The young Portuguese bride of Sir John Campbell: Dona Maria Brigida

I have mentioned a few things about Sir John Campbell, KB, KCTS, and left off suggesting that the KCTS (Knight Commander of the Tower and the Sword, Portugal) shaped his life.

As far as I can tell, Sir John Campbell stayed in Portugal after the Peninsular Wars, on loan to the Portuguese army until 1820. He left when the constitutionalists started to become too heated. When he returned to England, he lived in Baker Street with his Portuguese wife, Dona Maria Brigida do Faria e Lacerda, and Elizabeth, their daughter, who was born in Lisbon in 1818.

Sir John and Maria Brigida were married in 1816. She was 18 years old. He was 36.

Upon their return to England in 1820, or perhaps shortly before, their son, John David Campbell, was born. Elizabeth and John David are the only children I know of in this family.

Sir John was given what sounds like a reasonably quiet job in England, in command of the 75th Regiment of Foot while they were at home and not off fighting abroad. This is a famous regiment (the Gordon Highlanders) but during Sir John's tenure, I have the impression nothing much happened. (Another avenue for the eager military historian to pursue.)

I wish I could draw the curtain here and say they lived happily ever after. At this point, Portugal was experiencing unrest but not war, and Sir John had a comfortable family life in London, from the sounds of it.

Alas.

Some day I would like to go to the Parish Church in Marylebone.


View Larger Map

I've seen it from the outside without knowing (nor, at that time, caring) but haven't gone in.

As far as I can tell, there is still a plaque on the east wall, reading as follows.

"To the memory of

Dona Maria Brigida do Faria

E Lacerda

Wife of

Sir John Cambell, K.C.T.S.

Lieut Col in the British, and Maj Gen in the Portuguese Service.

She died much lamented

on the 22nd Jan 1821, in the 24th Year of her age;

Her remains are deposited in a vault of this Church.

Also of

John David Campbell

Son of the above who died 28 May 1824

Aged 3 years and 9 months"

http://www.archive.org/stream/miscellaneagene01howagoog#page/n31/mod e/2up 

Having lost his wife and little boy between 1821 and 1824, Sir John retired from the army and sold his commission by the 1st of October, 1824. Thus he and young Elizabeth (only 6 years old when her brother died; motherless since age 3) were apparently left alone.

There is always the possibility that Sir John married a second time during this period. I have found no mention of such an event, however, and the notes in biographic sources are consistent in saying he had two wives.

At this point my impression of Sir John is that he was living quietly and was enjoying a life of reasonably high social standing. His sisters and brothers appeared to have married well, and he probably had good family connections on his mother's side (the Pitcairns). I would say the same of his father's, but I haven't been able to trace them back with any confidence.

Things were about to change, and the KCTS was going to make a big difference in Sir John's life.

Sir John Campbell, Knight Bachelor, and his wife Harriet Maria: what probate told me

In 1851 and 1861, Sir John Campbell and his wife Harriet Maria were  living at 51 Charles Street, Berkeley Square, London  with four servants in 1851 and two of the same plus two new ones in 1861.

My first impression was that this was a couple who had spent 50 or 60  years together. There was no mention of children in either census, but  as Sir John and Harriet were each born in about 1781, any children they  had may well have been married and gone by 1800 to 1810.

Sir John's presumably self-described occupation changed just a little  over the 10 years. He was a Knight Bachelor and a retired Lieutenant Colonel from the Army.

The fact that he was knighted gave me some hope of finding a formal and  detailed biography somewhere, and I wasn't disappointed. Sadly, the name  "John Campbell" is hardly rare. Even "Sir John Campbell" born around  1780 isn't unique. Throughout, I've had to be careful not to get mixed  up with other Sir John Campbells and other army officers of the same time, named Campbell.

Knowing that Sir John and Lady Campbell were each 80 years old in the 1861 census, it made sense to look for information about their respective deaths first. This is following the principle of working from the known to the unknown, a good basic research strategy.

Sir John Campbell: Information from probate

I am quite grateful that the National Probate Calendar for England is available online through Ancestry.com. This index lists all the grants to people who acted as executors and administrators of estates. It often gives a few good clues about where a person spent the latter part of their life, how much money they had at the end, and often identifies one or more close relatives.

A quick search for Sir John Campbell dying in 1861 or later turned up an entry in the Wills of 1864.

Instantly, I had a positive identification:
Sir John Campbell, Knight, late of 51 Charles Street;
and some new information:

• He died 19 December 1863 at his home on Charles Street;
• He was Knight Commander of the Order of the Tower and Sword of Portugal;
• His effects were originally valued at under £8,000. In March 1865, the value was changed to under £10,000.
• His executors were Richard Onslow of Wandsworth, Surrey, Esquire, and William Campbell Onslow of 28 Leinster Gardens, Middlesex, Esquire, a retired Lieutenant Colonel of Her Majesty's Indian Army.

This provided me with clues to last a month. Wonderful stuff!

It will be confusing to start into Lady Campbell's details here but don't worry, I did the same for her and will be back with more about her, too.

Sir John Campbell, Knight Bachelor, and many directions for research

 Yes, I know I promised something about Queen Victoria's god-daughter and I will deliver, but not yet.

I found a story that's held my attention for a couple of weeks now, and I hope you will find it interesting too. I'll have to tell it in installments I'm afraid. So far there have been elements of:

• the history of the English in Portugal in the early 1800s
• the patterns of marrying and remarrying within a certain social group and class
• the way military officers stick together
• the way women are so poorly represented in historical records compared to men
• charming portraiture from the mid-1800s
• a family with some notable artists
• another family with a knack for marrying well
• the fate of a foreign bride
• money and how it moves between generations 
• and lots more.

To begin with, you will probably already know that I have been looking at Charles Street, Berkeley Square, London, as it was in the 1871 census. Since my last post, I decided it would help the research if I looked at the street in every census so I could better understand the transmission of the houses from decade to decade, and also so I could be sure of the numbering, especially in 1841 when the house numbers aren't actually shown on the census.

I've started putting together a spreadsheet from 1841 to 1901, showing the names of the inhabitants, in all 7 censuses, for each house. This has been illuminating and useful even with just half a dozen or so houses completed, so I will keep going.

Today's story introduces Sir John Campbell, a knight and an army veteran.

51 Charles Street, 1851

From the census, reference:
Class HO107
Piece 1476
Folio 364
Page 18
GSU Roll 87799.

On Ancestry.com, the page is found in the 1851 English Census at:
Middlesex >St. George Hanover Square >May Fair > District 17 > 18.

John Campbell, Head, married, age 70. Knight Bachelor late Lt Col 75 [indecipherable]. Born Kent, Chatham.

Harriet Maria Campbell, Wife, married, age 70. No occupation shown. Born Middlesex, Aldgate.

Servants:
Anne Sutton, Servant, unmarried, age 45. Cook. Born Norfolk, Aylsham.
Sarah Loal, Servant, unmarried, age 31. Ladies Maid. Born Northampton, Nassington.
Sarah Calligan, Servant, unmarried, age 35. Housemaid. Born Middlesex, Hackney.
Joseph Attersall, Servant, unmarried, age 22. Footman. Born Lincolnshire, Fiskerton.

The Campbells are at the same place ten years later. Two of the four servants have remained with them. I take this as a sign that someone was a decent employer, when the servants stay for a long time. Of course, there were other reasons to leave a household, even when the employer was good. I make fewer inferences about people leaving than about them staying.

51 Charles Street, 1861

From the census, reference:
Class RG9
Piece 46
Folio 53
Page 39
GSU Roll 542563.

On Ancestry.com, the page is found in the 1861 English Census at:
Middlesex >St. George Hanover Square >May Fair > District 15 > 39.

Sir John Campbell, Knt. Head, married, age 80. Formerly Lieut Colonel - Retired from the Army Inf. Knight Bachelor. Born Kent, Chatham.


Harriet Marie Campbell, Wife, married, age 80. No occupation shown. Born Middlesex,City of London, St. Botolphs.


Servants:
Sarah Loal, Servant, unmarried, age 41. Ladies Maid. Born Northampton, Nassington.
Joseph Attersall, Servant, unmarried, age 30. Butler and Valet. Born Lincolnshire, Fiskerton.
Henrietta Chandler, unmarried, age 32. Cook. Born Norfolk, Northwold.
Ellen Smith, unmarried, age 27. Housemaid. Born Bushy, Hertfordshire.

Given these two fixed points, we can start to explore some dimensions of the Campbells' lives.

John Burgoyne Blackett at 2 Charles Street in the late 1840s

This is a listing from the Northumberland Archives, via Access to Archives, a very useful service indeed.

Here's exactly what's on the screen:

"Notebook (vol. IV) comprising copies of letters from J[ohn] B[urgoyne] Blackett, initially at 2 Charles Street, Berkeley Square, then at 10 Eaton Place to Congreve, May 1848-Dec. 1851. Concerning politics, literary matters, mutual friends, foreign affairs, university reform, possible personal insolvency, retrenchment in standard of living. A group of undated letters at the end, perhaps c.1844, predate the main section. ZBK/C/1/B/3/1/9 [n.d.]"
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=155-zbk_3-1&cid=1-1-2-3-1#1-1-2-3-1

Why it matters to our story

You may notice that in 1848 when the letters started, Blackett was living at 2 Charles Street. He was also the Member of Parliament for Northumberland South from 1852 to 1856. His successor as the MP for the riding was George Ridley, who lived at 2 Charles Street later.

Maybe No. 2 was rented for whomever represented Northumberland South from time to time. But, the dates of the letters from Blackett at No. 2 don't match the dates of his time as an MP. Perhaps the connection is more to do with being from the nobility of Northumberland.

It raises the question of what Henry Fleming was doing there on census night in 1871, though. Guest of an absent MP, perhaps?

Blackett later lived at 10 Eaton Place, London, and for some reason I think I have run across Eaton Place in this research already. Will have to keep my eyes open.


Connection between Blackett and the March family (of No. 1 Charles Street, in 1871)

This is one of those "the world is a pretty small place" things, but that's what happens when you have people descended from William the Conqueror, Plantagenets, and so on.

The name "Umfreville" appears in both the Blackett and March families. For the Blacketts, it's way back around the 1500s. For the Marches, one of Thomas Charles March's sisters married a Yorkshire clergyman (of a titled family, if I remember correctly), and their sons had Umfreville as a middle name. The spelling varies, Umfreville, Umfraville.

A distant connection.





 

Who was Henry Fleming? A dandy? A heartless villain? Both? Neither? More history from Charles Street, Berkeley Square

At No. 2, Charles Street, which runs from the southwest corner of Berkeley Square in London, in 1871, there lived a bachelor, Henry Fleming, and two servants. Perhaps more people actually lived there, but that's who was home on census night.

Map, Google Street View, and the census return details for No. 2 Charles Street

Henry Fleming in 1871: Secretary of the Poor Law Board

It's there in black and white on the census form, Secretary of the Poor Law Board.

Your mind should immediately be racing to thoughts of Oliver Twist and gruel, poor people (both in the sense of lacking wealth and in the sense of suffering hardship), misery, and the workhouse.

This was 1871, about 32 years after the publication of Oliver Twist, but the poor were still liable to be taken into the workhouse, a place no one wanted to be.

Henry Fleming's involvement with the Poor Law Board dates back into the 1840s, closer to Dickensian times.

Thom's Irish Almanac and Official Directory, 1850, shows, at page 16, that the English Poor Law Board's office was at Somerset House, in London. Henry Fleming, Esq. is one of two Assistant Secretaries.




This was a time when Henry's star was rising.

A few years earlier, on July 15, 1844, Thomas Carlyle, the writer, sent a letter to his wife (one of over 9,000) mentioning callers stopping by that day.

 Old Stimabile, Darwin; then after dinner, Fleming3 on horseback to ask If Mrs Carlyle was home?—perhaps by Mrs Buller's order? He would not come in, tho' I by message invited him. 

(From Volume 18 of the collected letters, on  The Carlyle Letters Online, a website from Duke University Press.)

The footnote says:

"Henry Fleming (d. 1876); asst. sec. of poor law board, 1848–59; permanent sec., 1859–71. Introduced into society by Charles Buller, he “made his way by his pleasant manners and amusing gossip. It was said that when Lady Palmerston wanted to know which way the political wind blew, she sent him out on a horse in the Park. He was very good-looking, and [no one could] … guess his age. He wore an undeniable brown wig, and had a lovely complexion and brilliant teeth, how much due to art no one could tell” (Mary C. M. S. Simpson, Many Memories of Many People [1898] 115).

According to another account Fleming was “a kindly little man, … commonly known as the ‘Flea.’ … He was well known in society, a friend of Charles Buller's, and an  habitué of Lady Palmerston's house. He was much made up; and when Lady Ashburton was told of his house being entered by burglars, ‘It was hard on him,’ she said; ‘for he could not move, having unfortunately left his backbone on the dressing-table’” (Algernon West, Recollections 1832 to 1886 [1899] 1:86–87).

His obituary in the Times, 3 March 1876, said: “He was a welcome member of society which his official chiefs [of the poor law board] could often not aspire to enter. … As no one seemed to know his age, it was a constant subject of jocose speculation. His familiarity with Lord Palmerston was attributed to the alleged fact that Lord Palmerston had been his fag at Harrow.”


End of the footnote.


In fact, there are about 20 letters on the Duke University Press Carlyle website where Thomas or Jane (his wife) mentions Henry Fleming.


Our peek at the houses of Charles Street, Berkeley Square in 1871 began at No. 1: Thomas March of 1 Charles Street: One degree from Queen Victoria.

Before that, we started with the Stoker family: Bram Stoker, author of Dracula in public records: BMD (Birth, Marriage, Death).

Next time: what the Carlyles said about Henry. Thomas Carlyle and his wife Jane mentioning Henry Fleming in their letters to each other. (For what it's worth, I found it pretty funny what they had to say, and how fragrantly they could throw mud at people.)

Six degrees of Queen Victoria: How the Thomas Charles MARCH family were connected

To recap, this is a potted history of the people at No. 1 Charles Street in 1871. If you would like to see a fuller version, just look in the post archives and you'll see a series of posts before this one, about the MARCH family.

Thomas Charles MARCH was a lifelong member of Queen Victoria's household staff, finishing his days as one of the top employees. One of the highlights of his career, in the easy-to-find public records, was representing the Royal Household in the procession bringing the Duke of Wellington's body from Kent to London for a state funeral.

Arabella S. MARCH, nee Sarah COOPER, born in Basingstoke, Hampshire, was a spinster with a child (Arabella) when she married Thomas (who was 20 years older) in 1867. How she came to have a child and a house on Sloane Street, and funds before she married Thomas, I don't know.

Arabella MARCH, the daughter, born in St. Luke's, Chelsea, didn't marry and disappeared from my view after selling the family's country home, Forest Lodge in Ashtead, Surrey, around 1901.

Thomas C. MARCH in the 1871 census is Thomas Charles MARCH, who matches a boy who died at the age of 8.

Not shown in the 1871 census, because he wasn't yet born, Reginald George MARCH was the youngest child I'm aware of, and the only one with children, again, as far as I know. He was born at Holmwood, Surrey in 1874, was, like his father, a Clerk in the Lord Chamberlain's office, fought in South Africa with Lord Paget's Horse, was married, and had at least two children. He enlisted for the First World War but does not appear to have seen active duty outside the United Kingdom.

The only person I'm aware of to carry on the MARCH name from this family was Reginald's son, Thomas Charles MARCH, who matches a gentleman who died in 1999 in Winchester.

I promised I would play Six Degrees of Separation, in two forms, for these people:

Six Degrees of Queen Victoria
and
Six Degrees of Dracula.

The Queen Victoria numbers are from 1 to 3.

1, Personal connection to Queen Victoria

Thomas Charles MARCH. Having served so long and in such important positions, I'm guessing he bumped into Her Majesty the Small Queen at least once in a while.

His son Reginald George MARCH, based on his position in the Lord Chamberlain's office, which could be a stretch. If not a 1, he is a 2, like the rest of the family.



2, Personal connection to a person with a Queen Victoria number of 1

Connected through Thomas Charles MARCH:

His wife Arabella S. MARCH
His daughter Arabella MARCH
His son Thomas C. MARCH.




Next: The Dracula scores.
That takes a bit of explaining.

Thomas March is the first of many interesting people we will meet on Charles Street in 1871. His story starts with Thomas March of 1 Charles Street: One degree from Queen Victoria.


This article is one in an ongoing series, starting with Bram Stoker, author of Dracula in public records: BMD (Birth, Marriage, Death).

Next: What was Thomas Charles March's Dracula number? Six degrees.

The end of Thomas Charles MARCH, his wife and children, apart from one important detail

The story so far:

Thomas Charles MARCH was a lifelong servant of the royal household during Queen Victoria's reign. He rose through the ranks of the Lord Chamberlain's office and by 1881 was Pay-master of the Royal Household. In sequential census returns, and in some of the other public records Ancestry.co.uk (Ancestry.com) has online, as well as what others have posted to the Web, I have been tracing Thomas and his family. The larger context started out with Bram STOKER and is explained in previous posts.

Bram Stoker and family in the 1881 English census

I looked more closely at the three servants:

Emma Barton, Bram Stoker's 15-year-old parlourmaid in 1881

Harriet Daw, Bram Stoker's Cook in 1881. The problem of a small spelling error

and

A brick wall: Elizabeth Jarrald, widow, Nurse to Bram Stoker's baby son in 1881.

Researching Elizabeth led me to the man I think she married:

Charles Jarrald, a well-placed servant indeed.

And then I got on to the MARCH family. I started using the common convention of putting surnames in ALL CAPS when I got to the MARCH family because it's too easy to confuse their name with the month of March.

Thomas Charles MARCH marries

Thomas Charles MARCH married Sarah COOPER in 1867. She brought with her a daughter, Arabella, who went by MARCH for the rest of her life. I think the daughter matches the Arabella MARCH who died in 1944. The probate records for 1944 are not yet available online but when I can get a look at them, I'll be interested to see the size of the fortune, or lack of it, that Arabella had when she died. I haven't found her in the census after 1891. I rather hope she was installed in a nice grace and favour apartment somewhere on the grounds of Buckingham Palace or even Hampton Court Palace for the rest of her days.

MARCH family life in the 1880s and later

Thomas and Sarah had two little brothers for Arabella, Thomas Charles MARCH, b. 1867, and Reginald George MARCH, b. 1874. Sadly, it appears little Thomas died at the age of 8.

By 1881, the MARCH family had decamped from London and were living at a very nice country house called Forest Lodge in Ashtead, Surrey.You can read a bit about it online, courtesy of the Surrey History Centre Archives and their website, Exploring Surrey's Past. They had probably left London for Surrey earlier, in the 1870s, as Reginald was born in Holmwood, Surrey in 1874, and the boy Thomas died, probably at Ashtead (Epsom registration district), in 1876. In 1881, Thomas (the father) was 61 and as mentioned, Pay-master of the Queen's Household.

Reginald was away at school in Cheltenham for the 1891 census. Thomas and the daughter Arabella were the only ones at Forest Lodge. This was Arabella's home until about three years after her father died (he died in 1898), when she sold it to Mr. Augustus MEYERS, who built a beautiful new home there.

Here is what the Surrey History Centre Archives' website says:

"In the early 19th century, the Haunch of Venison inn stood [where Forest Lodge was] but, during the 1860s, Henry Parsons converted it into a house, where, in 1871, he lived with a large household, including five servants. In the 1879 sale of Ashtead Park, Forest Lodge was bought for £3,700 on behalf of Lord Rosebery, although it was occupied at the time by Thomas C March, who held important positions in the royal household and who subsequently purchased the property. After his death, it was sold by his daughter, Arabella.

"Augustus Meyers purchased the estate in 1901 and lived there for nearly fifty years. Soon after he acquired the property, he built the present Forest Lodge, set well back from the road behind the site of the original inn, which had stood near the present entrance. The laying out of the grounds, including the demolition of the earlier house, had been completed by 1911."

Just a side-note about Lord Rosebery: he became Prime Minister of England. He was born in 1847 at No. 20, Charles Street, Berkeley Square. You may recall that Charles Street is what got us here. Thomas Charles MARCH lived at No. 1 in 1861.

There is a privately-published book called Photographic Views of Interior and Gardens, Forest Lodge, Ashtead, Surrey (1911) displayed on the website of Dumbarton Oaks Research Library, as part of an exhibit called "Of Making Many Books There is No End", that will close on March 31, 2011. Only the cover and one photograph (the one the cover picture is based on) are pictured on the website. The book was, I assume, prepared for Mr. MEYERS and depicts his new house, but that is just my best guess.

Sarah, Arabella's mother, died at Forest Lodge on July 7, 1888. Probate was granted, not to her husband, but to her spinster daughter Arabella MARCH on August 13, 1888. Sarah's will may have been set up to name Arabella as executrix because, with Thomas being about 20 years her elder, Sarah expected to outlive him. Sarah's personal estate was valued at £633/0/11.

Before her marriage to Thomas, the 1861 census showed Sarah living at 78 Sloane Street, Chelsea with her occupation being "House and Funded Proprietor". If that means she owned the house on Sloane Street, her fortune could have been considerable. Maybe that was invested in Forest Lodge, or maybe she was less wealthy than I imagine. Students of women's history can perhaps shed some light on the situation of a married woman's property in 1888. Did it remain hers, or did it become part of her husband's wealth upon marriage? I would only be guessing if I answered that question either way.


Link to the map and Google Street View of present day 78 Sloane Street. Dorchester Court, the modern red brick building on the left, is No. 77 through 81.The white building with the blue plaques is No. 76 (at the end close to Dorchester Court).


View Larger Map

It appears Thomas worked for Her Majesty's household until his death in 1898. His occupation in the 1891 census was "Secretary of Board of Green Cloth, Queen's Household".  Probate was granted to Reginald George MARCH, his son, who was then a Clerk to the Lord Chamberlain, on August 10, 1898.

Thomas's estate was valued at £15,387/0/8.
 
In the National Probate Calendar (Ref: England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations),1861-1941 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2010.Original data: Principal Probate Registry. Calendar of the Grants of Probate and Letters of Administration made in the Probate Registries of the High Court of Justice in England. London, England © Crown copyright.), Thomas was called Thomas Charles MARCH of 82 Ebury-street Middlesex C.B.

The C.B. was news to me, and stands for Companion of the The Most Honourable Order of the Bath, an honour bestowed by the Queen, to a senior civil servant. I have not been able to find details of when Thomas MARCH was given this honour.

Here is a link to the Google Street View and map for 82 Ebury-street (modern day; the black door on the right, with the two white squares of what looks like paper), in case the embedded map below is not visible. In the 1891 census, this was a lodging house kept by a widow. On census night the widow, two female servants, and one 21-year-old man, an Assistant Engineer in the navy, were there. I would guess this was a convenient place for Thomas MARCH to stay when in London on business, but not likely the sort of place his daughter would have moved to after selling Forest Lodge, if it catered to gentlemen civil servants.


View Larger Map

The two surviving family members, Arabella and Reginald appear, from the scanty collection of records I have seen, to have gone their separate ways. I don't mean they were estranged (who knows?), only that I haven't found them living together. I don't know where Arabella was between about 1901 (the sale of Forest Lodge) and 1944, her death.

I couldn't find Reginald in the 1901 census, either, but I did find a good explanation for that.

In 1914, when the First World War started, Reginald enlisted and gave his occupation as "motor lorry driver". That's rather unexpected for a Clerk to the Lord Chamberlain. The reason comes from his prior military service as a member of Lord Paget's Horse. This was a private regiment raised by Lord Paget to fight in the South African (aka Boer) War. It appears they were in South Africa on census night, 1901.

Lord Paget's Horse recruited gentlemen, and its official initials, PH, were jokingly said to stand for "Piccadilly Heroes".

Also mentioned in Reginald's First World War attestation papers is the fact that he was married, and the papers identify his wife and two children.

Reginald enlisted for "Short Service (One Year With the Colours)" on October 5, 1914 at the age of 30. As mentioned, his stated Trade or Calling was "Motor Lorry Driver". There was also a note "Speaks French fluently and German [illegible]". On November 17, 1917, he was discharged as being medically unfit for service, being over age. His service record shows that he was at Home (i.e., the UK), not sent abroad to fight.

He died in 1918, leaving £2,686/8/1 and naming his wife Ella and two solicitors as executors. It's possible Ella went on to remarry (I found a possible match in 1927 to John MAYLE) and also that she travelled to the U.S.A., and that she died in Winchester in 1973. I haven't tried to check those things out (too remote).

Of his children, the little bit of searching I did suggests (doesn't prove) that his daughter Marjorie Eva went to the U.S.A.  in 1930, for 3 months at the age of 19. The Marjorie MARCH who made that trip listed Mrs. MAYYLE [sic] as her mother on the ship's passenger list, so it all fits.

Reginald's son, Thomas Charles MARCH, matches the age and name of a gentleman who died in Winchester in 1999.

I have a little more information about Reginald that I won't put here; we've strayed rather far from Thomas, his father, already.

The MARCH family into which Thomas Charles MARCH the father was born did very well for themselves. I will show how well in a couple of posts from now.

Next time, I want to show the Six Degrees of Queen Victoria and Six Degrees of Dracula for the MARCH family we've looked at so far.


If you'd like to get these posts by email or RSS feed, just sign up using the buttons at the top right of the page. I would love to have you as a reader.

If you find these stories interesting, or have a question, please leave a comment. Let me know what catches your fancy and I'll find more.


Thomas March is the first of many interesting people we will meet on Charles Street in 1871. His story starts with Thomas March of 1 Charles Street: One degree from Queen Victoria.


This article is one in an ongoing series, starting with Bram Stoker, author of Dracula in public records: BMD (Birth, Marriage, Death).

Next: Six degrees of Queen Victoria: How the Thomas Charles March family were connected.

Applying some Jane Austen logic to the marriage of Thomas Charles MARCH, Queen Victoria's Pay-master

I've been tracing the residents of Charles Street, Berkeley Square, based on the 1871 census. This started with the family of Bram STOKER, the author of Dracula, but it is not he who lived on Charles Street. I looked at the Bram Stoker household beginning in 1881, their first appearance in the English census, including examining the three women servants they had then. One, Elizabeth JARRALD, was a widow in 1881, but I found her (assumed) husband, Charles JARRALD in 1871. Even though Elizabeth and Charles were already married then, he, a 22-year-old servant, was at his employer's house on census night in 1871. That house was No. 27 Charles Street.

A little nosing around at who Charles's employer might be quickly showed that Charles Street was full of the upper classes, and so I decided to detour a bit away from the STOKERs, but don't worry, we will get back to Mr. Dracula eventually.

To keep the connection with Drac going, I am now playing two concurrent games:
Six Degrees of Queen Victoria
and
Six Degrees of Dracula.

The Head of the household at No. 1 Charles Street in the 1871 census, Thomas Charles MARCH, has a Queen Victoria number of 1. In a couple of posts from now, I'll reveal his Dracula number, which may surprise you.

Here's a recap of the 1871 census return for No. 1 Charles Street, from the post "Thomas March of 1 Charles Street: One degree from Queen Victoria".

At home: Thomas, age 50, married, Clerk Lord Chamberlain's Office, born in Marylebone.
His wife, Arabella S. MARCH, 32, born in Basingstoke.
Daughter, Arabella MARCH, 14, born in London St. Luke's Chelsea.
Son, Thomas C. MARCH, 3, born in London, St. George's [Hanover Square].

Thomas and Arabella got married some time after the 1861 census.

There are two little nits about the details of that marriage that make it less straightforward than at first appears.


The first is the name of Thomas's wife. In the 1871 census she is Arabella S. MARCH. I haven't found a matching lady named Arabella in a search for the marriage in the Ancestry.co.uk database (which searches the GRO Index and Free BMD, among others). The closest match I've found hangs on the "S": Sarah COOPER. Her age and place of birth match Arabella S. MARCH from the 1871 census, so I have provisionally assumed them to be the same person. There is no other likely Thomas Charles MARCH who matches nearly so closely.


Making assumptions in a blog post doesn't bother me. I try to make it very clear when I am crawling out on a limb, and I hope anyone reading this who has more information, will tell me. In the meantime I hate to let the absence of concrete proof of the facts get in the way of a good story.

The parish marriage register for the Parish of St. Thomas Portman Square (shown in Ancestry.com's database as St. Thomas Marylebone), shows:

On March 23, 1867, Thomas Charles MARCH, of full age, bachelor, Gentleman, of 93 Wimpole Street, Father's name Thomas MARCH (deceased), Gentleman,
married
Sarah COOPER, of full age, spinster, of 93 Wimpole Street, Father's name William COOPER, Gentleman.

The relevant entry is #425, found on page 213.
Source citation, from Ancestry: London Metropolitan Archives, Saint Thomas, Saint Marylebone, Register of marriages, P89/TMS, Item 006


The second nit is about Thomas's daughter, also called Arabella. On the one hand, she would appear to have been named for her mother, or at least, for the name her mother used in the 1871 census and later, but on the other hand, her birthdate is from the 1850s, before Thomas and Sarah (later Arabella) got married in 1867.

Arabella MARCH, Thomas's daughter in every census from 1871 on, was reportedly born around 1857, about 10 years before her parents' marriage.

I tend to assume, perhaps incorrectly, that single mothers in the second half of the 19th century were ostracized by society. Given that Thomas was working in the household more noted than any in English history for its propriety, Queen Victoria's, he is literally one of the last people I would expect to do anything remotely unconventional or scandalous.

This leads to some conclusions and assumptions.

The first assumption is that Arabella COOPER, later known as Arabella MARCH, the daughter, was born to married parents.

Given that, then the question is, were Sarah and Thomas actually married already when they got married in 1867? That seems unorthodox too, and is not my preferred hunch.

The second choice is that Arabella had either a different father, or a different mother, or both, and that one or both parents was either divorced or widowed. I rejected divorce, again because of propriety. It's something I wouldn't rule out conclusively, but it's low on the list of assumptions.

Then we consider: which parent was widowed? To conclude that either was, we have to assume that the marriage register was in error in calling the couple a bachelor and spinster. That does not seem likely, given who we're talking about, but I did look for evidence that either party had been married before. I found no evidence and decided to start a different line of inquiry: that Sarah gave birth to Arabella without marrying Arabella's father or that Sarah is Arabella's mother by adoption.

The out of wedlock birth seems almost inconceivable (pun intended and apologized for). Still, it was something I had to check out.

I searched in Ancestry.co.uk for a census return in 1861 for a woman born about 1838 in Basingstoke, with a daughter named Arabella.

Lo and behold, there emerged Sarah COOPER, unmarried, born about 1838 in Basingstoke with a daughter, Arabella COOPER, born about 1856 in St. Luke's Chelsea. Bingo! This doesn't prove Sarah to be Arabella's biological mother, but it does provide more clues. I would like to work more on the adoption hypothesis some time.

There is also the possibility that Sarah COOPER died and Thomas MARCH remarried between 1867 and 1871. I have not found evidence of such a death or such a remarriage, but my search has not been exhaustive. However, when Sarah COOPER, then Sarah MARCH died in 1888, the name under which probate was granted to her spinster daughter Arabella MARCH, was simply Sarah MARCH, no mention of Arabella.

And now, dear reader, cast your mind to the immortal words of Jane Austen as spoken by the insufferable Mrs. Bennet in Pride and Prejudice:

"It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife."

It is probably a truth also universally acknowledged, that a single woman in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a husband.




Sarah COOPER in 1861 lived with her daughter and one servant (Louisa HIGGS, b. 1843 in Cornwall), at 78 Sloane Street, Chelsea. Her occupation was "House and Funded Proprietor". Ka-ching! I think I hear the sound of the accountant's mind jumping into gear as Thomas MARCH meets the younger, apparently wealthy woman with a daughter, Sarah COOPER.

Or am I too cynical?

Regardless of the reasons, Thomas and Sarah I think we can safely conclude, are the people I've identified as Thomas and Arabella in later years. How Sarah became a Sloane Ranger and the mother of Arabella, and whether Thomas was taking a social risk by marrying her, are questions upon which someone else can base a good Victorian romance, but that won't be me. Believe it or not, I have focus, and it's Thomas I came here to talk about today.

Thomas March is the first of many interesting people we will meet on Charles Street in 1871. His story starts with Thomas March of 1 Charles Street: One degree from Queen Victoria.


This article is one in an ongoing series, starting with Bram Stoker, author of Dracula in public records: BMD (Birth, Marriage, Death).

Next: The end of Thomas Charles March, his wife and children, apart from one important detail

Six degrees of separation for Dracula and Queen Victoria

What began as a look at Bram Stoker's family in the English census returns has grown into a look at his servants, and their families. That's the beauty and the fun of looking at the census. You just never know where it will lead.

A few years back, I did a little research about a prominent family in Calgary, where I live, in the days before the First World War. Well, by the time I was done researching the history of a church they had helped to build, I was convinced that everyone in Calgary then was either related to each other, or about to be.

Of course, that's a bit of an exaggeration, but on the other hand, there's a lot of truth to it. The idea of "six degrees of separation" has been around for a while now. The theory is that you can connect anyone to anyone else via a chain of six intermediates or fewer.

For example, I have a friend (degree no. 1) whose husband (degree no. 2) is an executive producer on a great TV show, 30 Rock. I assume he's in one way or another acquainted with the stars of the show, so that makes me three degrees away from Tina Fey. Who knew?

If you use LinkedIn, you'll already know how easy it is to connect two people at the 3rd degree level, particularly if one of your 1st degree people has thousands of connections.

Rather than "six degrees of separation", I prefer "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon", a Web game where people trace anyone who's had anything to do with any movie at all, back to actor Kevin Bacon. I wonder if Kevin Bacon ever feels a bit odd about that. Must be strange to be the centre of the universe.



Anyway, after a little nosing around in the census returns, I've decided to make my own Six Degrees. In the next heartbeat, I decided to do two, because I came across a person who fits both.

Get ready to find out:

Six Degrees of Dracula
and
Six Degrees of Queen Victoria.

I'll try to include rankings for everyone I write about in this series if I can. I don't know how many 1-1s (only 1 degree from each) there will be, but we shall see.

This article is one in an ongoing series, starting with Bram Stoker, author of Dracula in public records: BMD (Birth, Marriage, Death).

Next: Thomas MARCH of 1 Charles Street, One degree from Queen Victoria

A brick wall: Elizabeth Jarrald, widow, Nurse to Bram Stoker's baby son in 1881

Starting with the 1881 census return for Bram Stoker and his family, I have been tracing all the members of the household, including the servants, through the public records that are easy to use, mainly relying on Ancestry.co.uk. The point is to see what can be gleaned from these primary sources, not to prepare comprehensive biographies. We'll leave that for others!

I've come to the eldest of the three servants listed with the family in 1881.

The transcription given by Ancestry indicates the the lady's name is Elizabeth Jarrald. She is a Servant in the household, a widow, age 30. Her occupation is Nurse (presumably meaning the baby's nurse, not a hospital nurse), and, rather infuriatingly, her birthplace is blank. Not helpful at all.

There is no easy way to find this lady.

A further problem is that her name may actually be Jerrald, or Jerrold, or Jarrold, or even a variant starting with a "G". When I look at the handwriting, it appears to be Jerrald, but it's a close call.

The assumptions and the dangers of making them


This is not the right way to do research! It worked for me and suits my purposes because I like the research for its own sake, I like to see what turns up even if it's "wrong", and I am only answerable to myself. Of course, as a matter of public responsibility, I try to point out to readers and other researchers where there are traps, such as here.


I was stuck with a name, an age, a location on one day in 1881, an occupation, and a marital status. Bearing in mind that any of these could be wrong (a danger with any census record), I went ahead and tried to find information.

A simple search for Elizabeth Jarrald

From the Bram Stoker family entry (linked to above), we have the spelling Jarrald, date of birth about 1851, place unknown.

Ancestry's search function, for Elizabeth Jarrald, b. abt 1851 gives two results with the same spelling. One is the 1881 return we already have, the other is also for 1881, in Haverhill, Suffolk, wife of John Jarrald. Noting the same name, we can exclude this second Elizabeth from consideration if she turns up again.

Now I will tell the truth about the way I did this research, but remember, I am not saying this is the "right" way to do it. This is a fast way to get results that may be for the person I want, but equally, may not be.

I wanted to find Elizabeth in 1871, but I didn't know if she was married then.

I could deduce that Elizabeth's husband, Mr. Jarrald, would appear in the GRO index of marriages with her, and in the GRO index of deaths, some time before the 1881 census.

I searched for marriages between a man with the surname Jarrald and a woman named Elizabeth, starting in 1881 and working backwards, one year at a time. This method takes some care and attention, and of course, some patience. I also searched for Jarrald men (and variations of the spelling) in the death index, working backwards.

In 1869, which is about as far back as I would go, if Elizabeth's age is correct (born 1851), I found a GRO marriage index with two men and two women:

Charles Jarrald and William James Randall
married
Emma Bloom and Elizabeth Trott.

Charles Jarrald is a likely candidate because he married in London and died in London in 1877.

The marriage index doesn't tell us which men married which women, but for Charles Jarrald, the choice of wives is narrowed to only two, Emma or Elizabeth. Of course, I would like it to be Elizabeth, but we need proof.

Next step: how I figured out the marriage puzzle.

This article is one in an ongoing series, starting with Bram Stoker, author of Dracula in public records: BMD (Birth, Marriage, Death).

Next: Figuring out which man married which woman: Elizabeth Jarrald, cared for Bram Stoker's baby, 1881

Harriett Daw, Bram Stoker's Cook in 1881. The problem of a small spelling error.

Bram Stoker was the author of Dracula, the famous vampire novel, published in 1897. From the early 1880s he lived in Chelsea, London, with his wife Florence.

Bram Stoker and family in the 1881 census (link)

The household in 1881 included Bram and Florence, their infant son Irving, and three servants. The youngest was Emma Barton, the 15-year-old Housemaid. I posted her story the other day.

The story of Emma Barton, Housemaid to Bram Stoker in 1881 (link)

Today I'll continue with the Cook, Harriet Daw, who was 21 and single in the 1881 census.

The problem with Harriett and spelling

I haven't found a matching Harriett Daw in the census or in the other easy records to find on Ancestry.co.uk. Almost immediately, though, a Harriett Dew appeared. Off by one letter. Matching, sort of, as to place of birth. Matching as to age.

Other people's non-verified family trees have a Harriett Matilda Dew traced from birth to death, including marriage in 1882. Missing: an entry for the 1881 census. These gaps are also suggestive that the two Harrietts are actually one.

So, with a giant flashing red light warning that we may be talking about two different people, here is the story of Harriett Matilda Dew, as found in the public records on Ancestry.co.uk.

Daughter of a Carman

Harriet was named after her mother, Harriett. Sometimes there is one "t" in "Harriett", sometimes two. Harriet Matilda was baptized on June 13, 1858 in St. Paul's District Parish Church, Lisson Grove. Her mother's name was Harriett Eliza, and in the baptism register, although both parents are named, only the occupation "Laundress", a word that would only apply to a woman, is given.

Harriet Matilda had a brother, John (full name, John Thomas Henry Dew), two years older and named for their father, John Thomas Dew. Both John and Harriett were christened at the same church, on the same day.

In 1861 the young family was living at 10 Upper Lisson Street, Marylebone, London. The father was a Carman.They lived reasonably close to Paddington Station, and he worked for the Great Western Railway for a good part of his life, it appears.

I can't get to 10 Upper Lisson Street on Google Maps today; perhaps the street no longer exists, or maybe this part of it has been taken up by later road-building, or destroyed in the Second World War. However, on Lisson Street as it now is, I found this charming Google Street View picture. Possibly the best one I've found to date.

(Link in case picture does not display properly below)


View Larger Map


Ten years later, in 1871 on census night, they had a "Nurse Child" in the house. Her name is hard to read and probably misspelled. Literally, it looks like Lousia Cate, but my guess is Louisa Cole may be closer. She was 6 years old, and the only other thing we know is she was reportedly born in Notting Hill.

I have looked for a connection between Louisa (using either surname, Cole or Cate) and the Dew family. I can't find one strong enough to mention.

The phrase "Nurse Child", in the most general sense, means a child in the care of a woman who is not the child's natural mother. It's more of a fostering arrangement than what we would think of as babysitting. If the child had only been there for a day or two, on the census I would expect her to be called a Visitor.

Women could earn money by looking after children, often while their (not uncommonly unmarried) mothers went out to work. In desperate situations, that was what a mother had to do to feed herself and her child.

This is another piece of social history that would be interesting to know about, but it doesn't advance our understanding of Harriet Dew particularly, since Louisa and Harriet were not in the same house in the next census. Any speculation that there may have been a close relationship between Louisa and the Dew family is just that: speculation.

Marriage in 1882
In 1882, so within about a year of Harriett's appearance in the census as the Stokers' Cook, she left to become the wife of William Edmund Frid. They were married on Christmas Day. On the marriage certificate, Harriet's father is John Dew, deceased. Unverified family trees say her mother had died earlier. Her only sibling, John, was married in 1876 and, like their father, worked as a Carman for the railway.

Mr. Frid was a Carpenter. Before marriage, he was apparently living with an aunt and uncle in London and was unemployed. I am only guessing that his fortunes changed, at least I hope so. In 1891, Harriett and William had four children, three girls and a boy.

Although the Frids lived in Marylebone at the time of Harriett's marriage to William, (both at Welling's Place on the marriage certificate) and were there in Marylebone again in the 1891 census, all four children were born in Mortlake.

That's not how I personally got my vampire bloodline, but it does have a personal connection, because for two years, about a hundred years later, we lived in the same part of town. I hope the Frids liked it as much as I did.

An early death in 1895

Her little children were still young when Harriett died in 1895.

Did William remarry? What became of the motherless children?

It's not far-fetched to speculate that Harriett died in childbirth, given her age. That is pure speculation. The death certificate would give a cause of death, but you have to pay for those.

The family in 1901

Six years after their mother died, Harriett's children and their father were still living together, in Marylebone. William, the father, was a Carpenter Joiner, and his son William working for a Butcher. No occupation is listed for any of the three girls.

Because of the misspelling (or to be more clear, the assumption that there is a misspelling), the descendants of Harriett Dew may not know their ancestor cooked for "Dracula" himself. I hope they see this post and do some further research to see if my hunch about Harriett Dew and Harriett Daw being the same person is correct.

This article is one in an ongoing series, starting with Bram Stoker, author of Dracula in public records: BMD (Birth, Marriage, Death).

Next: A brick wall: Elizabeth Jarrald, widow, Nurse to Bram Stoker's baby son in 1881

17 St Leonard's Terrace, Chelsea: Bram Stoker's family home in 1891

The 1891 census is the first time we see the Stokers living on St Leonards Terrace. In 1881, they had been on Cheyne Walk. Both places are in Chelsea, both fashionable.

It is at No. 18 St Leonards Terrace where there is a blue plaque for Bram Stoker (link). In 1891, the Stokers lived at No. 17, but in No. 18 there was no one designated the Head of the household. The occupants were two women, referred to as Servant in Charge, in the Occupation column. The open question is whether the Stokers had an interest in No. 18 in 1891, or whether that came later.

St Leonards Terrace is about a block from the Royal Hospital and the grounds of the Chelsea Flower Show. One website lists it as one of the 200 most expensive streets in Britain.

A piece of trivia: Sir Laurence Olivier, in another time and with two different wives, also lived on Cheyne Walk and moved (eventually) to St Leonards Terrace.

Here is a picture of (approximately) No. 17 St Leonards Terrace, Chelsea, courtesy of Google Street View. No. 18 is the white house on the end of its block. We can't tell from this picture whether No. 17 is on the right or the left. My guess would be the right but that is just a guess.


View Larger Map

This article is one in an ongoing series, starting with Bram Stoker, author of Dracula in public records: BMD (Birth, Marriage, Death).


Next: After Dracula: Bram Stoker and family in the 1901 English census

Dracula's author, Bram Stoker, and family in the 1891 English census

If you have already had a look at the Stoker family in the 1881 census (link), you will know that they were living at 27 Cheyne Walk in Chelsea, London. Bram and Florence, their son Irving, and Bram's brother George lived there with three servants: a nurse, a cook, and a parlourmaid.

Some changes have come about, which you will quickly notice in the 1891 census.

Reference: Class:  RG12; Piece:  63; Folio  43; Page  12; GSU roll:  6095173.

1891 England Census for London, Chelsea, Chelsea South, District 2, Page 12, Household 103
Link to Ancestry.com image of the census page (may only work if signed in to Ancestry.com. Don't worry, the information is all here.)

Address: 17 St Leonard's Terrace, Chelsea, London
1 inhabited house

Household 103 on census form

Abraham Stoker, Head, Married. Male, age 43. Barrister, Theatrical Manager, Author. Born in Dublin [Ireland].

Florence A. L. Stoker, Wife, Married. Female, age 27. Occupation is blank. Born in Cornwall, Falmouth. [Falmouth, Cornwall].

Mary A. Drinkwater, Servant, Single. Female, age 28. Cook (Domestic Servant). Born in Oxford, Milford. [Milford, Oxfordshire]

Ada V. Howard, Servant, Single. Female, age 22. House parlourmaid (Domestic Servant). Born in London.

That is the end of No. 17. However, at No. 18, there is no new Head of household, only two servants. It may be that the Stokers had both houses, particularly if these were side by side. In case this is of interest later, here are the details.

Address: 18 St Leonard's Terrace, Chelsea, London

Household 104 on census form.

Julia Abbott, Servant, Single. Female, age 25. Servant in charge. Born in Great Yarmouth.

Mary Kerr, Servant, Single. Female, age 22. Servant in charge. Born in Dumfries Lockabie [possibly Lockerbie, Dumfriesshire, Scotland].

_______________________________________________________

The family has moved from Cheyne Walk to St Leonard's Terrace. Is that a move up or down?

Son Irving and Bram's brother George are both absent. George may very well have set up his own household, but where is the boy? He would be about 11 years old now.

Instead of three servants, there are only two, a Cook and a House parlourmaid. This is the same as in 1881, when the family also had a Nurse to care for the boy. The servants are new, though, not the same people as ten years ago. It makes me wonder whether there were very many others in between.

Bram's occupation was Theatrical Manager M.A. in 1881. Here in 1891, he is Barrister, Theatrical Manager, Author. Perhaps the M.A. is his law degree. Showing his occupation to include Author suggests he's already had some success in publishing his work. What has he written to date, and how well has he done as an author?

Florence was shown as an Artist in 1881. Why not now? Has she given it up? How does she spend her time?

There are the same questions about the servants as in 1881, boiling down to who are they, and how did they get here, and what became of them?

Finally, there is the question of the house next door. Has it got anything to do with the Stokers at all, or are the servants looking after it while the owner is absent?

And, a question that no census is going to tell us, has Bram started to think about Dracula yet?

This article is one in an ongoing series, starting with Bram Stoker, author of Dracula in public records: BMD (Birth, Marriage, Death).

Next: 17 St Leonards Terrace, Chelsea: Bram Stoker's family home in 1891

Emma Barton, Bram Stoker's 15-year-old parlourmaid in 1881

The 1881 census showed the Stokers living in Chelsea, London, at 27 Cheyne Walk. In the household we saw Bram, his wife Florence, their baby son Irving Noel, Bram's brother, George, and three servants: Emma Barton, Harriett Daw, and Elizabeth Jarrald.

Bram Stoker and family in the 1881 census (link)

In a moment, we'll take a closer look at the servants, starting with Emma, the youngest.

Looking at the censuses over the decades, and at the other records that pop up on Ancestry.co.uk without much search effort required, here's what I have pieced together.

Of course there are gaps, but my aim is not to be encyclopedic. It's more to see what we can find out from the primary sources, without much work or expense.

I have access to all the records on Ancestry because I pay for the full meal deal every year as my big Christmas present to myself. Sometimes I link to pages on there that might not be visible unless you're signed in and have access to the records. However, I won't leave you wondering. Where I can't be sure everyone can follow the link, I will include the information here.

OK, on with Emma.

Emma Barton, Housemaid to Bram Stoker and family in 1881, in Chelsea, age 15

Emma Barton was born in late 1865, it appears, in Woodford, Essex. Her birthplace is also listed as Walthamstow sometimes. Her parents were John Barton, a gardener, and his wife Sarah. Family trees that I have not tried to verify show Sarah's last name was Wilby, and that she died in 1880.

Here is the current Google Map showing Walthamstow and to the east of it, Woodford. The City of London is to the south-west.

(Map not visible? Here is a link to the same thing on Google.)


View Larger Map

Emma was christened Emma Louisa, though the name Louisa doesn't come up in the census records I've seen, so I assume she always went by Emma. She had an elder sister, Harriett, and an elder brother, William. The other six children were younger.

What I have found for Emma boils down to this. She apparently lived at home with her parents and all the other children until the 1881 census, which would have occurred just a year after her mother died. At the age of 15, in 1881, Emma was the housemaid for the Stokers in London. How she got that particular job is a mystery to me. I expect there were well-established ways of hiring servants, and I also expect that with a little research on my part, I could probably find books on the topic.

What I imagine, from whatever I've absorbed of English 19th century life by osmosis, is that "good servants are hard to find", that girls in service at this young age had to be trained up, and that the lady of the house would have been to a certain degree responsible for that training. It wasn't necessarily the job of the senior servants, though I imagine they would have had quite a big role. But Florence, Mrs. Stoker, would have been the one to set the standard she expected the servants to maintain.

I don't know for certain that this was Emma's first job. Given her age and the timing of her mother's death, I'm guessing it may well have been.

What happened to Emma?
I can only partly answer this question.

In 1891, she was single, and working as a waitress. My guess is it was at a relative's coffee house in West Ham. On census night, she was a visitor in the household of Thomas Barton and family at 280 Victoria Dock Road, West Ham. Thomas may have been a relative, though in the census, Emma is called a visitor rather than a niece, for example. Thomas was a Coffee House Keeper, hence my speculation.

The census doesn't say where Emma actually lived, only where she was on census night.

Here is a link to the Google Maps Street View for 280 Victoria Dock Road, approximately, today. There is a hotel at that address now. The Street View may open at a slightly different spot, where there are some older buildings. Whether they were there in 1890, though, I can't tell.

Here's the Street View that the link should take you to.


View Larger Map



In the 1902 business directory for the area, Thomas Barton has "dining rooms" at 280 Victoria Dock Road.

Emma Barton in 1901: More responsibility

By ten years later, it looks like Emma has moved on, and who knows how many jobs and homes she may have had in between. The 1901 census shows her as the senior servant, the Cook, in the household of a Jeweller (Leonard Reeder, or Needes, hard to make out) and his wife, in Willesden Green, still in London. There was a younger parlourmaid, age 22, working there too. Emma was still single in 1901, and by now, age 35.

What became of her after that, I don't know. I've seen at least one family tree saying she died some years later in Canning Town. I haven't seen proof of that. There is an Emma Barton who is married to a Mr. Barton, in the 1901 census, living in Canning Town. That's where the Thomas Barton Coffee House was so who knows? But, in 1901, Emma Barton formerly of the Stoker household was single and living in Willesden Green.

What happened to Emma Barton's family?

With such a large family, I took the easy route and didn't try to trace every single person. In broad brush strokes, it looks like the eldest daughter, Harriett, stayed home to care for the other children and the father, but by 1901, she was no longer with him. (In 1891, she is erroneously listed as the mother of the children who are still at home.) Some family trees (unverified) show her as getting married in 1892 and going on to have children with her husband.

The eldest boy, William, married and had a family living in Woodford / Walthamstow in 1901. He was a gardener, just like his father.

In 1891, the sixth child, Emily Mary Barton, then 20, was living in Woodford with an uncle, Frederick Barton, and also a Gardener, his wife, and their 15-year-old son.

Various family trees suggest that most of the children got married, and none died particularly young. The youngest, Florence Rhoda Barton, in 1901 was the housemaid for George Moss, a 44-year-old Jeweller, and his sister, Frances, age 38, both of whom were single. They lived at 35 Addison Road North in Kensington, which is not far from Holland Park and looks like quite a nice neighbourhood.

Emma's father, John Barton, was in 1901 living as a Boarder with an 80-year-old widow named Charlotte Stringer, who kept a confectionery shop. This was in Lancing, Sussex. John, age 63, was working as a Gardener, with none of his children under the same roof.

The Barton family did seem to maintain a presence in the Woodford area.

Emma, however, was on her own it seems, working as a servant and living in other people's homes, perhaps for the rest of her life. Or maybe she got married in her late 30s or later. It's not out of the question.

Dracula was published in 1897, after Emma had long departed the Stoker household. Did she ever dine out on stories of living with the famous author? Who knows, but I expect some of the past servants much surely have enjoyed bragging about their association, at least a little.

This article is one in an ongoing series, starting with Bram Stoker, author of Dracula, in public records.

Next: Dracula's author, Bram Stoker, and family in the 1891 English census

27 Cheyne Walk, Chelsea, London, former home of Bram Stoker (1881)

Bram Stoker, author of Dracula, lived with his family at 27 Cheyne Walk in Chelsea in 1881 when the census was taken. Details of the household (the Stokers, Bram's brother George, and three servants) are in this post:

Bram Stoker and family in the 1881 English census (link).

Cheyne Walk is a desirable place to live today, and has been fashionable for a long time. Here's a link to a picture of No. 4 Cheyne Walk (link) in 1881.

The Google Timeline of Cheyne Walk (search "Cheyne Walk" on Google.com, then select the Timeline option for results) gives an interesting perspective on the street over the years. Modern day residents have included Mick Jagger and David Bowie, with their respective partners. Sir Hans Sloane was a prominent figure there in the 1700s.


Link to a picture of Cheyne Walk, Chelsea (London) from about 1800.

And here is how it looks today, courtesy of Google Street View, below (may take a moment to load).


View Larger Map

This article is one of an ongoing series, starting with Bram Stoker, author of Dracula, in public records: BMD (birth, marriage, death).

Next:  Emma Barton, Bram Stoker's 15-year-old parlourmaid in 1881