The HI CUZ Newsletters have taken on a new face and distribution format. Family information will continue to be eclectic and cover all facets of family research, and all of our collective family lines.
However, they will henceforth be distributed solely as postings to this blog – http://hicuz.blogspot.com/
Reminder, your acceptance of this newsletter signifies that you will not use its contents to alter, in any form or way, the historical religious beliefs, no matter what they were – or were not – of family members mentioned herein.
The following encapsulate for those attending the Rowe Reunion in Maine
From HICUZ 41 –
Naturalization (Citizenship) papers - What follows is a transcribed version of the naturalization papers for my grandfather, William Joseph Rowe. This document (actually two attached/related documents in this and most cases) provided very important family information on my Grampa. Why did he become naturalized, as his birth, though of foreign parents, was on an American ship, thus seemingly making him American. It lists the date and place of a significant event, birth date and place, former country. It may also list other family members, their identifying data, and family friends. These papers are found on pages 455 and 456, Clerk of the District Court of Portland, Maine under 22 January 1892. Page 455, QUOTE –
UNITED STATES of AMERICA
To the Honorable the Judge of the District Court of the United States holden at Portland, within and for the District of Maine, on the first (written in) Tuesday of December (written in) in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and (eighty stricken and) ninety one (written in) to wit: on the 22nd (written in) day of January (written in) A.D. 18(8 stricken) 92 (written in).
Respectfully represents WILLIAM J. ROWE (signed in Grampa’s hand) of Portland (written in) in said district an alien, and a free white person, that he was born at Sea, on the ship Josephus (written in) in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, on or about the sixth (written in) day of June (written in) eighteen hundred and fifty-three (written in) and is now (about stricken) thirty-eight years of age; that he arrived at Boston (written in) in the United States of America, on or about ninth (written in) day of June (written in) in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and fifty-three (written in) being then a minor, under the age of eighteen years; and that it was then and still is, his bona fide intention to reside in, and become a citizen of, the United States of America, and to renounce all allegiance and fidelity to every Foreign Prince, State, Potentate, and Sovereignty whatsoever – more especially to Victoria, Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, whose subject he has heretofore been.
(stricken out – all of which appears in the record of the Honorable , Court, to wit, at the Term thereof, A.D. 1888 , a copy of which duly authenticated he here in Court produces.)
And the said Petitioner further represents, that he has ever since continued to reside within the jurisdiction of said United States; that he has never borne any hereditary title, or been of any of the orders of nobility; that he is ready to renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to every Foreign Prince, Potentate, State or Sovereignty whatsoever – and particularly to Victoria, Queen as aforesaid, whose subject he has heretofore been; that he is attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States of America, and well disposed towards the good order and happiness of the same.
Wherefore, your petitioner prays, that he may be admitted to become a citizen of the said United States of America
(stricken out – More especially under the provisions of the 21st Section of an act of the Congress of the United States
(Signed) William J. Rowe
Subscribed and sworn to in open Court. (Signed) H.H. Davis
ATTEST Clerk UNQUOTE
Page 456 is a sworn statement, signed 22 January 1892, by Daniel M. Mannix and Thomas J. Feeney, before the same court, attesting that these two “have known William J. Rowe, the foregoing Petitioner for five years last past, during which time he has resided in the United States, and has conducted himself and behaved as a man of good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and (has been) well disposed toward the good order and happiness of the same.” My father was named after this Daniel M. Mannix, a doctor in Portland , Maine United States
From HICUZ 43 –
Wroe research - Received a PURE GOLD package from Wendy Wroe of Hertsfordshire , England
SEAL traces evident in upper left corner
The twenty fourth day of April in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety Nine.
On which Day appeared personally James Wroe of Broughton in the Parish of Manchester in the County of Lancaster & Diocese of Chester , Gent .
And being sworn on the Holy Evangelists, alleged and made Oath as follows That he is of the Age of twenty five Years, and upwards and a Bachelor and intends to marry Ann Plant of Manchester as is aforesaid aged twenty four Years and upwards, and a Spinster not knowing or believing any lawful Let, or Impediment, by reason of any praecontract, Consanguinity, Affinity, or any other lawful Cause whatsoever, to hinder the said intended marriage: and he prayed a License to solemnize the said Marriage in the Collegiate Parish Church of Christ in Manchester aforesaid. In which said Parish the said James Wroe further made oath, That the said Ann Plant hath had her usual Abode for the Space of Four Weeks last past.
The same day the said James Wroe
Was sworn before me, and License issued,
Jos. Brookes, Surrogate James Wroe (his signature) UNQUOTE
What can we determine from this form, this marriage license. It suggests that the (or an acceptable) marriage age was 25 for males, 24 for women, as the form indicated. It shows James as a gentleman of Broughton, in the parish of Manchester , the county being Lancaster Manchester Parish Church in Manchester
The Bonds of that marriage appear below.
The Bonds (from HICUZ 44) – QUOTE
(Eight Pence seal mark affixed) Know all men by these Presents, That we James Wroe of Broughton in the Parish of Manchr in the County of Lancaster & Diocese of Chester Great Britain , France , and Ireland
The condition of this obligation is such that if the abovebounden James Wroes, Bachelor and Ann Plant, Spinster now licensed to be married together, be neither of Consanguinity, or Affinity, the one to the other, within the Degrees prohibited for Marriage: If also there be no Let or Impediment, by reason of any Precontract, entered into before the Twenty-fifth Day of March, One Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifty Four, or any other lawful Cause whatsoever, but that they may be lawfully married together, both by the Laws of GOD, and this Land: Moreover, if the Persons, whose Content is required by Law in this Behalf, be thereunto agreeing: And lastly, if the said Marriage be done and solemnized in such Manner, as in the License to them granted is limitted: Then this Obligation to be void, or else to remain in full Force and Virtue.
Sealed and delivered
In the Presence of
Jos. Brookes (signature)
James Wroe (signature and seal)
Henry Aspinall (signature and seal)
UNQUOTE
What can we determine from this form? It is a very legalistically written, standard form, swearing payment of five hundred pounds to the Bishop of Chester if the marriage is not consummated. A HUGE sum in that day, not necessarily one which James Wroe could pay if he (or Ann) changed their minds. Obviously marriage was not to be entered into lightly. The form is dated 24 April 1799, the day before their marriage. Did James Wroe have a seal, and was it registered with some civic or business organization, and therefore traceable. Wendy suggests that seals were used almost exclusively by officials.
Have any cousins found a similar marriage bond for one of their ancestors, preferably in Scotland , Wales , Canada , or Ireland
Wendy’s research of St Mary’s Church burial records (refer back to HICUZ 42) found a number of Wroe families, one of whom, Richard Wroe, MAY be the father of James Wroe, and thus my great great great great grandfather. Let me label the heads of three families A, B, and C. Note the bolded, underlined statements.
A. Richard Wroe, yeoman, m Elizabeth Holland, spinster 12 March 1763 – both spouses signed the parish marriage records. Richard born abt 1743; died 22 Dec 1786, in 1773 and 1781 Trade Directories – chandler and tythe gatherer; at 8 Market Street – no will registered for Richard. Richard died in 44th year. Elizabeth Elizabeth Manchester
Possible siblings of James Wroe, children of above Richard/Elizabeth:
Richard chr 17 Nov 1765 MC; died 18 January 1766
Thomas b 1764; died 7 August 1766 at 2 years, 9 months
Possible brother to Richard above –
B. James Wroe, b 1734; d 1810 10 June @ 76. James, also a yeoman, m Elizabeth d 24 May 1801 @ 60 years; both buried at St Mary’s, Manchester
John (chr 5 Mar 1762 @ St Ann
June d 15 March 1852 aged 64
Mary (b 1765 MC) d 17 Sep 1768
Ann (chr 17 Jan 1768 MC) d 11 January 1777 at 9 years
Elizabeth (chr 10 Jan 1773 MC) prob d before 1778
Richard (b 1776) d 21 March 1786 at 10 years
Ann (chr 3 Oct 1781 MC) d 8 June 1798 in 17th years
Martha (b 1782 MC) d 18 Dec 1783 at 1 year, 8 months
MC indicates christenings at Manchester Cathedral
Possible parents to James and Richard (both yeomen) above
C. John Wroe, b 1713, chr 12 March 1713 m Mary – of Salford
John d 7 Sep 1769 @ 56; Mary d 12 Nov 1796 in 80th year;
Both buried at St Mary’s, Manchester
Their children:
Richard chr 1743
John (b 1747) d 19 January 1768 in 21st year
Thomas (b 1752) d 3 March 1776 in 24th year
Mary (b 1755)
Joseph (b 1757) d 16 Jan 1780 in 23rd year
William (b 1759/1760) d 22 Nov 1768 in 9th year
Wendy said she has a hunch that this John and Mary may be the parents of Richard and James Wroe above, because St Mary’s parish burial records indicate all were buried in adjoining graves (200, 201, and 202), strongly suggesting they were of the same family. Wendy has requested a copy of the will of James (Richard had none), which may provide details. Notice that this period was not one in which people lived long lives, with several of this family dying in their twenties.
D. She also found a John and Mary Wroe of the same period, he a farmer of Broughton, in the Prestwich Registers, with the following children:
James 1741 MC
Richard chr in 1743 – father noted in Prestwich Registers as farmer
John chr 1747 of Broughton
Wendy feels this couple may be the same John and Mary identified immediately above.
E. Another Wroe family discovered by Wendy in Prestwich Registers is noted below:
Richard Wroe m ?? of Kersal (part of Broughton)
(poss) James b 1707
John b 1713
Thomas b 1717
Joseph b 1720
Peter b 1723
Mary b 1726
Wendy suspects that this Richard (E) may have been the father of the John (m Mary) (C, D, or C/D) noted above. This is a fascinating hobby!!! THANKS WENDY!!!!
In discussing the term yeoman, Wendy says that if one divided the whole of English society in the late 1700s into two socio-economic groups, that yeomen would be at the bottom of the top half. “A yeoman would own his own land, however small. If it was a large holding and he did not get his hands dirty, but employed many labourers, he may even call himself a gentleman.” A gentleman would be one who would not have to work for a living, while a farmer typically meant one who “rented the land …Working for himself, keeping any profits, but paying rent.” A labourer would “be working on the land, paid by the farmer, owning nothing, paid by the hour.”
HICUZ 46 –
PURE GOLD!!! Wroe research - Received (late Oct 99) a WONDERFUL package from a cousin in England Manchester , England Manchester
Public Records Office (PRO) records release restrictions preclude my copying or printing the will itself. In the case of this specific will, one would think it is far enough removed in time to be beyond any concerns of living people, and is not in itself revealing of any social failures or ills; on the other hand other wills could reveal information of living individuals or of information that could be of concern from a legal point of view. This restriction, like that imposed on census record information, is a general rule to protect privacy of English in a broad sense.
James’ father, probably back in 1726, signed an agreement termed an indenture, with several friends or neighbors, apparently leasing several plots of land for a term of 500 years (not sure if this meant Wroe ownership went back that far, or the term referred to the length of future agreement on the lands’ use and control; most probably the latter. James Wroe’s will was signed 10 September 1762, probated 20 May 1765, but final settlement did not occur until May of 1835, well beyond when any living heirs of James Wroe had passed away. What took so long? Here are some thoughts and a few details -
The land in question is described as lying in Cheetham, Lancashire County
Specifically, it included pasture land bounded on the North by land once held by John Bridsoake and comprising about two acres. An area termed “Rye Field” of about two acres and two rods. Another “close” called the Little Meadow, of about two rods. Another similar area called the Lower Hill of about three acres and two rods. A similar four acre area commonly called the Lady Meadow. A parcel called the Ferney Acre of about two acres. A six acre area oddly termed the “Bare Arse Meadow.” A four acre arable plot commonly termed Croslee. Next to this, three acres and two rods of land called the Nearer Crosslee. A three acre and three rod meadow termed Calles or the Wet Field Meadow. In Cheetham an area of roughly eight acres known as the Great Meadow, with “appurtenances” held “in Trust” for Joseph Heywood, Peter Heywood, and “their heirs to the term of five hundred years … to the intent and purpose only that the same term should attend and wait upon the freehold and Inheritance of the same Premises … might be preserved … kept on foot to prevent a merger and extinguishment thereof … to protect … from and against all intervening incumbrances…”
It would appear that this James Wroe [I’m boring you with this because he may be distantly related and lead, via land records, to more ancestors] neglected to legally deal with his commitments in his Last Will and Testament. The laws required him to properly dispose of the legal transfer of these plots of land. When he died, James’ will apparently overlooked this legal necessity, left the land to his daughters (no sons, hence no further Wroes from this family). When this will was being reviewed by the barristers/attorneys/lawyers of the time, it must have become apparent that the will contradicted or ignored the terms of the land agreement.
An explanation of the niceties of English land tenure, per Bruce Jackson, County Archivist of Lancaster County
QUOTE - Land could be held in one of three ways up to the middle of this century – Manorial land was held by copyhold, meaning that the transfer of land was effected through the manorial court and tenancy proved by possession of a copy of the entry in the court roll, the land remaining the property of the lord of the manor.
Other land was held either by freehold, where ownership could be transferred outright by means of a feoffment, or by leasehold, where land had to remain in the possession of a particular person or family, for different legal reasons, but could be transferred by lease.
In order to get round the various legal constraints affecting leasehold land, it became the norm to be transferred on long leases. The method varies around the country – some regions favoured the lease for lives, where the land was transferred for the period of the lives of three people and new leases were made when one or more of the “lives” died; other regions favoured the lease for 999 years, or a similar long term of years, effectively transferring the land “forever.”
If the tenant died within the term of the lease, the land should revert to the official owner, however the tenant could take measures, with the agreement of the owner, to transfer the land for the remainder of the term to another “tenant.” Bruce went on to state that the term of 500 years “referred to in James Wroe’s will was effectively a freehold transaction. It is likely that at some point in the land’s history the official owner could not, or did not wish to, transfer the land as freehold, and effected a long term lease. Without the documentary evidence it is impossible to say for certain that this is the case. It would appear from the wording in the will that a previous tenant [or family member??] transferred the land to James Wroe for the remainder of the initial term, and that before his death James Wroe neglected to make arrangements for the land to be transferred again. In this case the land would not have been assessable as part of James Wroe’s estate and should have reverted to the original owner. UNQUOTE
From HICUZ 46 – Courtesy of Wendy Wroe
Wendy found the 1761 marriage license (she later said in an e-mail, “I still can’t believe how lucky you were that the licenses were still available, AND THAT FATHER JOHN DECLARED HIMSELF” for James Wroe, the brother of my (our) great, great, great, great grandfather Richard Wroe (m Elizabeth Holland). Wendy indicates that luck was present, as “1st they were married by license and not by banns; 2nd the documents are still available and not lost; 3rd they were under age, therefore needed written agreement to their marriage (most underage just told lies apparently); and 4th it was father who signed … stating who he was. Unbelievable proof for the 1760’s … this really IS a stroke of luck for you.”
Here, in a document from official PRO files, was the signature of John Wroe (shown bolded and underlined above) my great (x5) grandfather, dated tenth October, 1761. Both John and James are noted as yeoman (landholders) “of the Parish of Manchester and Town of Salford in the County of Lancaster Salford . Both Betty and James are said to be 20 years of age. They were to be married in the Collegiate and Parish Church of Christ in Manchester
Another researcher sent something even more precious!!!!!!
This next was the marriage license, signed by Richard Wroe, my great, great, great, great grandfather (direct line). It was signed, the 10th of March 1763, showing Richard to be twenty years old, and Elizabeth Holland, his wife, to be twenty-one. Richard, a yeoman, signed “Richd” and they intended marriage at the Collegiate and Parish Church of Christ in Manchester Manchester England defeated France for control of Canada
From HICUZ 48 –
PLATINUM, PLATINUM, PLATINUM - Wendy Wroe of England
1. Baptism record of John Wroe, son of Richard of Kersal – 12 March 1713. [John is my Great X 5 grandfather.]
2. Baptism record of a son to James Wroe, tallow chandler of Manch (ester), August 1741. [This James is a grandson to Richard above, and a brother to my Great X 4 grandfather]
3. Baptism record of a son to John Wroe of Broughton, Sept 1741 [this is the elder brother [James] to my Great X 4 grandfather Richard]
4. Baptism record of Richard Wroe, 30 Dec 1743 (in the Prestwich Registers), son of John Wroe, farmer and Mary his wife of Broughton. [This Richard is my Great X 4 grandfather, and John/Mary are my Great X 5 grandparents]
What a TREASURE Wendy has been; we Rowes (and many Wroes) owe her an immense debt of gratitude. Let me just provide a brief Wroe/Rowe direct lineage (omitting siblings) down to little ole me:
Richard Wroe of Kersal, b abt 1680
]
John Wroe, b 12 March 1713, m Mary abt 1687/90, of Salford , yeoman,
shopkeeper, d 1769 @ 56
]
Richard Wroe, b 30 Dec 1743, m Elizabeth Holland 2 Dec 1763, d 1786 @ 44
]
James Wroe, b 2 Dec 1770, m Ann Plant 25 April 1799. He d 19 Apr 1837 @ 66;
gentleman, later Clerk of Police, Salford ]
]
Richard Wroe, b Cheetham, bap 29 June 1800, m Margaret Stansfield. Weaver,
carder in Bradford .
]
Thomas Wroe/Rowe, b 8 March 1830, bap 21 Mar 1830; m (?) Mary Ellen
Meagher. He a laborer, d 13 July 1892 in Portland , Maine
]
William Joseph Rowe, b 6 June 1853 at sea, m Catherine Ellen Shanaghan
19 June 1877 Portland , Maine
]
Daniel Mannix Rowe, b 14 June 1893, m Bridget “Bryde” O’Connor 20 May
1931. He d 2 Sep 1965 in Portland , Maine
]
Donald Patrick Rowe, b March 1944 [Your favourite cousin, me]
Another researcher has shared equally remarkable data. It included -
A. Will of Richard Wroe [my Great X 4 grandfather] dated 5 Sept 1769. Richard is noted as a yeoman, of Salford , and giving 1/3 of “the farm I now live upon” to his wife Mary. The will mentions sons James [my Great X 3 grandfather], Richard, and a brother Thomas. The executors were his son James and brother Thomas, who were sworn 5 Oct 1769, suggesting Richard died shortly after making out his Last Will and Testament. Richard’s Will noted leasehold farms in Openshawe, Hulme, and Rusholme, and living on Ancoats Lane. The researcher noted that two prior searches for this particular Will had proved unsuccessful.
B. Will of Thomas Wroe of Stretford signed 13 Jan 1781. His sons James [my Great X 3 grandfather], John, and nephew Richard Wroe were executors. They were “sworn in common form” on 30 Oct 1783, which suggests his death in that year. Richard owned some land as freehold (free and clear) and other plots as “leasehold”, meaning he leased them from others for a specified period, some “for the term of three lives” or three generations. The Will mentions livestock, farm implements, tools, kitchen utensils, and linens. The Will also notes his wife as Alice, a daughter Mary, and sons Thomas, James, and John (eldest). One part of the will notes a 500 year leasehold (which appears from other papers to have been disputed after his death); an address of Market Street Lane was noted, along with Fountain Street . John Wroe, Richard’s son, inherited the land as the eldest, and his name was mentioned as deceased in the papers (dated 30 July 1836) disputing the leasehold, suggesting John’s death before that date.
C. Will of John Wroe signed 5 Sep. 1769, noted, Two fields “called by and known by the Name or names of the Great Meadow ... some gardens.”
Recall that in HICUZ 46 above the will of James Wroe, signed 10 Sep 1762 which was finally probated/resolved in 1836, was mentioned. In it are words describing a piece of land in Cheetham termed “Great Meadow.” Note just above (#7) in the wording of the Will of John Wroe signed 5 Sep 1769 that a piece of land “called by and known by the Name or names of the Great Meadow” is also mentioned. I would estimate that that James Wroe and this John Wroe are related. More analysis to do of course to validate this idea. The wills are being transcribed into WORD documents for better analysis and electronic storage.
My great, great grandparents, Richard and Margaret Wroe probably married in 1821, and had the following children (siblings of Great Grampa Thomas Wroe/Rowe):
Sarah Wroe - baptized at Manchester Cathedral 23 Aug 1822
James Wroe - ditto 16 Dec 1825
Elizabeth (Wroe) Barnes - ditto 1 Feb 1828
Thomas Wroe/Rowe - (born 8 March 1830) ditto 21 Mar 1830
William Wroe - ditto 27 May 1832
John Wroe - ditto 31 Aug 1834
Mary Wroe - ditto 23 Apr 1837
Jane Roe (this was spelling on civil birth certificate)-
born 16 Jan 1839 and baptized 25 Feb 1839. An "X" on the birth certificate suggests Margaret could not write. Jane had the sole birth registration, as England
My great grandparents, Thomas (ne Wroe) and Mary Ellen Meagher Rowe – their family:
William Joseph, b at sea on "Josephus" 6 June 1853
Margaret, b Hancock Court , Portland 1856; died 22 Nov 1858 @ 2
Catherine Meagher, b 13 Dec 1858; died ???
Thomas Meagher, b 10 Feb 1863; d 7 May 1927
Mary, b 2 May 1865, d ??? (Anna M. Rowe married John E. McBrady)
Jane (Jenny), b 7 Sep 1867; died ??? (married ?? Emery)
My grandparents, William Joseph and Catherine Ellen Rowe, had a total of eleven children, though a large number never reached maturity. They were:
Nellie Mary Rowe, born 2 Sep 1878; died 26 Nov 1879 @ 1
Mary Ellen Rowe, born 20 Nov 1879; died 21 Aug 1885 @ 6
William Thomas Rowe, MD, born 15 Sep 1881; died 5 May 1955
John Henry Rowe, born 29 July 1883; died 12 Apr 1956
Edward Shannon Rowe, born 8 Aug 1885; died 4 Apr 1886 @ 1
Edwin Leonard Rowe, born 20 Jan 1887; died 9 Aug 1941 @ 54
Francis Stephen Rowe, born 26 Dec 1888; died 11 Apr 1921 @ 33
Joseph William Rowe, born 2 Apr 1891; died
Daniel Mannix Rowe, MD, born 14 Jun 1893; died 2 Sep 1965
Alice Josephine Rowe, born 3 Mar 1896; died 28 Aug 1981
Thomas Lipton Rowe, born 23 Oct 1899; died 8 Jul 1915 @ 15
Homes (all in Portland, ME) to remember and visit – try to find on Google Earth
A - 45 Waterville street from ?? to 1909 (Thomas Lipton Rowe born there; Grampa Willie died there in 1909; Great Grampa John Shanaghan died there in 1901)
B - 40 Monument Street , where Thomas and Mary Ellen lived through about
C - 36 Vespers Street (where Uncle Edwin Leonard later lived), one had a grocery store
downstairs.
D - 54 Adams Street , where Great Grampa Thomas lived at his death in 1892 and Great Gramma Mary Ellen in 1902.
E - in 1882 - Willie and Kate lived @ 48 Adams, w/ boarders John and E.H. O'Brian; Thomas and Thomas H. Rowe @ 74 Adams (or 17 Newberry St); John Edward McBrady, sheet iron worker @ 74 Adams.
All these houses are within several blocks on Munjoy Hill near Portland 's Eastern Promenade (overlooking Casco Bay and Chebeague Island
No comments:
Post a Comment