TICKNER Chart 0600

This is a Chart for Henry Tickner and Lucy Hedger

 

married
31st July 1824
Shere, Surrey

 

6,7,13,14
HENRY TICKNER
born
6th June 1802
Shere, Surrey
occupation
1841, 1851, 1861, 1871 Ag Lab
died
March quarter
1875
Guildford district, Surrey
Aged 74

 

6,7,13,14,15,23,24
LUCY HEDGER 
born about
1804
Wonersh, Surrey
baptised
8th April 1804 
Wonersh, Surrey 
occupation
1861 Ag Labs wife
widow on the 1881 Census
died about
September quarter
1887
Guildford district, Surrey
Aged 84


6,7,10,15
19,20,21,22
James 
TICKNER

possibly born about
12th
September
1824
Peaslake
Shere
Surrey
baptised
12th
September
1824
Shere
Surrey

married
12th 
July
1851
Ann
MANSELL
7,10
Mary 
TICKNER

possibly born about
25th
March
1827
Shere
Surrey
baptised
25th
March
1827
Shere
Surrey
7,9,16
Henry 
TICKNER

possibly born about
18th  June  1830
Shere
Surrey
baptised
13th 
June
1830
Shere
Surrey

married
8th August 1857
Shere, Surrey
(BMD - September 
quarter
1857
Guildford
district
Surrey

27Emma
FOREY
baptised
1st June
1823
Shere, surrey
6,7,8
Emma 
TICKNER
possibly
born
7th April
1833
Shere
Surrey
baptised
7th 
April
1833
Shere
Surrey
6,7,8
George TICKNER

possibly
born
 
22nd
November 1835
Shere
Surrey
baptised
22nd November
1835
Shere
Surrey
occupation
1851
Ag Lab
1,2,3,4,5,6,7
8
William
TICKNER
possibly
born about
22nd July 1838
Shere, Surrey
baptised
22nd July
1838
Shere
Surrey

married
10th February 1861
Shere, Surrey
Jane
SHEPHERD
7,8,12
Jane TICKNER
possibly
born
 
18th April
1841
(3 months on the 1841 Census)
BMD
March quarter
1841
Shere
Surrey
baptised
18th April
1841
Shere
Surrey
possibly
died
December
quarter
1847
Guildford
district
Surrey
8
Ann TICKNER
possibly
born
 
16th June
1844
Shere
Surrey
baptised
16th June
1844
Shere
Surrey
8,11
Hester TICKNER
possibly
born
 
30th January
1848
Shere
Surrey
baptised
30th January
1848
Shere
Surrey
6,11,13,14
17,18,25,26
John TICKNER
possibly
born
 
28th May
1848
Shere
Surrey
baptised
28th May
1848
Shere
Surrey

married
27th October
1877
Shere
Surrey
(
December
quarter
1877
Guildford
district
Surrey)
Ada
Matilda
CHEESEMAN
  1. 1881 Census - Peaslake, Shere, Surrey
  2. 1891 Census - Peaslake, Shere, Surrey. Thomas is down as Walter on this Census
  3. 1901 Census - Peaslake, Shere, Surrey.
  4. 1871 Census - Peaslake, Shere, Surrey
  5. 1861 Census - Pinsus? Farm, Shere, Surrey
  6. 1851 Census - Shere, Surrey
  7. 1841 Census - Jesseys, Shere, Surrey
  8. IGI Baptisms for Emma, George, William,  Jane,  Ann and Hester. Note the baptisms given come from the IGI but were submitted by a member of LDS Church. They appear to be the same as the dates which appear for the births on the Family Tree Maker On-line Site for Alan-R-TICKNER. I would think it highly unlikely that they were baptised on the day they were born. I have left at the present time but put the word possibly before the born.  I would think the baptism dates are correct and taken from the Parish Registers and that they were actually born before the dates born. This is usually the case, as only on some parish records are both the birth and the baptism dates shown. It did happen where the baptism took place on the day of birth but this was usually where it was felt that the child would not survive, so one or two in a family is possible but not for every child.
  9. IGI Baptism for Henry is from the actual records. Again I have a problem, the Family tree programme shows he was born on 18th June 1830 but the IGI baptism is from the 13th June 1830, so he was baptised before he was born which must be incorrect. I have put the information down as I have found it, hopefully someone in the future might be able to solve the problem.
  10. IGI Baptisms for James and Mary, again from actual records and the birth and baptised dates are the same.
  11. IGI Baptism and Family Tree Programme for Baptism and Birth - Note that there is only four months between the supposed births of these children, so I think this confirms that the birth dates are really baptism dates and that it looks like Hester was baptised sometime after her birth. Unfortunately I cannot find a Hester TICKNER on the BMD at all in Surrey, There is a John TICKNER in the December quarter of 1847 in the Guildford district who I think would be the correct child.
  12. Taking Jane as being 3 months old as shown on the 1841 Census which was taken on the night of 6th June 1841 and the fact that she was registered in the first quarter I again think that the birth dates are incorrect, to be actually registered in the first quarter she would have had to be born between January and March, being three months old on the Census also suggests that she was born before the 18th April, otherwise she would have only been 6 weeks at the time of the Census.
  13. 1861 Census - Gravel Pits, Shere, Surrey
  14. 1871 Census - Gomshall, Shere, Surrey
  15. 1881 Census - Smoky Hole, Shere, Surrey, Lucy was with her son James and his wife Ann and their daughter Emelie (Emily) on this Census.
  16. 1861 Census - 6 Queen Street, Gomshall, Surrey, Henry is down as married, a Farmers Labourer, he is head of household but his wife is not with him. It looks as though there was a Mary TOREY, (I think it should be FOREY) aged 60 and it looks as though she was his mother-in-law but it is difficult to read. The occupation of Housekeeper for her has been crossed through and she was born in Shere, Surrey. The reason I think it should be FOREY is that there is a marriage on the BMD in September quarter 1857 in the Guildford district of a Henry TICKNER to an Emma FOREY. Looking at the Census I think her mother is down as FOREY and not TOREY as Ancestry.com has indexed it. I cannot find Henry after this Census. There is a Henry born in the right year that comes up on the 1871 Census and he is married to an Eden and there are lots of children. If you search on the Web there are a lot of hits for Eden TICKNER of Shere but she was not married to a Henry but a John and when you bring the actual 1871 Census up this is the result you get, it is John not Henry, so again Ancestry.com has the indexing wrong. I have also found the marriage of an Emma FOREY to Henry TICKNER on the IGI
  17. 1891 Census - Lane End Farm, Shere, Surrey. John and Ada had two children on this Census. 
  18. 1901 Census - Lane End Farm, Shere, Surrey. One of the children, Percy still with them.
  19. 1861 Census - Shere, Surrey. Three children on this Census. There was also Ann's mother Dorothy MANSELL, aged 80 born Hampshire, with the family.
  20. 1871 Census - Smoky Hole, Shere, Surrey. Four children on this Census.
  21. 1901 Census - Lane End, Shere, Surrey. James is in the next property to his youngest sibling John on this Census. He is with a family called GEAVETT but I can see no relationship with this family, the wife is a Mary and born in Petworth, so definitely not his sibling Mary above.
  22. 1891 Census - Smoky Hole, Shere, Surrey. - Had a job finding this on the Census. Shere not spelt correctly. With the family was a George TICKNER, grandson, aged 10 a Scholar so will have to try and find where he belongs, there is also a Joseph MANSELL, a boarder aged 30 a Farm Labourer born Shere, Surrey who I think would be connected as that was the maiden name of James' wife Ann.
  23. IGI Baptism. No other children come up using the Batch number on IGI with parents names James and Jane.
  24. Parents - James and Jane HEDGER
  25. 1881 Census - Lane End, Shere, Surrey
  26. IGI Marriage and BMD marriage information
  27. IGI Baptism, it makes her quite a bit older than Henry but I think that is possible, especially as she does not appear on the 1861 Census with her husband.

The idea of these charts is to give the information that we have found in the research we have done and put together and with the help of many other people who have contacted us over the past thirty odd years we have been researching our family. The idea is that you click on the Chart box in blue to be taken to the next family. There is now a large number of charts to be found and connections can be made to all the main families I am researching. If a chart has a box with the standard background it means that as yet I have not put the Chart on the Web.
To conform to the Data Protection Act all the Charts have been altered to exclude all details for living people other than the name.

Go to Chart index

Return to Home Page

If you have comments, alterations, corrections, amendments etc. please follow the details to be found on the Home Page to contact me.