Hello - looking for Frederick Andrews, Dublin

littlealison

Ah, thanks. Will try again. - Alison

littlealison

(Continued from last year!)...
I did email the Jewish site but have had no reply.

I have now found two possible records for John Andrews
1) on http://www.findmypast.ie “Marriage: JOHN ANDREWS 1834 DUBLIN N/A”
‘Deputy Keeper of Ireland, Index to the Act or Grant Books, and to Original Wills, of the Diocese of Dublin 1272-1858 (26th, 30th and 31st Reports, 1894, 1899)’

I copied this to a file of mine last year and I can’t find it online again. I'm not a member of fmp.ie, can't get details - can anyone confirm this? Or give any more details?


2) On comparing records from Dublin Directories:

1851: ‘Jno Andrews 16 Leinster St, St Anne’s, South’
…..same address as Mary Anne Andrews in 1850 – and 1842 - could she be Marion?
If married in 1834…..but not living together sometimes, or having separate workplaces….??
...........................Or am I completely confused? - Alison.

littlealison

Yes I was, and I still am!

pinkypinky

I just had a look on FMP and can't see that record. It looks like the record of a marriage banns and there won't be anything else - destroyed in Four Courts.

littlealison

Thanks for looking, pinkypinky. It is at least possible.
And these records together do make sense with what I had already.

If so, he was in Dublin and old enough to marry in 1834....was that 21 at the time? Or younger?

pinkypinky

I believe you could marry at 16 with parental consent - 21 is the age of majority but you could marry before it no problem

littlealison

I have no birth date -
But....if he was over 21 he was born before 1813, if over 16 he was born before 1818.
(- and I probably won't find any record.)

Ah well, this is maybe as far as I can get, unless some new records turn up....
thanks though.

littlealison

I have recently found PROBATE records on FamilySearch!
(Ireland, Calendar of Wills and Administrations, 1858-1920)

- records of both John Andrews with address and executor!
So I started on a search of the 'Freeman's Journal' where I knew there were many pawnbrokers' adverts. And have managed to disentangle the two. Quite a slog.
Father died in 1893, aged 83, son in 1894.

The elder John had one shop at 21 Jervis Street.
The younger had three establishments at Ardee Street, Bride Street and Church Street.
The ads start about 1871. In 1872, the older John sold a house in Bray.
(There's one ad that says 'Jervis St and Bray'.)

He says in the marriage records in 1863 that he is a pawnbroker at the time....but in the same year there is an article in the 'Freemans' Journal' giving a list of pawnbroker's assistants and the name John Andrews is in there.
I suspect that he wasn't a pawnbroker in his own right until 1871 or so....on the other hand this might be his son and he was in Bray.
All his children were born in Dublin or county Dublin, though.

Anyway I know a lot more than I did...about the last 30 years of his life.
Still don't know where he came from!

Hermy

You can also check the Calender of Wills here.

littlealison

Thanks Hermy. I will keep that as it seems a quick way to check a name.
But, on the Familysearch version you can see the original and it gives the address - which has been very important in this bit of research!

Hermy

Oh better again - I didn't realise that!

Just checked and it's the same image as NAI.
Either way I'm glad you made a new inroad into your research.
It's great when you get a breakthrough.:)

littlealison

Didn't find images there, but it's fine.....I went back and found three Arthur Andrewses as well, all of whom I can identify.

littlealison

This might be of interest to someone.
It is the marriage database form more unusual sources by the Irish Genealogical Research Society.

http://www.irishancestors.ie/?page_id=1926

AND - I have just found John Andrews' marriage in 1828 on it.
John Andrews = Mary Anne Watson (or Marian, but same difference) !

littlealison

Hello all. Been away for a while, but after some correspondence with an Andrews relative in the US, I am checking all my Andrews records again. particularly Frederick Andrews' and his brother Arthur's children. Found two records on www.irishgenealogy.ie where the baby was baptised before it was born....I must tell them!
About John Andrews' children, I am thinking that if you have a clandestine marriage - possibly mixed religions - how do you record the births of your children? As Schulze died in 1839, and you're not attached to any church that would recognise your marriage......  I think John and Marian didn't.                                                                                              

Only Nathaniel has a birth date, and that info came from Vermont.

See https://www.johngrenham.com/browse/retrieve_text.php?text_contentid=18 . I can find no trace online of the 55 baptisms mentioned here.  Anyone know if they are available?

pinkypinky

What makes you think it's clandestine? Inter-denominational marriages were far more common than people realise. Most churches recognised marriages in other Christian churches.
Schulze was just one of the known couple-beggars of the period. Afaik, the Schulze marriages/baptisms are not included in the records on irishgenealogy.ie but you can certainly ask the GRO in Roscommon to search them. There's also a printed book of the records and the marriage records are included in the IGRS's Early marriage index.

littlealison

'Clandestine' seems the usual description for these marriages. But I have the marriage.

My point was, why no birth records for any of the six known children of John Andrews
and Marian Watson ?
I postulated a reason. Can you give me another?

littlealison

Yes, I suppose all the records could have been lost. (Nathaniel Andrews seemed very sure of his birth date though!)   And Schulze's marriages were not declared legally sound until a court challenge in the 1870s.

In case anyone wants to have a look, these dates are from other records:
Adelaide (?1841)
Arthur (?1841)
Frederick (?1842),
Nathaniel ( now known May 5th 1838, from Vermont history book)
John ?1848.
[font=Times New Roman","serif]Eva (1851 or 1856, censuses differ….).[/font]

pedroeibar1

littlealison wrote: »

Hello all. Been away for a while, but after some correspondence with an Andrews relative in the US, I am checking all my Andrews records again. particularly Frederick Andrews' and his brother Arthur's children. Found two records on www.irishgenealogy.ie where the baby was baptised before it was born....I must tell them!
About John Andrews' children, I am thinking that if you have a clandestine marriage - possibly mixed religions - how do you record the births of your children? .......?

Something very odd in this thread. For starters, in the RC and CoI Churches baptism is a sacrament – it requires the pouring of water on the person to be baptised. That cannot be done on a child in the womb. So baptism cannot happen pre-birth..

What exactly do you mean by a clandestine marriage? Are you confusing this with an irregular marriage? Or with a mixed marriage, which, as correctly noted by Pinky in the post above, were quite frequent. Furthermore, marriage and baptism are not related. If a baptism took place it would be recorded in a church register (pre 1864). If the parents were not married the child would be classified as ‘Illegitimate’ if the father’s name-was unknown (or he did not acknowledge the child) and the space for the father’s name would be left blank. If the parents were unmarried and living together it would be ‘son / dau. of Joe Smith & Jane Bloggs (unmarried)’. But a baptism would/could take place. Provided of course that the parents wanted the child to be baptised, which they probably would if they had earlier bothered with banns.

Earlier you mention Banns being read, so you need to research the Marriage Acts, marital ages and parental consent for marriages in Ireland.

As for ‘data’ coming from the US. I’d also add (no offence to anyone) that all but one of the daftest genealogical notions/stories/claims I’ve encountered have been from the US. Too many times I’ve found leaps of faith to connect a ‘John Smith son of Joseph of Dublin’ simply linked to a Joseph Smith of Dublin who conveniently happens to be around at the appropriate date and nothing more. For that reason I look at ALL information emanating from the US as a clue until I prove it myself.

littlealison

I think you are really complicating things here. what I said about baptism before birth was a joke - there has obviously been a mistranscription in one or other! Which should be corrected. (Oh - I may have caused confusion here as this was a reference to other records than this particular family.)

I needed to check my records as they occasionally did not agree with my relatives'....and I do have some agreement that their assumptions are sometimes hasty.
I have not mentioned banns (not in these recent posts), that must have been someone else.

I repeat, I have found the record of the marriage of John Andrews and Marian Watson. whether you want to call it mixed or irregular or whatever. I can find no records of the births OR baptisms of their six children I know existed.  That's my problem.

pedroeibar1

littlealison wrote: »

I think you are really complicating things here. what I said about baptism before birth was a joke - there has obviously been a mistranscription in one or other! Which should be corrected. (Oh - I may have caused confusion here as this was a reference to other records than this particular family.)

I needed to check my records as they occasionally did not agree with my relatives'....and I do have some agreement that their assumptions are sometimes hasty.
I have not mentioned banns (not in these recent posts), that must have been someone else.

I repeat, I have found the record of the marriage of John Andrews and Marian Watson. whether you want to call it mixed or irregular or whatever. I can find no records of the births OR baptisms of their six children I know existed. That's my problem.

Genealogy can be complicated, I always try to simplify it.;)
Your pre-birth baptism comment might have been intended as a joke, but I read it at face value. That baptism might also be an indication of another child/family of the same name, or– with an appropriate time gap - in the correct family, the records of an infant death and the subsequent child being given the same name (very common).

John Andrews and Mary/ Watson married in 1828. Even allowing a 20 year span for childbirths, that still means the births would predate the civil system by about 20 years. So there are now and never were official records of their births. It also means that you are in a period where baptism records can be sparse – I have several people who were baptised 1830's & 40's but the apposite parish registers simply do not exist.

It becomes highly innaccurate, confusing and complicated when working forward rather than working backward – if for example a John Smith born 1750 had three sons, one would be called John (third son named after father), and their first-born sons would most likely be called John due to the naming patterns prevailing in the era (named after the grandfather). That means possibly three cousins named John, so a genealogist would never assume one of the correct era/family group to be the ‘correct’ John. Add to that the usual pattern of given-name / surname frequency. For example Cornelius frequently is associated with O’Callaghan, Hugh with O’Neill and O’Donnell, etc. John is among the most common forenames, so there is a much higher probability of several John Andrews being unrelated.

You can only trawl the newspapers in the hope that the family was important enough for a birth or two to be recorded ('The lady of John Andrews - a son'). Anything else would be shooting in the dark.

FWIW – Weirs, the posh jewellery store in Dublin's Grafton St. is AFAIK still controlled by the Andrews family but I know nothing about their genealogy.

littlealison

Oh dear, I have done a lot more than you think.....My family, John and son John, were pawnbrokers, at least from 1849. Not badly off, but I think they were not closely related to the other, richer Andrews, as I have only found one possible reference connecting them, a funeral in The 'Freeman's Journal' of a Henry Andrews, where a possible Arthur A attended - and there are many Arthurs too. I have trawled the FJ quite a bit! Also Dublin directories. and I have had to separate the two John Andrews, pawnbrokers.

OK. There are no records of these births, or not at present online.  The other puzzling thing is that there are no apparent children before Nathaniel, a ten year span 1828 -1838. Possibly children died, or, had no offspring to find marriages of. ( - and my American relative has Nathaniel's birth date wrong. The history book from Vermont was written while he was still alive, 1895, so is very likely correct! He did well in Macy's.)

I will have to think about the combination of a second child with the same name + a baptism record, something I haven't seen yet. Back to the records. Thanks - Alison

pinkypinky

I think you are making too many assumptions. Just because something was written in his lifetime doesn't mean it's correct.
There's a disproportionate number of immigrants with a 17/03 birthday - they selected something easy to remember.

littlealison

[font=Times New Roman","serif]"History of Springfield, VT"; written 1895:

[/font]
[font=Times New Roman","serif][font=Times New Roman","serif]"[/font]Nathaniel W Andrews, son of John and Marion ( Watson ) Andrews, was born in the city of Dublin, Ireland, May 25,1838, he came to Perkinsville, VT in 1856 and in 1858 moved to Springfield and began work in the office of Ellis, Britton & Eaton, manufacturers of children's carriages and toys. He has continued in the office of this company through all its changes, except for two years 1862 and 1863 when he was in Ireland. He is now the bookkeeper of the Vermont Novelty Works Company, and stockholder in the company. He m: in Dublin, July 6,1863 Cathleen M Payne who was B: in Tralee, county of Kerry, Ireland.[/font]
[font=Times New Roman","serif]
Sounds like a serious and diligent historian to me.....[/font]

pedroeibar1

littlealison wrote: »

[font=Times New Roman","serif]"History of Springfield, VT"; written 1895:

[/font]
[font=Times New Roman","serif][font=Times New Roman","serif]"[/font]Nathaniel W Andrews, son of John and Marion ( Watson ) Andrews, was born in the city of Dublin, Ireland, May 25,1838, he came to Perkinsville, VT in 1856 and in 1858 moved to Springfield and began work in the office of Ellis, Britton & Eaton, manufacturers of children's carriages and toys. He has continued in the office of this company through all its changes, except for two years 1862 and 1863 when he was in Ireland. He is now the bookkeeper of the Vermont Novelty Works Company, and stockholder in the company. He m: in Dublin, July 6,1863 Cathleen M Payne who was B: in Tralee, county of Kerry, Ireland.[/font]
[font=Times New Roman","serif]
Sounds like a serious and diligent historian to me.....[/font]

Unless I am very obtuse the comments written by me and Pinky relate to the Andrews generations before the snippet you have shown and refusal to accept the absence of GRO/Church records.

Furthermore, and destpite the foregoing, just because a record is contained in a book does notnecessarily mean it is correct or should be taken at face value, even if written by a serious person. FWIW, the ‘History of Waterbury and the Naugatuck Valley Connecticut' (a similar tome to the book you quote) published 1918 contains detail on a distant branch of my family that is factually incorrect. Despite that, the genealogy has spread throughout the internet, on Ancestry, Familysearch, etc, all repeating the same errors, many not even attributing the source.

Similarly, Burke’s ‘Landed Gentry’ etc., and his ‘Peerage’ are riddled with errors (a current issue has one of my cousins married to his brother’s wife). O’Hart’s books on Irish genealogy are mainly mythical, he was too credulous in using the sources he did consult, assuming myth as fact. Equally erroneous are many of the ‘genealogies’ in a well-known genealogical journal, Miscellanea Genealogica & Heraldica, which commenced about 1860 and ran up to WW2. The list is endless, as are the errors. That is why sources are necessary and should be supplied.

Sometimes we have to accept a brick wall when the limit of records is reached. It is not easy to do so, (I did not like it) but it is necessary. Unless of course the person is an ancestor collector and adds people without proof, but that then causes all the other work into question and doubt.

littlealison

I am sorry, but this has not been helpful to me. I won't be answering any more of your posts here.

pinkypinky

This thread has run its course, especially as you don't want to hear advice from experienced genealogists.