The Moore Granddaughter

Eliza E Moore, age 7, born Christchurch Hampshire, was a Granddaughter in the household of William and Elizabeth Moore in the 1871 census (mentioned previously in 21 siblings - part 3).  In the next census Eliza was still with them, age 17, occupation Dressmaker.  Life moved on for her and in the 1891 census she was a Ladys Maid, progressing to Housekeeper by 1901 and then in the 1911 census her occupation was Proprietress Apartment House, with a Parlour Maid and Kitchen Maid living there too.

There was a death registration for Eliza E Moore age 76 in 1939 so it seems she remained unmarried.  That deprives us of the opportunity to find her father's name on a marriage certificate.  Also, there is no sign of a birth registration for Eliza Moore in the Christchurch district, which would have provided the name of her mother and father.  So who were her parents and which one of them connected Eliza to the grandparents in whose house she lived during her childhood?

Let's examine the census records more closely for any clues about family connections:

• 1891:  Ladys Maid in the household of Lavinia A Dutton age 76, Head of the household, Widow, occupation: Living On Own Means, and her Daughter Louisa E L Dutton age 40, Single, occupation: Chicken Fancier.  In total there were four Servants: Housekeeper, Ladys Maid (Eliza), House Maid and Footman.
• 1901 census  Housekeeper-Domestic, with two young women as General Servant-Domestic, in the household of Frederick Lovell age 57, Lodging House Keeper.
• 1911 census  Proprietress Apartment House and in her household was Frederick Lovell age 68, Widower, Stepfather.

Now let us not get distracted by the concept of being a Ladys Maid to a Chicken Fancier!  Note that in 1901 Eliza is a Servant Housekeeper in the Lodging House of Frederick Lovell then 10 years later the two of them are still together but Eliza is the Head of the household, Proprietress, and Frederick is recorded as her Stepfather, which would make him the husband of Eliza's mother.  What luck - a new clue!

There was a marriage registration for Frederick Lovell and Phoebe Moore late in 1879 and a little over a year later Frederick Lovell age 37, Lodging House Keeper, was with his Wife Phoebe Lovell age 39 in the 1881 census.  Eliza was 16 years old at the time of the marriage between her mother and stepfather.

To summarise the overall story once the various information is joined together, William Moore married Elizabeth Hoskins who brought with her a daughter only a few months old called Phoebe Hoskins and she grew up in his home as Phoebe Moore.  Then history repeated itself - at about the same age as her mother had been, Phoebe had her own daughter, whose birth was registered and baptism recorded as Eliza Elizabeth Hoskins (1863, Christchurch).  Like her mother before her, Eliza grew up in William's home and used the surname Moore throughout her life.

The Shorter Sister

In the 1901 census James Beeching was Head of the household in Brenzett, Kent, a village on the Romney Marsh.  The page lists Wife, Eliza Beeching, then three Sons, a Daughter and another Son who was not yet 1 year old.  The next line on the page is Annie Maria Stickells, Relationship Sister, Occupation Visitor, age 28, followed by Elizabeth Harriett Stickells, Daughter age 2.

Based on the position in the list, and the surname, I think that Elizabeth was the child of Annie on the previous line, and not Daughter to the Head of the household but actually his niece.  We know about the difficulties of connecting a niece to her uncle and aunt (see The Long Niece).  However, in this case we seem to have the child's mother present in the household, Sister to the Head, so surely it is a straightforward situation!

The census says Annie Maria Stickells was the Sister of James Beeching.  As the mother of a 2 year old, and with a different surname to her brother, we would expect to find a marriage between Annie Maria Beeching (or just Annie, or even Anne or Ann, perhaps) and a bridegroom with the surname Stickells (or some variant spelling, perhaps).  However, I have not found any such marriage registration.

Turing to the GRO Online Index, we can look for the birth registration of young Elizabeth Harriett Stickells and check her mother's maiden name there.  Indeed, there is a single candidate record and the good news is that it has the expected name, year and county.  However, the other news is that the mother's maiden name was recorded as Shorter, which is nothing like Beeching.

How did James Beeching come to describe Annie Maria Stickells, née Shorter, as his Sister on the census?  Was she actually his half-sister with a different father and surname?  In the previous census, in 1891, James was with his Wife, Eliza, and three Sons.  Ten years earlier, James, age 18, was with 2 older Brothers, William Beeching and Richard Beeching, then the census before that James is one of 5 children between the ages of 2 and 12 in the household of John and Sarah, all with the surname Beeching.  All rather straightforward and not providing any clues about the Shorter connection.

Then revelation!  Between the census with the Brothers and census with the Wife and children there was a marriage - James Beeching married Eliza Shorter in 1883.  So, Annie Stickells, née Shorter, is the sister of his wife rather than himself.  What a lot of confusion because the ink said "Sister" but missed out "in-law".

The Long Niece

In the 1881 census Susan M Shergold is age 18, unmarried, Niece in the household of Henry Long and Elizabeth Long.  Starting with the easiest options, we can consider the possible sibling relationships that would connect Susan to her Uncle Henry and Aunt Elizabeth:

	Susan's father - Mr Shergold?	Susan's mother - Mrs or Miss?
Susan's Uncle Henry Long	Were Susan's father and Uncle Henry brothers?	Were Susan's mother and Uncle Henry siblings with her maiden name Long?
Susan's Aunt Elizabeth Long	Were Susan's father and Aunt Elizabeth siblings, with her maiden name Shergold?	Were Susan's mother and Aunt Elizabeth sisters with the same maiden name?

In the attempt to draw their family tree, we can start by assuming that Susan has the surname with which she was born and see if she is with her parents in the previous census.  Indeed, a 7 year old with the same name and same place of birth is found in the 1871 census as Daughter to Emanuel Shergold, living in Shrewton, Wiltshire, with his wife Jane Shergold and three other children, too.
 
The wonderful FreeBMD website gives the following information from marriage registrations, after some consideration of variant first names: 

• (Susan's uncle) Harry Long and Elizabeth Rowe (oh - not Shergold) married in 1873.
• (Susan's father) Emmanuel Shergold and Jane Goddard (hmm - not Long, or Rowe) married in 1869 (less than 2 years before the census with Daughter Susan age 7).
  

The useful GRO Online index shows that the birth of Susan Mary Shergold in 1864 was registered with the mother's maiden name of Giddings.  Back in FreeBMD we can find that Emmanuel Shergold and Dinah Giddings married in 1855 and Dinah Shergold died in 1866, when her daughter Susan was 2 years old.  So we now know that in the 1871 census Susan is with her stepmother Jane but we are no closer to the uncle and aunt of the 1881 census, either through Susan's mother or stepmother.

Back to Susan's 1881 census household: consider that when Elizabeth married Harry Long, she brought him a Stepson William J Rowe.  If Elizabeth was married when William was born, and Rowe was her husband's surname, then we need to look further for her maiden name.  There was no marriage record for Rowe but with some more persistence:

• George Roe and Elizabeth Shergold (ah ha - Shergold) married in 1855.

So it seems that in 1881 Susan was living with her father's sister, Aunt Elizabeth, lately Long, formerly Rowe or Roe and elsewhere Row, née Shergold.  Congratulations if you got the the end of this niece piece with me!

The trouble with nieces and nephews

Usually, a census household of Head, Wife and one or more Sons and Daughters is easy to understand.  I say, "usually" because there may be a child of only one of these adults but not labelled as step-child, even if that is their true relationship to the head of the household.

Often there will be someone extra in the household.  That could be an unrelated person such as a Servant, Boarder, Lodger or Visitor, although sometimes such people do turn out to be connected to the family in some way.  Of more obvious interest is a bonus person who is clearly related, such as a Grandmother, Grandfather, Grandson or Granddaughter.

Occasionally I have seen a Cousin included in a household - if you have not already looked at "The Cousin Explainer" (Cheer's Cousin!) I recommend it to you now.  More frequently I have come across examples of a Nephew or Niece to the Head of the household.  The choice is to ignore them, make a note for reference, or go ahead and try to place them on the family tree in their own right.

To add a niece or nephew to the family tree it is necessary to identify at least two relationships - whether the line is through the Head or Wife, and whether through a brother (father to the child) or sister (mother to the child).  In my experience, I have found it best to consider the easiest options first but remain open to the possibility that there may have been remarriages, changes of family name, variants of first name, errors, missing records or unmarried mothers.

In the 1881 census, the household of Henry Long and his wife Elizabeth Long includes three children: George Long - Son, William J Rowe - Stepson and Susan M Shergold - Niece.  Now, remembering that the relationships recorded on the census should have been relative to the Head of the household, my first thoughts were:

• George is the son of Henry and Elizabeth.
• William is the son of Elizabeth by a previous husband.
• Susan could be either Henry's brother's daughter, Henry's sister's daughter, Elizabeth's brother's daughter or Elizabeth's sister's daughter.

Phew!