas, liverpool

Thomas Rawlinson, 43, Bachelor, Carter,
Mary Crosnier?, 40, widow,

Fathers, William Rawlinson, Labourer
William Shepherd, Mariner,

Thomas, address, New Bird St. same as 41 & 51 census for Hannah.

[dickiesam]

RAWLINSON, Thomas married CASIMER, Mary
Registration district: Liverpool
Year of registration: 1854; Dec qtr
Volume no: 8B; Page no: 452

The name Casimer is on the original hand-written GRO Index page, listed between Cashon and Casley.

[Bertieone]

Thanks DS,

Just went to find it.

[Wendyem]

A big thankyou to all for thoughts & efforts on my ponderings, it's so much easier to see & maybe sort with the input of others.

Mary : not recently, shall try again-something else may have appeared.

Hilary: William Stamper ..Gt G'Father..not found on censuses. mariner.
John Pearce.? Also queried the Pearce name may have been friends or relative
of John Mitchell.. beginnings not yet found.
another son, James Mitchell, 1837 also Brick St.
Hannah at 1st marriage would have been younger, if her 1st husband died ( at sea?) she may have been still distressed at 2nd marriage. Even nerves can mess with handwriting. (Maybe the curate messed up his 'spinster/widow' bits.) remember the birthdate of young 'Harry Thomas'?.. I know, I'm pushing here

D S - photobucket. Thank you, I did make the attempt many years ago but the seemingly endless questions put me off. May have to try that again.

Bertie, the lodger in 1851 is what convinced me I may be correct, even if he was a cousin.
Amazing how anyone can get 'Crosnier' from a clear 'Casimer'!

Marchbird, my thoughts too re lettering, tho' that may be a learned trait from schooling too.

Not a definite find on baptism of Jane Rawlinson as yet. Have found 2 possibles (if Jane married at 15)

thanks again Wendy
#8438

[Wendyem]

Arrived today, the birth certificate of Thomas Pendlebury MITCHELL,b.22 Nov.1839 to John Mitchell Mariner, & Hannah Mitchell, formerly Pendlebury. Brick St. Reg'd 5th. Dec.1839.

So,was she or wasn't she a Pendlebury?

Thank God he lived- along with my Gt.G'Father William, the sole survivors of all children.

[MaryA]

Had to reread to refresh, first thoughts are that her maiden name was Pendlebury.

Could be nerves or whatever she was asked at the marriage when she said her name was Pendlebury rather than a previous married name, I have a similar instance in one of mine where she says she is a spinster, yet gives her previous married name and the father's name is correct.

Weddings are funny things for giving you nerves, similar to the age old question of whether a father was deceased or not, depending on whether the question was asked or not.

[Wendyem]

After almost three weeks wait for the certificate, I must admit I didn't feel much relieved. I shall cling to the thought that she wouldn't have given the name Pendlebury to her Son if it had been the name of a husband, same for her eldest son William who named his last child Samuel Pendlebury.

I crossed my mind that she wasn't with her 1st Husband (if indeed there was one) very long & so the name didn't click with her, It took me a while to become accustomed to a new surname, especially when having to write it down.
Or she may have been carrying a child, - Husband dead, & so a new marriage came about, - the imagination runs riot. No sighting of any earlier child before William Stamper tho'.
Well I've done as much as I can there so will have to be content.

Thanks all for assist along the way.

Wendy