Genealogy Chat

Hi all, I've put this in another thread, but it has got lost, so apologies for resurrecting it! I have an ancestor who is down on what i believe to be his marriage certificate as a 'whitesmith'. All other evidence points to him being a watchmaker. Are the two compatible - as i thought whitesmith was for larger items? Mark

Hi Mark I too have whitesmith's - I thought they worked with polished metals, mostly tin but then again I am probably wrong. I suppose there could be a connection to the watchmaker. Jo

You'd think he'd put his poshest version on the marriage cert, wouldn't you? I'd have thought a watchmaker had more prestige than a whitesmith, but I guess they're all skilled tasks. How much overlap, though? Christine

On the website Old Occupations a Whitesmith is described as a Tinsmith. Whitesmith From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia A whitesmith is a person who works with white or light-colored metal (such as tin) and does finish work, such as filing and/or polishing, on iron to remove black oxides. Whitesmith can also refer to the person who polishes or finishes the metal rather than forging it. The soft metals a Whitesmith uses are not as good for making strong weapons as are the metals used by a Blacksmith. Georgina.

I must admit I would probably want some more evidence that this was the same person! Do you have anything to show he was still a watchmaker AFTER the marriage? Somepeople might have to give up such close work due to poor eyesight................. Merry

Hi Merry, I must admit that I am having doubts that the marriage is the right one. The watchmaker evidence comes from 1851 census where he is a watch balance maker, and from his place of birth Prescot which was a renowned watchmaking centre. My guess is that they moved top Coventry (also a big watchmaking centre for work). I have a family in Prescot in 1841 who seem to match , but they are also watch-makers, so the marriage is looking less likely. The facts are: 1) Birth certificate from 15/11/1861 for Mary Jane Brown, father John Brown watch balance maker and mother Elizabeth Simpson. 2) 1851 census shows Elizabeth and John at Waterloo Street Coventry St Johns both aged 30. - he is a watch balance maker. She is from Oldham, he is from Prescot 3) marriage cert for John Brown aged 30 Whitesmith, father Richard Brown Whitesmith and Elizabeth Simpson (father John), both resident at 27 and 16 Swan Street respectively. married July 1st 1850 at Manchester cathedral. 4) Elizabeth and John had a first child in 1851 - Richard which matches his father's name as in the marriage cert if correct, also matches an 1841 Prescot family. HELP!!!!!! Mark

A watch balance maker isnt really the same thing as a watchmaker - watch makers were apprenticed whereas a watch balance maker, although probably quite skilled work, was something that could be fairly quickly taught, I should think. Cheaper watches might have balances made of 'white metal' and that ties in nicely. OC

OC, I think I love you! I had 'lost' John in 1861 - Elizabeth and the young Richard (trnscribed as Crown) are in Coventry with a lodger, but John was missing. She remarries one William Elliott 3 years later, so I wonder if they had had a tiff? However, I think I've got him now, back home in Eccleston 'visiting' - still a watch balance maker ! Is there any way anybody can think of that I can prove this marriage? Mark

Did they have any children you could get the birth cert for? Or have you done that already??? Merry (bit rash, that comment to OC!!!!! lol)

oops, you have........must be you loving OC that put me off!! Merry

Hi again Merry, There are two John Browns in Prescot in 1841, both rather unhelpfully 'watchmaker's. One is given as 22 which ties in rather better with 'my' John who is 30 on that marriage cert in 1850, and one is 19. Advantage of the 19 year old is that he is a bachelor while the 22 year old is married to a Jane and has a baby daughter. My gut feel is that it must be the 19 year old as his father is Richard, who is the father on the marriage cert, and which is the name of John and Mary's first-born, but I can't prove it!!!! Mark