While tracing back through the life of James YEOMANS recently, I came to a standstill at his birth. There were two likely baptismal records of Josephs whose fathers were both called William but which one was the correct one? One had a mother called Mary, the other, Elizabeth. Never mind, I thought, I’ll just use the censuses.
The problem was however, that I couldn’t find Joseph YEOMANS in the 1841 census – the one that could give me his parents names and take me another step back in the line. I had Joseph’s marriage record so knew he was married in St. Philip’s Church, Birmingham in 1845 (now Birmingham Cathedral) and the ’51 and ’61 censuses located him there. A general name search (variants on and off) and an area limiting search came up with nothing. It’s possible he was living/staying elsewhere that night but also possible the transcription was askew.
The marriage certificate gives his father’s name as William YEOMANS – a tin plate worker. Joseph’s precise age is not given, only ‘of Full age’ to indicate he was at least 21. The 1851 census gives 27 which means he would only be 17 in 1841 and likely (although not guaranteed) still living at home. Locating it would hopefully solve the issue of which mother was his.
William and Mary YEOMANS were found quite easily, yet I could not find William and Elizabeth.
Presuming it was likely a different spelling of the name, Yeomans, I searched using a variety of name combinations. Finally, I searched for Jos* Yeomans and huzzah! There he was WITH his father William and mother, Elizabeth, who had been recorded as Wm & Elizth. For further proof this was the right family, both Joseph and his father were recorded as Tin Plate workers AND they were living on Summer Lane (the address given on Joseph’s marriage certificate).
His age was a couple years out from the birth years given on subsequent censuses but it fit very well with the 1822 baptismal record.
Interesting to note that he gives his age as 1 year younger than his wife, Catherine on the 1851 census and 1 year older than her on the 1861 census which are both 2/3 years younger than his actual age.
At midnight on 21 October 1877, three police officers went to a house in Court No. 2, Rivett St and found a woman, Sarah Sharratt, bleeding from about ten wounds on the head and arm. She had been attacked by our dear Hannah ROLLETT [alias LAMB]. “[The woman] stated that because she interfered when her daughter and the prisoner were quarrelling, the latter attacked her with a drinking glass, which she broke by the violence of her blows” (Nottinghamshire Guardian 26 October 1877, p2 col3).
Hannah had been quarrelling with Sharratt’s daughter all day and threatened to throw the mother and daughter out of the house which they all lodged at together. The middle-aged woman “said she could not do so, and as alleged, [Hannah] then ran upstairs, and, after throwing the contents of a slop-pail upon her, struck her repeatedly on the head with a drinking glass, which broke with her violence… [Hannah] was arrested at an adjoining house the same evening. She was under the influence of drink, and had her hand cut so badly that a doctor had to be sent for” (Sheffield Daily Telegraph 08 November 1877, p7 col6). “Previous convictions being proved against the prisoner, she was sentenced to six months’ hard labour” (Sheffield Independent 09 November 1877, p2 col2).
Of course I wanted to know more about these previous convictions but despite the Calendars of Prisoners being available online for the period 1761 to 1888, I have been unable to find Hannah or Alexander’s prison records. My visit to the record office in Derby proved fruitless too – perhaps the office in Matlock has more as there is no mention of records being destroyed.
Note: the newspaper reports record the street as being River, Rivet and Rivett St. Rivett St was located off Siddals Road. Since River Street is closest to her other addresses and Alexander is reported as being picked up drunk & disorderly on Rivers St in 1881- I am making the presumption that River Street is where the attack occurred.
Locate prison/quarter session records for Hannah & Alexander
If you lived in the West End of Derby in the 19th century, you were considered to live in the slums. It is here that the families I’ve researched lived mainly in what was known as court housing (see Discover Liverpool for a good explanation of this type of housing).
An article on the Derby Telegraph site mentions that this area was part of an 1849 report to the General Board of Health on “The Sewerage, Drainage and Supply of Water and the Sanitary Conditions of the Inhabitants of Derby”;
In Willow Row, Court 1, 103 inhabitants shared two privies and residents reported that milk would turn to curd when mixed with water from the communal pump…
Observations of Walker Lane, where 75 cases of typhus fever were reported between June 15 and September 14, 1847, were: “The houses are of the most inferior description and the inhabitants of a piece with their houses; to crown all, there are lodging houses, which are the principal headquarters of vagrants, and of those comers and goers who, for reasons best known to themselves, prefer darkness to light.”
It is in these conditions that Hannah Bates, William Lamb (& their families) lived most of their lives. The slum clearances of the 1930s mean that the court housing is now long gone but it’s important to keep these living conditions in mind when researching the people of the area and trying to understand their lives.
Hannah was born Hannah Bates in 1856. Her father was James Bates, a general labourer, and her mother was most likely, Ann Tilbury, a millhand. Little is known so far about her childhood, but it seems her father died when she was around 2 years of age. In 1872, she became Hannah ROLLETT when when she, an 18 year old Silk mill hand married Alexander ROLLETT, a 19 year old ‘Labourer at [the] Colour Works’. This seemed to begin a lifelong association for Hannah with the West End area of Derby, also known as the slums.
Searching the newspapers for Alexander brought up an assault on a police constable he had been involved in 1876, as well as an assault on his wife (Hannah) the previous year, and a charge of drunkenness. “Poor Hannah,” I thought. “Another woeful tale of an abusive alcoholic husband – this must be what made her leave Rollett and take up with William”. But I thought too soon; my next search for ‘Hannah Rollett’ brought up many more mentions than there had been for Alexander and she certainly seemed to be quite the character! With the help of the newspaper articles and some maps, I started piecing Hannah’s story together.
After a couple years of marriage, Hannah and Alexander had their first child, William in 1874. The very next year, Alexander was charged with assaulting Hannah, but because it happened ‘at Rose Hill’, she was directed to ‘apply’ to the County Bench. This was recorded in Friday’s edition of the Derby Mercury, 25 August, 1875.
2 days later, Hannah was convicted of assaulting Alexander’s sister, Sarah Ann. The article notes this occurred on the Saturday; apparently the day after Hannah appeared in the Derby Borough Police Court.
ASSAULT CASE.-Hannah Rollett was summoned for assaulting her sister-in-law, Sarah Ann Rollett, at about three o’clock on the Saturday afternoon previous. -The evidence was of a disgraceful character, and defendant was fined 5s, and costs; in default, seven days’ imprisonment. -On leaving the dock defendant threatened what she would do to the complainant when she came out of gaol; whereupon the Bench ordered her back into the dock and called upon her to find sureties for her good behaviour for three months – herself in the sum of 20l., and two sureties in 5l. each, or one at 10l. – Prisoner said that she might as well be in gaol as anywhere else, and they would have to keep her there.
There was clearly no love lost between the two and although it is not stated what the argument was about, I presume Hannah’s recent charges against Alexander must have had something to do with it.
Their second son, John William was born the next year in September 1876, which means Hannah was heavily pregnant when Alexander assaulted a police constable on the night of August 13, 1876.
MURDEROUS ASSAULT ON A POLICEMAN. -Three men, named Alexander Rollett, William Gell, and William Murphy, were charged with violently assaulting Police-constable Simeon Webster when in the execution of his duty. -The policeman was unable to attend the Court in consequence of the injuries he had sustained. -It appeared that at midnight on Sunday he went to a disturbance in Willow-row, and had no sooner arrived on the scene than he was hit on the back with a brick. He took hold of the man he believed to have thrown it, and was then felled to the ground bleeding and senseless by a brick which was thrown from another quarter, and which struck him on the temple. While on the ground a mob gathered round him and pelted him with bricks and stones, besides kicking him brutally on the body, and they left him apparently dead. He was shortly afterwards taken home, and medical assistance obtained, but he now lies in a precarious state. The three prisoners, when arrested on the charge, emphatically denied it, but a hat found near the scene of the assault is supposed to belong to Gill [sic]. -The men were remanded for a week.
Despite Alexander’s claim he was home by half past 10 that night, he was sentenced (on 29th August) to six months imprisonment for his role in the attack . Less than two weeks later, on the 9th September, Hannah gave birth to their second son and life was certainly not going to get any easier…
I have done a LOAD more research on the Lamb/Rollett family and found what I believe are answers to some of the questions I posed in my previous post (which I will write about later, I promise) but I’ve just come back from a quick trip to Derby and inputting the information into my online tree has thrown up ANOTHER question.
While at the Derby Local Histories & Family History Library, I found the baptism entries for William Henry LAMB & Rebecca TAYLOR’s children on a parish register microfilm. Their 5 oldest children were baptised at All Saints, Derby (which is now known as Derby Cathedral) all on the same day – 11th March 1849. Beside the first column, the children’s actual birth dates were also recorded – the eldest, John, being born nearly 10 years previous.
This is not that unusual and I have come across this before in my research over the years. However, these children had already been baptised as infants in St Alkmund’s Church!
Now, I have heard of some children being re-baptised after changing religions or denominations; I’ve even heard of some being re-baptised after moving to a new area. But St Alkmund’s & All Saints are both Church of England AND within a stone’s throw of each other so those explanations don’t fit.
Researching the church of St Alkmund’s shows that it was rebuilt 1844-46 (during the time some of the children were originally baptised); perhaps there was some issue surrounding this? The only other thought that has come to mind is some kind of scandal where there were concerns the children were not legitimately baptised.
If anyone can shed some light on this, or pose an alternative explanation, please contact me.