I just found myself listening to Sheila Chandra singing an English traditional song called "Blacksmith" It goes like this: O a blacksmith courted me, nine months and betterO he fairly won my heart, wrote me a letterWith his hammer in his hand he looked so cleverAnd if I were with my love I would live foreverOf course, the damn blacksmith is a faithless b_d; and this reminded me of the story of Catherine Loveless which I tried to unravel a long time ago, and had to put aside (1) because the Rootsweb list whose advice I asked seemed to completely misunderstand the situation, and (2) because I became quite upset by it. She's not an ancestor, it's one of those interminable twisty branches I wandered down. My 3rd cousin 4x removed had a wife, the wife had an aunt who had a husband, the husband had an aunt and that was Catherine Loveless. Nonetheless she is important to me. I'm going to refresh my memory and then I'll get back to you Christel
Catherine was the youngest child and only daughter of Joshua LOVELESS and Ann BUSH (they had married in Lillington in 1814, and lived in Leigh where all the children were born). Catherine was born late 1834, being baptised on the 7 December. 1841 census (all born in Dorset) Joshua Loveless 50 Ag Lab Ann Loveless 45 Jonathan Loveless 25 John Loveless 20 Enos Loveless 15 William Loveless 13 Catherine Loveless 6 HO107; Piece: 292; Book: 13; Civil Parish: Leigh; County: Dorset; Enumeration District: 2; Folio: 7; Page: 8 There was also a George c 1816, who is (I think) in Lillington, a Servant to farmer John Jean(e)s --- who may or may not be part of the family of William's wife ... In 1851; George again absent, not found so far: John had married in 1844 (still in Leigh), Enos had married in 1849 (still in Leigh) Joshua Loveless 60 Head, married, Parish Clerk, born Leigh Ann Loveless 59 Wife, married, _, born Hermitage Jonathan Loveless 36 Son, Unmarried, Farm labourer, born Leigh William Loveless 22 Son, Unmarried, farm labourer, born Leigh Catherine Loveless 16 Daughter, Unmarried, Glover, born Leigh Class: HO107; Piece: 1859; Folio: 75; Page: 17 [edit: sorry forgot to enter the census details] Ann died in 1852, Jonathan married in 1859 (and promptly ended up in prison for stealing cheese (!?), not found him in 1861), William married in 1856. So in 1861 that leaves widowed Joshua and youngest child Catherine alone together -- or does it? 1861 is where it begins to get interesting ... but I am tired of typing now and need a break (I am being very precise when I could have summarised but I want to be certain of every step) ... the next chapter tomorrow (or maybe later if I can't sleep)
George in 1851 HO107-1859-137-9, Higher Whitfield, Lillington. Still single and still a servant (ag lab) for John and May Jeanes. He has been enumerated as Lovlass born 1817 Leigh
thanks MollyMay finally found on Ancestry, didn't help that Lillington is suddenly called Tillington; and he is George LOOLASS
Just had a look at Leigh OPC & followed the Family a while, but Catherine didn't get a mention in that area after 1851. Can it be she who married George budden in 1866 reg'd in Sherbourne? FreeBMD. She was a witness at the marriage of an Enos in 1849 whose father was Joshua,a parish clerk. Was he another brother? Free BMD also has a marriage for a Joshua in Sherborne 1852.
oh, Wendy, glad I got you interested! Yes, yes, and don't think so (but hadn't noticed that marriage before ... may need looking at) The next chapter to folllow ... shortly ...
P.S. the problem with Leigh is that it was a chapelry of Yetminster, many events that happened in Leigh turn up in the Yetminster parish records
This is Catherine in 1861; Joshua Loveless 70 Head, Widow, Ag Lab, Leigh Catharine Loveless 25 Daughter, Unmarried, Glover, Leigh Frederick G Loveless 1 Months, Grandson, -, Leigh George Button 25 Lodger, Unmarried, Blacksmith, N/K RG 9; Piece: 1359; Folio: 34; Page: 15 So, things I noticed about this census: 1. Joshua is no longer the Parish Clerk, this is now his son William 2. there's a grandson -- could belong to anyone, all the sons are now married, but is it Catherine's child? 3. Oh, yes, the Blacksmith -- who doesn't know where he was born .... hmmm First thing I did was look for the birth/baptism of the child. FreeBMD Births Mar 1861 Lovelass Frederick Charles Budden Sherborne 5a 358 Ok, then maybe what I (am the transcriber) thought was a G is really a C. And what is this Budden, and the mysterious blacksmith called Button? and then the Baptism clinched it: Name: Frederick Charles Budden Loveless Baptism Date: 17 Nov 1861 Parish: Leigh Mother's Name: Catherine Loveless Oh, I thought they are living with her father, they had a baby, they'll get married soon ... And as ma-dotcom already pointed out Catherine did marry George Budden BUT not until her father was dead, Frederick Charles was dead, 3 more illegitimate children had been born (2 of whom died), and then he married her on 7 Apr 1866 in Yetminster ... FIVE YEARS later, why the wait -- he was obviously still around, the babies are pretty regular The other illegitimate children are: Edmund George Loveless 1862 – John Loveless 1864 – 1864 Elison Budden Loveless 1866 – 1866 I believe that the bolded names are highly significant ... but I can't tell you why yet I will move onto 1871 in another message.
Just because you want to go to bed, you are making the rest of us wait for the ending! Good sleuthing, Mugswort's Mom
Thanks Sue It's good to see that you already care about what happens to Catherine, and already she's been through quite a lot I know it takes longer this way, I'm doing it like this mainly because I want to get you involved in the way I got involved and so that you understand Please stick with it, it gets really interesting
I should also say that the name ELISON gave me all sorts of trouble; on some records it was Alicia, on others Alice, even Elizabeth ... well, you'll see
This is Catherine in 1871 in Yetminster: George Button 37 Head, Married, Blacksmith, born Yetminster Kate Button 29 Wife, Married, Blacksmith's Wife, born Yetminster Edwin Button 9 son, unmarried, scholar, born Yetminster Alice Button 4 daughter, unmarried, scholar, born Yetminster Jane Button 1 daughter, unmarried, -, born Yetminster Class: RG10; Piece: 2017; Folio: 13; Page: 19 Edwin is really Edmund Alice is really another Elison Jane is a complete puzzlement -- as far as further records go, there is a Robert (1881 census, marriage, birth reg Jun 1/4 of 1870 etc) (although I can't find his baptism -- but nor can I find a baptism/birth reg for a Jane ... it's strange, it's one of those things) Now, I almost got excited -- a birth place for George! except everyone is born in Yetminster, and we know Catherine wasn't, and Edmund was actually baptised in Longburton (and that is his birthplace on later censuses) But, I dutifully checked for a George Budden/Button baptism in Yetminster ... but you guessed already didn't you ... there's nothing there
This is Catherine in 1881, back in Leigh: Catherine Budden 47 Head, Widow, Glover, born Leigh Edmund Budden 17 Son, Unmarried, Ag Lab, Longburton Elison Budden 13 Son, Unmarried, _, Yetminster Robert Budden 10 Son, _, _, Yetminster Ellen Budden 1 Daughter, _, _, Yetminster RG11; Piece: 2116; Folio: 40; Page: 26 Of course Elison isn't a son Is Robert the Jane from the 1871 census? the age suggests maybe not, but the birth reg I found suggests yes ... and I've double checked again today, there isn't a Jane Ellen is a bit of a pain; I believe the age should be 7, she was baptised in 1874, but the only birth reg I could find that roughly fits was in 1872 (the 1891 census suggests 1874 also) And Catherine is a widow, so George has died (so I'll never find out where he was born), right? Wrong ... I shouldn't need to tell you this (have you guessed?), but I cannot find a death for a George Budden that fits the data I have. Unless it is the George BATTEN who dies aged 42 in the Dec 1/4 1878 Sherborne RD -- well, maybe, let's see ... he was buried in Holwell according to the Dorset Deaths & Burials on Ancestry -- and a glance at the parish registers for Holwell shows a lot of Battens, and this baptism: 4.6.1837; George son of; not given & Jemima; BATTEN; Holwell (from opcdorset.org)
I can continue to trace Catherine in each census, until her death in 1912. She is a widowed Catherine Budden on all of them. Honestly, I would have left it there and just assumed that George's death is (yet) another death I just can't pinpoint. But there's something not right. I found this in the Leigh parish register on 24 Aug 1883 (from opcdorset.org): Elizabeth; Baseborn daughter of ; Catherine LOVELESS; Leigh; Glove-maker; St Bartholomew Robert; Baseborn son of; Catherine LOVELESS; Leigh; Glove-maker Ellen; Baseborn daughter of ; Catherine LOVELESS; Leigh; Glove-maker I promise you that I have searched high and low for another Catherine Loveless, a glover, from Leigh/living in or near Leigh/having some vague connection to Leigh -- there just isn't one. Ok, it says Elizabeth and not Elison, and there are no ages/birth dates given so can I be 100% sure? But, isn't this my Catherine getting her children re-baptised, and only those children she had after her marriage to George Budden, and as a single woman? She obviously considers that there is some kind of problem with that marriage. (For example, was it bigamous?)
I am going to throw this into the pot. 1851 census HO107-1855-16-25, Great Canford,Poole. Robert Budden b1803 carpenter Matilda b1814 Samuel b1832 Carpenter Edmund b1834 blacksmith Alfred b1836 lab Fanny dau b1842 Calra dau b1845 Elinor dau b1847 Elison dau b1850 Elizabeth Budden 1776 mother Some name co-incidences for you to ponder.
Oh my MollyMay aren't you sharp!? you must have picked up on the few little hints I left lying around... although I have put off telling some things, like I'm especially surprised no-one asked about a certificate or parish record for the marriage. Now I know someone's paying attention, should I get on with the story?
Of course you must - well who is listed as George's father on the m/c then? As a guess could Edmund be Edmund George?
I did look for Robert's marriage to Matilda 16/10/1831 and noted her maiden name was also recorded as Budden!
Christel have you followed any of Catherines children i.e. Robert? & the Cross Lady,'family name who has a private tree, not you is it? Sounds a bit like he was 'dead' to her anyway, perhaps because of bigamy or he moved on & she needed to reinstate herself. I wonder if George had two families on the go,? a blacksmith had reason to move aboutabit. Sorry I missed MollyMays input here just viewed your last, must stop the shortcuts.
I pondered some time on how to prove George Budden the blacksmith a bigamist, or otherwise. First of all I needed to work out who he was. I began by taking him at face-value; what did I know (or rather think I know) about him? Roughly when he was born, that he was a blacksmith, that he was called George, that he was called Budden, that he never admitted where he came from; I also knew what he named his children. I looked again at the parish record for his marriage; what else does it tell me about him? 1866 April 7th; George BUDDEN ; Full age; Batchelor; Blacksmith; Yetminster; Robert BUDDEN ; Carpenter & Catherine LOVELESS ; Full age; Spinster; ; Yetminster; no entry; Banns Witnesses: G. POOLE , Ann CHISMAN ,(transcript from opcdorset.org) (Interesting that Catherine does not give her father's name - does she know this is a dodgy marriage? -- given her re-baptism of the children in 1883 I don't think so, but perhaps I misunderstand her motives for that. But maybe Joshua knew something and she knew he disapproved, but not necessarily why?) So I began looking for George Budden (preferably a blacksmith) with father called Robert (preferably a carpenter), born in Dorset c1834. I found one, George, son of Robert & Sarah, born Whitchurch Canonicorum, bap. 21 Oct 1832. But since I can find him in the 1861 census I ruled him out I remember ruling out another blacksmith called George Budden from Morden, c 1833. I think his father was a carpenter but called James. I can't remember all the stages and thoughts and processes I went through trying to find this man. Did he lie about his father's name, did he lie about his name? I tried to get help, got confusion, and some hostility. I gave up. (I'm stopping here 'cos I see a reply from ma-dotcom in my email and I want to reply to her)
