Find Ancestors

Those two family's named Hawes in the 1941 Census surely must be related to each other. When you guys move you certainly move fast.

The baptism of Samuel Nicholas Hawes 12th oct 1823 would have made him about 38 when Eliza was born 1862 so it is possible he could be the father?

What going on guys we have just jumped from being a boat builder to being an inmate at pentonville prison with a complete name change??? SNH??

You have to think a little less linearly and literally.

The only significance of the Samuel Nicholas Hawes was a death that could match with a father for Eliza. That's a pretty tenuous connection -- but certainly worth exploring. Chris found his early records, I traced him forward. He doesn't seem to have married/had children.

I had already suggested the very common situations that would result in a child appearing in census (and/or birth) records under a different name from the name they married as, with a different father from the father they named on their marriage certificate.

The Samuel and Naomi Hawes couple in 1861, married 1859, died 30+ years later, are ripe for being parents of a child born in the London area in 1861ish.

They don't appear together ever again in census records -- although they didn't die until much later. And I can't find either of them separately.

If they had become estranged before 1871, it is extremely likely that Naomi would have partnered with someone else -- and that she and any children she had with Samuel would appear in the 1871 census under her new partner's surname.

I found a household that matches those specs to a T. There is a Naomi born in Cambridgeshire, there is a daughter Eliza born c1862.

The head of that household is a man who was a widow in 1861, with the son shown in the 1871. There is no marriage for his name to a Naomi ever.

I think this is a good working theory -- that Naomi Cole Hawes became estranged from Samuel Hawes after having daughter Eliza, and partnered with Alfred Clarke.

Alfred Clarke, to all appearances a prosperous tradesperson, was in prison in 1881. Naomi can't be found under his surname, Clarke. She dies in 1889 in Shoreditch as Naomi Dawes. (If they are one and the same person, of course!)

-- edit --
Yes, you're right, Hawes! The death I posted on page 1, from FreeBMD - "Dawes" was a brain glitch. ;)

The only person I see in 1881 who looks possible for her -- there being no marriage of a Jacobs to a Naomi to account for her -- is:

Name: Naomi Jacobs
Age: 41
Estimated birth year: abt 1840
Relation: Head
Where born: Stapleford, Cambridgeshire, England
Condition as to marriage: Widow
Occupation: Annuitant

Civil Parish: Shoreditch
County/Island: London
Street address: 1 Hoxton Sq

Naomi Jacobs 41
Rosetta Jacobs 7 - born Whitechapel
Maria Jacobs 5 - born Islington


and I haven't got any further with them so far.

And I do have to leave!

But that's my theory for now. ;)

Will have a digest later, Downham and Soham both Ely way...this was that 1859 marriage.

Naomi Cole
Spouse Name: Samuel Hawes (Milliner)
Spouse Age: Full Age
Record Type: Marriage
Marriage Date: 18 Dec 1859
Parish: St Marylebone
County: Middlesex
Borough: Westminster
Father Name: John Cole
Spouse Father Name: Samuel Hawes (Cabinet Maker)

Safe travelling Janey, Happy Christmas :-)

Chris :)

Yes I second that safe travelling Janey and happy Kissmas! I have just returned after dropping my 14 year old daughter of at the local theatre to watch a pantomine with her friend, she has been looking forward to it for weeks.

I think i know what you mean by thinking less Lineraly and Literally. At the moment it is only theories on conjection and not applicable. A sort of process of elimination untill there are no more theory's to explore and once that happen's will just have to remain as one of life little mystery's. When that day come's one will focus on the possitive aspects rather than the negative and that it was good and never bad.

You see i must be the sort of guy who would like to believe that on Eliza's marriage to Frederick she gave the correct name of her father because she knew irrespective whether he was dead or alive (I don't think I am being cynical). There must have been something between them. They married in 1881 (had 16 children, of which eight survived into adulthood) and remained that way untill Eliza's death in 1936 (EDIT 1933), a total of 55 years.

I know life is not a bed of rose's (especially this time of year) and I think I have lived long enought to know a little bit about it. And I agree with you entirely that if Eliza's parent's did remain together untill Samuel's death (and she may well have been born out of wedlock) her mother may well have taken up with someone else (not nice on ones own). My poor old mum is on her 3rd husband having seen two die.

Yes I know it is slender but if the Samuel Hawes who died in 1873 and he is the only one to die with that name between 1861 and 1881 then as you say it is worth exploring. In life there is death and death there is life they are just extensions to each other.

And again as you say the Samuel Hawes who died in 1873 may not have been the Samuel Hawes who fathered Eliza Hawes and her father who ever he was dissappeared in the night and Eliza's mother told her he had died.

Them theories are pretty heavy but anything is possible?? I am liking seeing Islington, Shoreditch, Hoxton area's mentioned. A Noami Dawes was mentioned as dieing in Shoreditch 1889. Should it be Noami Hawes and Not Noami Dawes?

My best wishes go out to you all!

Coming back after a very welcome long absence from the keyboard -- this was the last thing I was doing here before leaving, so I'll just pick up here. ;)

The marriage info Chris posted gave father John. So this is that Naomi in 1851:

Name: Naomi Cole
Age: 15
Estimated birth year: abt 1836
Relation: Daughter
Father's name: John Cole
Gender: F (Female)
Where born: Downham, Cambridgeshire, England

Civil Parish: Downham
County/Island: Cambridgeshire
Registration district: Ely

John Cole 43 - widower, labourer
Mary Cole 22
Michael Cole 19
Naomi Cole 15
John Cole 12
Charles Cole 10
Margaret Cole 8
Alice Cole 7
Matilda Cole 5
Joanna Cole 1 MO - granddaughter


and in 1841:

John Cole 30
Mary Cole 30
Isabel Cole 13
Mary Cole 12
Michael Cole 10
Ann Cole 7
Naomi Cole 5
Betsey Cole 4
John Cole 2
Charles Cole 3 MO


I do think these are most likely to be the deaths of the Cole-Hawes couple:

Deaths Jun 1889
Hawes Naomi 52 Shoreditch 1c 88

Deaths Sep 1909
HAWES Samuel 74 Islington 1b 150


You might have to get more than one possible Eliza Hawes birth cert to see whether there is one with those parents.


The theory as I've outlined it -- Naomi Cole and Samuel Hawes marry 1859 and have a daughter 1862ish, then separate, and Naomi partners with someone else by 1871 when her child (or children) was still very young -- isn't at all outlandish. It was a very common situation in the days before divorce was accessible, and could have occurred for all sorts of reasons (I think desertion or intolerable behaviour by the husband was probably most common, myself).

By the way, someone here at GR has Naomi Cole born 1835 Downham in their tree; another person has Naomi Cole born 1833 Downham, which is probably an inaccurate entry for the same person. You could contact them to see whether they know anything about that Naomi.

Hi Janey! Thanks for getting back to me. Best wishes go out to for 2011. I will certaintly take in the ideas that you have sent via the internet and explore them in a little further. It is a theory which could even relelate to todays society.

What birth references regarding Eliza's birth do you think I should get?

Yes, that's the question ;) -- which Eliza?

Part of the problem is the inconsistency in her place of birth as stated in censuses. If I'm right about the Clarke household in 1871, I'd guess that's the inaccurate one (Clapham). The Hawes couple was in St Luke reg dist (which became Holborn reg dist in 1869) in 1861, not long before her birth, so I'd start in that vicinity. There's a dearth of Eliza-s in that vicinity in 1861-62, though.

I might actually wonder whether her birth was registered as Clarke, e.g.:

Births Jun 1862
CLARKE Eliza Wandsworth 1d 427
(Wandsworth included Clapham)

Or she might have been registered as Elizabeth? Or registered under Naomi's birth surname? --

Births Dec 1861
COLE Eliza Islington 1b 169

I just don't see any obvious candidate at all. All you can do is browse the possibilities at FreeBMD and see whether you can do any better!

I think what I might do is get the death certificate for Naomi Hawes 1889 and see who the informant of death was -- it might give you a name to investigate further, and it might even have been Eliza.

You referred to "Eliza's death in 1936". That would be as Eliza Keyte? I can't see such a death. Two Elizabeth Keytes died in 1936 -- in Evesham (aged 77) and Bedwelty (aged 0). Might it have been 1933?

Name: Eliza Keyte
Death Registration Month/Year: 1933
Age at death (estimated): 71 = dob c1862
Registration district: Edmonton
Inferred County: Middlesex
Volume: 3a
Page: 547

I was just hoping her age at death might give us a better fix on her date of birth.

That death was registered in the jul-aug-sept quarter, so if that is our Eliza and her age at death was accurate, she was born between June 1861 (almost 72 at death in June 1933) and Sept 1862 (just turned 71 at death in Sept 1933). Her exact date of death could narrow it to a 12-month period.

How about: the surname was mistranscribed into the GRO index?

Births Sep 1862
HOWES Eliza Islington 1b 252

(The retyped GRO index does say Howes -- I checked the image -- but it could have been mistranscribed from the certificate; I have a couple of them myself, e.g. Rossiter transcribed into the index as Rosseter.)

Yes I do appologise for that Eliza Keyte (nee Hawes) did in fact die in 1933. I have a copy of her death certificate and it states that she died on 13th July 1933 at North Middlesex Hospital, The certificate also states Eliza as being the husband of Frederick Keyte. The informants name was given as Lucy Ives (daughter).

I also have Frederick Keyte's death certificate and it states that he died on the 2nd August 1941 and again the informants name was given as L Ives (daughter).

Frederick and Eliza did in deed did have a daughter called Lucy born 1892, Who would have been the sister to my grand father born 1905. I was able to accertain from Lucy's brother Alfred's 1st world war details that in 1919 Lucy was then married to a Mr Tingley (Harry). And census records and contact from other genes members tell me that they had four children Albert 1910, Ivy 1912, Violet 1913 and William 1915.

I have assumed that at some time between 1915 and 1919 Harry Tingley has either died or became estranged from Lucy.

My reasoning: : Lucy Ives named as daughter on both her parents death certificates and no grandaughters of Frederick and Eliz'a's that I know of with the name Lucy. I have checked birth index's relating to last name Ive's mothers maiden name keyte and three have appeared, Lilian R 1919, Violet 1921 and Queenie L 1922 all born Edmonton.

I could find no marriage ref for a a Lucy keyte to a Mr Ives. I did find a marriage reference of a Lucy Tingley to a Mr George T Ives date 1950 edmonton. Again I have assumed that Harry Tingley may not have died untill late in life, refused to to divorce Lucy and she had to wait untill 1950 to marry George Ives.

I will order marriage certificates for Harry Tingley and Lucy Keyte, barnet 1910 and George Ives and Lucy Tingley, edmonton 1950. And hopefully they will be able to reveal some interesting facts.

I should also search with regards to the three children born to Ives / keyte and would it be just great if my theory was correct and I was able to locate all three lady's still living.

Yes I have often wondered if the the surname Hawes /(Howes) had been mistranscribed and maybe she Eliza was born born a Howes and not a Hawes?

Edit:: Eliza death certificate gives her age as 71 at death.

So if Eliza was 71 when she died on 13 July 1933, she was born between 13 July 1861 (almost 72) and 13 July 1862 (just turned 71). So her birth could have been registered from Sep Q 1961 to Sep Q 1862, if it ws registered within 6 weeks of her birth.

For her daughter Lucy, this looks like her death:

Name: Lucy Ives
Birth Date: 18 Mar 1892
Death Registration Month/Year: 1972
Registration district: Enfield
Inferred County: Greater London
Volume: 5b
Page: 351

Or -- strange coincidence -- another Lucy Ives also born in 1892, also died in 1972 in Enfield:

Name: Lucy Ada A Ives
Birth Date: 17 Dec 1892
Death Registration Month/Year: 1972
Registration district: Enfield
Inferred County: Greater London
Volume: 5b
Page: 333

Your Lucy is the one born in March:

Births Jun 1892
Keyte Lucy Edmonton 3a 326

Lucy and Harry married in Barnet in 1910. Harry in 1911:

TINGLEY HARRY *1889* 22 Barnet Middlesex

I don't see a death to match him at all, including in WWI war deaths. Actually, I don't see a birth for him either, unless maybe he was really Henry. I wonder whether his age in 1911 is way out -- he might be this one in 1901:

Name: Harry Tingtery
[Harry Tingley]
Age: 18
Estimated birth year: abt 1883
Relation: Son
Father's name: Alfred Tingtery
Mother's name: Elizabeth Tingtery
Where born: Enfield, Middlesex, England
Civil Parish: Finchley

Someone has corrected the surname on sister Emily's record at Ancestry (luckily for me): "Family known from earlier census". that was over two years ago, and the person who made the correction last logged in to Ancestry over 6 months ago, but it might be worth trying to contact the person.

And don't forget to search trees here at GR. There are numerous people with Harry Tingley-s born in the 1880s in their trees. And aha. Two who have Harry Tingley born 1884 New Southgate, Middlesex, in their trees also have Lucy Keyte born 1892 Tottenham. Always remember to search trees here if you're looking for rellies!

So that likely makes him:

Births Dec 1884
TINGLEY Harry Edmonton 3a 376

Name: Harry Tingley
Death Registration Month/Year: 1949
Age at death (estimated): 65
Registration district: Hendon
Inferred County: Middlesex
Volume: 5e
Page: 413

Thus explaining the 1950 remarriage of Lucy, as suspected. ;)


And yee haw, one of the people who has Lucy and Harry in their tree also has Eliza Hawes, 1863 aIslington. And another person who has Harry has Eliza Hawes 1862 Islington; there are also others with Eliza Hawes 1862 or 1863, Islington. ... And -- one of them has Samuel Hawes 1832 London. I suspect some of those tree owners are known to you though? And of course there's no guarantee that their info is valid -- but it's certainly worth enquiring!

Four people have Naomi Cole: variously 1836, 1835 and 1833 (did I say this already?), Downham/Cambridgeshire. No overlap with Samuel Hawes, though.