{"id":742,"date":"2020-02-08T17:01:00","date_gmt":"2020-02-08T16:01:00","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2021-05-14T15:53:27","modified_gmt":"2021-05-14T14:53:27","slug":"one-thing-leads-to-another","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/close.one-name.blog\/wp\/?p=742","title":{"rendered":"One thing leads to another …"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

            <\/span><\/o:p><\/div>\n
 <\/o:p>I\u2019m sure I\u2019m not the only family history researcher who finds it difficult to keep focused on one thing at a time. As a \u201cone-namer\u201d I often resolve at the start of a session to note all the occurrences of the CLOSE surname or variants in a particular record set, but more often than not, I find that something of interest prompts me to wander away from the intended pathway.<\/span>  <\/span>Here\u2019s just one example of today\u2019s wanderings whilst searching for a suitable subject for my next blog.<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n

Checking anniversaries<\/span><\/h3>\n
My first decision was to check my CLOSE website<\/a> <\/span>for special anniversaries (e.g. 100, 150, 200 years) falling on or near today\u2019s date.  <\/span>Looking through that list, no names jumped out at me as individuals with an interesting back-story that I could write about.  <\/span>Basic births, marriages and deaths are unlikely to engage a reader\u2019s attention.<\/o:p><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n

Leaping back from 1870 to 1861<\/span><\/h3>\n
My next thought was to look through my collection of newspaper reports about CLOSEs for an interesting story \u2013 nothing from 1820 or 1920 grabbed my attention, but there was<\/u>a report in the <\/span>Liverpool Mercury <\/span><\/i>of 26 Jan 1870 which looked promising. Maybe I would write about that \u2013 particularly since it concerned my first cousin 3 times removed, John CLOSE (1820-1901).  <\/span>On consulting his record in my database, I discovered he had previously figured in another newspaper report just over 8 years previously, in the Preston Guardian <\/i>of 6 November 1861.<\/o:p><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
The 1861 report concerned an explosion at the Prince Albert pit at about 10am on 1st November 1861, in which ten men were killed and five others seriously injured, three of whom later died of their injuries.  <\/span>The paper reported that after the explosion, <\/span><\/div>\n

\u201cMr Makinson, the manager, and Mr Close, the fireman, were descending the shaft and making the necessary preparations for examining the workings.\u201c <\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

It went on to say that these two were at the head of the search party, and met a group of men, some unscathed, others seriously injured, whom they helped to get out of the pit.  <\/span>I\u2019m proud of this distant relative of mine who was willing to put himself in danger.  <\/span>His inquest evidence stated that he was in a different part of the mine at the time of the explosion, but he immediately went towards the danger area where, as the report states, <\/span><\/div>\n

\u201cchokedamp prevented the remainder (of the dead) from being reached till half-past three in the afternoon.\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n\n
<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
from Shevington in Bloom <\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n
Source: <\/span>shdib.blogspot.com<\/span><\/span> <\/span><\/a><\/div>\n

<\/span><\/div>\n
Observant readers will have noted that the Preston Guardian <\/i>report merely refers to a \u201cMr Close\u201d.  <\/span>However, subsequent inquest reports name him as John CLOSE, fireman, and a trawl through my CLOSE census records produced only one, the above-mentioned John (1820-1901) who lived in Shevington and was a miner around the time of the accident.<\/span><\/o:p><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n

Further wanderings<\/span><\/h3>\n

Minor diversion<\/span><\/h4>\n
Here\u2019s where I made a couple of further detours. <\/span><\/span>The report of the mining accident listed the names of those killed or injured and where they had lived.<\/span>  <\/span>Several were from \u201cThe Barracks\u201d, Shevington, which despite its military ring was, as the press report helpfully explained, \u201ca row of cottages within a few score yards of the colliery.\u201d<\/span>  <\/span>That address sounded familiar to me, and a quick search of my personal family tree database discovered three different families in different locations, all named \u201cBarracks\u201d \u2013 including the family of John CLOSE living in Barracks Lane, Shevington in 1891.<\/span>  The family <\/span>could have been living there at the time of the 1861 accident as well \u2013 but the 1861 census rather unhelpfully gives his address as \u201chouse in fields\u201d.<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n\n
<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Inquest report: Nottinghamshire Guardian, <\/i>12 Nov 1861<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n
<\/div>\n

Major detour<\/span><\/h4>\n
The list of dead and injured in the Preston Guardian <\/i>contained surnames which also figured in my own family tree: ASHCROFT, BARON, RIDING. The report named three from one family: James ASHCROFT, 47, and his two sons John, 15, and Samuel, 13, \u201cof the Barracks\u201d, Shevington. Another victim was 12-year-old James BARON \u201cof the Barracks\u201d.  <\/span> <\/span>It was a chilling reminder that child labour was still acceptable in coal mines at that time.  <\/span><\/o:p><\/span><\/div>\n

<\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
I wondered if this might be the same James ASHCROFT who was the father of another James b 1845 who married my 2<\/span>nd<\/sup> cousin twice removed, Mary Ellen BARTON (1841-1908).<\/span>  <\/span>I hadn\u2019t reviewed that family of nine children for many a year, and my notes indicated that the dubious source for the children was an email from one of their descendants sent to me in 2002.<\/span>  <\/span>Some of the birth years were marked as approximate, so I embarked on a check of GRO births and of census records in order to add some reliable evidence to this family.<\/span>  <\/span>As a consequence I was able to remove two children who didn\u2019t belong to the family at all, add one additional child and record exact dates of christening (parish records helpfully also gave dates of birth), and add deaths of three of the eight children in infancy.<\/span> <\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
My conclusion was that the James ASHCROFT whose son married my distant relative is not the one who died in the Shevington explosion.  <\/span>But my researches DID confirm one of my guiding principles: \u201cDon\u2019t believe everything you read in the papers.\u201d  <\/span>I found that although the younger son was named Samuel in the first press report, he is named Solomon in the inquest report and in every official record I have found for him.<\/o:p><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
What about James BARON, aged 12?  <\/span>The above-mentioned John CLOSE\u2019s daughter Jane (1845-1899) married a Richard BARON in 1866; any relation, I wonder? And as many as four women named RIDING married relatives of mine in the Shevington area. Were any of them related to William RIDING, one of the victims who according to the inquest was the person responsible for causing the explosion?  <\/span>No time to check them out now, so I\u2019ll have to put all these on the \u2018to do\u2019 list.<\/o:p><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n

Back on track<\/span><\/h3>\n
Where was I? Oh yes, I was supposed to be writing about my relative John CLOSE (1820-1901) who married Hannah (aka Annie) HOLLAND in 1842, and was blessed with eleven children, ten of whom survived into adulthood.  <\/span>And I was marking the 150th<\/sup> anniversary of a remarkable event featured in a press report of 26 January 1870.  <\/span>Maybe the aftermath of the mine explosion had been too much for him to cope with.  <\/span>Whatever the reason, his children\u2019s marriage records from 1865 onwards and the 1871 census list him as a gamekeeper \u2013 as does the piece in the Liverpool Mercury <\/i>of 26 Jan 1870.  <\/span>Having painted my great-grandfathers\u2019(1)<\/sup>cousin John as something of a hero in 1861, he comes across as somewhat foolhardy in this story of a what could have been another tragic accident:<\/o:p><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Liverpool Mercury, <\/span><\/i>26 <\/span>Jan 1870<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n

Conclusion<\/span><\/h3>\n
So, what have I achieved today?  <\/span>Well, I wrote about my relative John CLOSE (1820-1901) , as intended \u2013 although the focus was on 1861 rather than 1870.  <\/span>I also discovered and corrected some errors in my ASHCROFT family records and, as ever, added a few more items to my \u2018to do\u2019 list. So maybe today\u2019s meanderings haven\u2019t been entirely wasted!<\/o:p><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n

(1)  <\/span><\/span><\/span>Postscript: <\/span><\/h4>\n
\u2013 No, the apostrophe isn\u2019t in the wrong place!  <\/span>John CLOSE was my great-grandfathers\u2019<\/b> cousin \u2013 he was a first cousin to two<\/b> of my great-grandfathers \u2013 but that\u2019s another story.<\/o:p><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n

<\/g><\/svg><\/i> \"Loading\"<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

             I\u2019m sure I\u2019m not the only family history researcher who finds it difficult to keep focused on one thing…<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

<\/g><\/svg><\/i> \"Loading\"<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":794,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_s2mail":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-742","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-post"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/close.one-name.blog\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/742","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/close.one-name.blog\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/close.one-name.blog\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/close.one-name.blog\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/close.one-name.blog\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=742"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/close.one-name.blog\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/742\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":797,"href":"https:\/\/close.one-name.blog\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/742\/revisions\/797"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/close.one-name.blog\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/794"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/close.one-name.blog\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=742"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/close.one-name.blog\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=742"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/close.one-name.blog\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=742"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}