Richard Craig. Liverpool(?)- b c 1792

Richard Craig enlisted Royal Navy 7 May 1816, age 23. (TNA)

Born Liverpool c1792 (census).

Married for second time August 1857. Father named as William Craig (deceased) - shoemaker.

Would welcome any suggestions as to possible date of baptism.

 

From Liverpool, England, Church o England Baptisms, Marriages and Burials 1659-1812 on Ancestry.

There is a baptism at St. Nicholas, Liverpool of a Richard CRAGG on 28 December 1795 - born 19 October.

Son of William CRAGG of Thomas Street, a Cordwainer and his wife Jane THOMPSON. It gives the place of their marriage, but I cannot read it.

Could this be your chap, maybe?

 

Lancashire OPC has marriage place as Whitehaven with a question mark.

 

There is a Marriage Bond on Ancestry for William CRAGG and Jane THOMPSON, but the place names are hard to distinguish. One certainly looks like Whitehaven. There is another that I am totally unsure about.

 

The first is Whitehaven.
The second is Workington.
The third is old chapel of Whitehaven.

 

That is certainly a possibility but I am not entirely convinced. I can understand him overstating his age on enlistment, but did he go through life believing he was 3/4 years older than he actually was?

With the census being taken in the Spring, by the end of the census year he would have been a year older, taking his calculted year of birth back to 1791.

Interestingly at his first marriage, to Jane Thomas in East Stonehouse in 1817, his name is recorded as Cragg, but I do not think it is his signature on the register. One can only imagine what a Devon ear made of a Liverpool accent.

 

My dad born 1902 did that to join up in the First World War. Said he was born 1899 , he never changed that. His marriage and death give his age as being born 1899. This caused a lot of trouble when I was looking for him with his family. A 5 years search done by the GRO came to the conclusion he hadn’t been registered. It was only finding his baptism in 1902 that gave me his birth year.

 

I do accept that the 1795 baptism could well be what I am looking. It's just that I would like some additional piece of corroborating evidence. I do have evidence, however that Richard was not beyond "adjusting" dates to suit his purpose.

In August 1857 he married an unmarried mother, 30 years his junior, who had given birth to a son in May 1857. ( definitely not his). When they had him baptised in 1864 they declared him to have been born in May 1858, making him legitimate as their child.