The Lieflock Line, Wootton Rivers and Tangley Trees

Uncertainty whether name is Merrett or Merriett.

Additional notes from email correspondence: Robin Lovelock:

Harriett came from Swallowfield and the following appears in 'Lovelocks in Berkshire by Parish': Reading, St Giles supplied by Jill Fleming: 1882 Mar 12 John Willam Lovelock, bricklayer, Father: David Lovelock, bricklayer and Harriett Merrett .... IGI also has 'Merrett'. Free BMD, on the other hand, has 'Merritt', referencing Marriages, March 1882 - March 1882, Reading, Volume 2c, page 499. ................. IGI gives Harriett's father as Joseph Dicker. ........

Robert:

... FreeBMD says that her SURNAME was MERRITT. It IS of course very likely that this was indeed Harriett Dicker's second marriage, the first being of course to a Merrett/Merritt/Merriett.

Robin checked the IGI - and guess what?

1871 Sep 30 Reading St Giles Harriett Dicker, age 27, Father: Joseph Dicker married a George Merritt, age 26, Father: Thomas Merritt....................

Robin Lovelock, 7-Jan-05: {7 Jan.: see my 'aside' - MerrItt - in acknowledging the posting of Graham's list of Lovelock wills. I'm coming to the view Harriett probably adopted the style of Harriett Merritt Lovelock after her second marriage, and that the mason was guilty of a tombstone typo!}

Robin Lovelock (from gedcom file provided 26 Aug 05):

James note as of Nov 2004: Uncertainty whether name is Merrett or Merriett. [3/2/05 I've changed it to Merritt here/James has Merrett.]

<b>{25/8/05 Having by now I think confirmed quite a bit of Harriett's biography, in particular her birth as Harriet Dicker and marriage to George Merritt before that to John William Lovelock, I have now changed her surname to 'Dicker' in this database, but added 'later Merritt' in brackets as that is what we have hitherto known her as!!} </b> Some more detail added Jan. 2005, consequent on my reminding James of the following:

My post to the Lovelock RootsWeb mailing list 2/9/04: "... I've been puzzled by a gravestone at Wootton Rivers: that of the elder brother (John William L. b. 1844) of my great grandfather (George b. 1846). John William appears to have been buried with his second wife, Harriett; his first, Jane, having died young. On the gravestone we find 'John William Lovelock ... and his wife Harriett Merriett' (there's a photo on the website). I've always wondered if the mason made a mistake, 'Merriett' not being a first name I've come across elsewhere, and also being so 'like' 'Harriett'. This of course is to assume that 'Harriett Merriett' parallels 'Mary Jane', which is clearly what Malcolm L. and Richard Moore and/or the compilers of the Wiltshire MI did - for that's the source of the info. given on the website in 'Lovelocks in Wiltshire by Parish' - referring to 'Harriett Merriett Lovelock'. On another part of the site, John quotes the inscription direct.

Harriett came from Swallowfield and the following appears in 'Lovelocks in Berkshire by Parish': Reading, St Giles supplied by Jill Fleming: 1882 Mar 12 John Willam [sic] Lovelock, bricklayer, Father: David Lovelock, bricklayer and Harriett Merrett. With all due respect to Jill, a (presumed) mistake (if such it was) in transcribing Will[i]am could suggest a similar one with 'Merriett'. However, the IGI also has 'Merrett'. FreeBMD, on the other hand, has 'Merritt', referencing Marriages, March quarter 1882, Reading, Volume 2c, page 499. {23/5/05 BMDIndex image is also clearly Merritt.} Returning to the gravestone, there's no hyphen, so we don't seem to be in a double-barrelled scenario. It seems unlikely (to me anyway) that Harriett simply retained her single name, while that from any possible first marriage - like John William she was 37 when they married - seems even less likely, although the minimal 'Family' info. available via the IGI gives Harriett's father as one Joseph Dicker. Other scraps from the Lovelock website are: (i) the 1891 census (Graham's extractions) has Lovelock, John William and Lovelock, Harriett M. living in Milton Lilbourne (Pewsey RD); (ii) Lovelock GRO deaths on our website has 1922 Lovelock Harriet [sic] Merritt [sic] - as well as (9 places above) 1922 Lovelock Harriet (her sister-in-law, my great grandmother), both Pewsey RD; (iii) the [JWL/HM] marriage does not appear in Lovelock GRO marriages.

Robert Sterry's response to my list post: "I'm not sure why you reject the possibility of her retaining her maiden name after she was married? FreeBMD says that her SURNAME was MERRITT. ... very likely that this was indeed Harriett Dicker's second marriage, the first being ... to a Merrett/Merritt/Merriett. So I* checked the IGI - and guess what?<i> <u>{ </i>*<i>NB Error in James's database note (edited from this) and thence website: attributes IGI look-up at this point to 'Robin'.}</i></u> 1871 Sep 30, Reading St Giles, Harriett Dicker, age 27, Father: Joseph Dicker, married a George Merritt, age 26, Father: Thomas Merritt ... {23/5/05 BMDIndex (and FreeBMD) has this: Reading, Jul/Sept 1871, vol. 2c, p. 634} I guess the spelling of her previous married name that she chose to place on her headstone was a personal matter! Or perhaps the stone mason did get it wrong!!?? I have found such errors in my own family on headstones. I'm sure it's not uncommon."

7 Jan. 2005 Graham recently posted a list of Lovelock wills, including: John William L. (of Clench [Milton]), beneficiary referred to as Harriett Merritt Lovelock [NB Merritt]. I'm coming to the view Harriett probably adopted the style of Harriett Merritt Lovelock after her second marriage, and that the mason was guilty of a tombstone typo!

24/5/05 Making use of BMDIndex to see if I can firm up Merritt/Merrett, I can't find a birth entry; the only Harriett Dicker birth I can find around 1844 is in Uckfield (and there are several other Dicker births there in early 1840s); it's clearly not Swallowfield - ?? Can't find the couple in 1901 Census.

25/5/05 Helen Norton in response to my asking whether she has Swallowfield PRs: 'Harriet DICKER, dau of Joseph & Charlotte of Risley Common, Labourer was baptized May 5 1844, born April 19th.'

But: I can't find any evidence of a civil registration of Harriet's birth. FreeBMD claims less than 20% coverage for 2nd and 3rd quarter births in 1844 (but 100% for a run of quarters either side of that period); so one might expect perhaps not to find the event concerned there - although there are 7 Dicker births recorded for Wokingham RD (which includes Swallowfield - I didn't check/know this 'til now) between 1837 and 1860, with one in 1841 and one in 1846. ..... ..... BMDIndex ...... appropriate page (April/June 1844) ...... [has a] Harriet(t) Dicker, but .... Uckfield. [see above] ..... (As far as I know there's only one Uckfield and it's in East Sussex). ..... I've viewed all pages which in principle would include Dicker for 1843/4/5. An "even later" registration is I suppose possible, but ......<b> </b>how likely is it that either the birth wasn't registered or that there's a mistake - or a complete omission - in the GRO data? (I haven't sought 'direct access' .....) {above incl. in email to J, G & R, plus Helen H, 25/5/05} Graham's responses: "I can't understand why neither John nor Harriet show up anywhere in 1901, either under the name Lovelock or any obvious variant of it. Harriet's 'missing' birth registration wouldn't seem so odd, as you say, - if she was born on 19 April the registration would have fallen well and truly into the FreeBMD 80% incomplete second quarter - but for the fact that the image doesn't have an appropriate entry, and it's not a borderline date that could 'slip' into another quarter. Impossible to answer your question in bold - we can't know the unknown - but I think it unlikely that the birth wasn't registered - things should have settled down by 1844 and in any case the vicar would probably have raised the matter. You could try ringing the Wokingham Register Office, which will have the original Registers, and asking them if they have a record of Harriett's birth, explaining to them that the GRO record does not match the PR entry. They are sometimes prepared to do that sort of thing, although you may need to submit a request in writing. Regarding the spelling of THAT surname, if you check out the information on Wills that I supplied to James some time ago you will find that her name was recorded at what was then Somerset House (I gathered the information years ago) as 'Harriett Merritt Lovelock', and that was long before I had any inkling that there might be confusion regarding its rendering." {RL: I was aware of this - see above.}

25/8/05 I replied briefly to Graham's message (26/5), contacted Wokingham RO (30/6), and later, at latter's suggestion, Uckfield RO (by post, 11/7); then Helen again (17/8).

'Reported' overall findings to J, G, R & H as follows on 28/8/05: <<...... In light of helpful recent inputs from both Wokingham and Uckfield ROs and more from Helen, I think we're forced to conclude that no civil registration took place - Graham's comment (qv) notwithstanding. In a bit more detail (some of it maybe for the website James? - it takes us a bit off the 'immediate' Lieflock line I'll grant!):- <u>Email enquiry to Wokingham RO</u>, citing Swallowfield PR baptism entry and puzzle re lack of GRO data. Response: ".... had a trawl through our registers from 1837 to 1860 - there are lots of Dickers around, but the only one I can find who has Joseph and Charlotte as the parents is a George Dicker who was born on May 10th 1838. The reference number for this certificate is Wok 1 Entry 125. As far as the entry for Harriet that you've found being Uckfield, I think the best thing to do is to call them or write to them and see if that is the one - there are certainly no Harriet Dickers in the Wokingham District for the time you've mentioned. ..........." Janine Sey Deputy Registrar <u>Thence to Uckfield RO</u>: Response: "We do have a birth record for a Harriett Dicker, date of birth 1844, Rotherfield (Ref: Roth4, no.75), Her parents, however, are not Joseph and Charlotte Dicker. ............" Cathy Manson Crowborough Register Office While away in France I read a book called 'Tracing Your Family Tree' by Kathy Chater. Among other informative stuff therein I found the following re. the post 1837 scene: '.... In the first ten years or so following the introduction of national registration, parents were not obliged to notify the registrar of a child's birth, and if a child was not registered within six months, it could not be included in the records. There seems also to have been some confusion about whether it was necessary to register a child if it had also been baptised. In 1874, fines were introduced for non-notification ... which improved the situation. This lack of registration, combined with the bureaucracy involved in copying entries as they were passed from level to level in the system, means that a number of events are missing from the indexes, especially in the earlier period. There may be as many as 15 per cent of the births missing for 1837-47, and as many as 1 in 40 marriages missing for 1837-99. ......' (page 31) No specific source is quoted for the figures given etc., and obviously there is scope for different views. However .... All-in-all, it therefore seemed to me that we can be reasonably certain that the birth of an elder brother of Harriett's - George, bap. 1838 - was registered, but that hers was not (or else there was some other error in recording or copying the information so that the entry got 'scrambled'). With my own earlier FreeBMD findings and Wokingham RO's comments in mind - both indicating several Dicker births in the RD around the relevant period - I wondered if anything else was available on the family and turned back to <u>Helen</u>, who as usual came up trumps, as follows: <u>From Swallowfield PRs</u>: George DICKER, chr 10 May 1838, s Joseph & Charlotte Banns 1822 Joseph Dicker, wid, otp & Charlotte Watkins, sp, Statfield saye {RL: presumably Stratfield Saye, Hants} (presume marriage took place in brides parish) <u>1851 census</u>: Swallowfield, Berks Joseph DICKER Head M 60 M Agricultural labourer Pamber HAM Charlotte DICKER Wife M 49 F Stratfield Saye HAM David DICKER Son 16 M Agricultural labourer Swallowfield, WIL BRK George DICKER Son 13 M Agricultural labourer Swallowfield, WIL BRK Elizabeth DICKER Daughter 10 F Sunday scholar Swallowfield, WIL BRK Harriet DICKER Daughter 7 F Swallowfield, WIL BRK A few reflections on this on my part - comments welcome: Given the ages of Joseph and Charlotte (and noting that he was a widower when they married and 11 years her senior) it rather looks as though Harriet was their youngest and that while George was not only baptised but had his birth registered (under the then very new system), the arrival of both of his two younger sisters was marked only via religious ritual {<i><u>26/8 NB ERROR - no bap. entry for Elizabeth!!</i></u>}; masculinist assumptions on the father's/parents' part?! Obviously elder brother David was born before the registration system began. Given the date of Joseph and Charlotte's marriage, one might expect there to've been other children before David; however, whilst any such might well have been living elsewhere by 1851 - any male(s) perhaps even accounting (as parent(s)) for some of the other Dicker births in the RD in the 1850s and 1860s - from Helen's PR info. they don't appear to've been baptised at Swallowfield, so [without additional work and sources] we may never know. In terms of additional data: I've rechecked the Harriett/John William L marriage via BMDIndex: March quarter 1882, Reading, 2c 499 (she definitely appears as Merritt) also (same source - BMDIndex) marriage of George Merritt and Harriett Dicker: September quarter 1871, Reading, 2c 634 (separate matching entries in each case) and a George Merritt death, aged 28, June quarter 1874, Reading 2c 229 - quite possibly our man? Turning to Harriett's parents, given their births and marriages (plural in Joseph's case) being before 1837, I tried the IGI: Charlotte Watkins, bap. Stratfield Saye 23 Jan 1803, parents Joseph and Elizabeth, looks likely (Batch No. K139442, Source Call No. 1041371) Two 'poss.', but I think unlikely, baptisms for Joseph; neither fit age 60 in 1851 exactly, and perhaps more significantly neither place mentioned is (I think) very close to Pamber (nr Basingstoke): birth 2 April 1789, bap. Abingdon 4 Sept 1793; birth 26 Dec 1792, bap. Sutton Courtenay, (nr Abingdon) Berks 6 Jan 1793 Re. Joseph's previous marriage, one or other, or indeed both of the following IGI entries could be relevant: Joseph Dicker/Sarah Harrison, Oct 1814, Basingstoke (Batch M136542, Source Call 1041202) Joseph Dicker/Elizabet [sic] Sheppard, 29 June 1817, Swallowfield (Batch M008541, Source Call 0291666) No death or burial info. available for either of the women, or for Joseph, unfortunately. Finally, re. Harriett's younger brother George: Confirmed GRO birth entry from FreeBMD and BMDIndex: Wokingham RD, June quarter 1838, 6 270. The IGI has an 1881 census entry which could well refer to him: born Swallowfield 1839 [sic]/age 42, married, Mill Carter, Mapledurham, Oxfordshire. Apart from (i) still not being able to find Harriett and John William in 1901, nor (ii) to finally confirm what now seems highly probable, viz. a mason's error ('Merriett') on the original and/or the restored/replacement headstone in Wootton Rivers churchyard, which started me off on 'all this', that seems about as far as we can/it's worth going. >> 25/8/05 Entered additional info. in my database as appropriate - re. Harriett's parents, siblings, first marriage, and George Merritt; also extracted 1881 Census entry for her brother George and expanded details of his wife and children via FreeBMD. Sent gedcom of this to James and others (26/8).