stuck in the poorhouse

Question

Hello there

I am new to wikitree, I did employ a genealogist once (when I could afford such things) and she seems to have hit a bit of a dead end since I think my great great great grandfather died in the workhouse and it has been suggested that the family could not afford a gravestone. Now that I have plenty of time and not much money I decided to see if things had moved on a bit but other than finding wikitree (which seems like a very good thing) I have not found any other Lears that I can merge with.

I am Andy Lear (Lear-1133) there is not much doubt about that

My father was john Lear (Lear-1134) and again this is not in dispute

He remembered his father (also called John) (Lear-1135) being a compositor which is borne out by the 1880 census which has him down as an apprentice compositor. he would have had my father (who was born in 1921) at the age of 41 but the photo on his profile was taken at my parents wedding so that looks likely

I am also quite happy that his father was john Lear  the butcher/seller of horse flesh/ labourer as the 1901 census shows him living in 47 Vauxhall street with John 'compositor' (then an apprentice) Lear. We have his birth certificate which shows he was the son of a music printer called John Lear
So we are happy also with music printer John Lear (Lear-1137) who in the 1851 census was living at something that looks to me like 16 johanna Street St Mary’s, Lambeth (which is just by waterloo station)

The genealogist I spoke of had this to say on the subject of music printer Lear’s father.  “I have just received the death certificate of Margaret Lear.  This confirms she died on 4 February 1861 at 67 James Street.  She was 72 years old and the widow of John Lear, brushmaker journeyman.  As Margaret was the informant at the death of John Lear, music printer, we now know that his father was another John Lear who worked as a brushmaker ..... Margret was a widow in 1851”

So she, at least, seemed convinced that Music printer Lear’s father was another John Lear (Lear-1138) ‘brushmaker lear’  who may well have died in the workhouse and ended his life as a hawker (possibly  hawking brushes?)

We do not know for sure that he died in the workhouse, it has not been completely confirmed that the death certificate and burial record  (which I have uploaded as a photo on the profile of lear-1138) are definitely those of the father of music printer lear but there seem to be no other likely candidates.
There is an online group for the decedents of brush makers that I joined but they had no records of John Lear brush maker. If he did die in the poor.

I defiantly have some documents missing that I cannot get off the genealogist that discovered the brush maker (well not without money changing hands and I am currently unemployed)  I don’t know much about tracing family history and I am hoping that there will be someone here that could steer me in the right direction,

Many thanks

Andy Lear

Comments

It will help you a lot (and help others to help you) if you could put in some locations and sources.  It is often easier to identify ancestors if you have it written down where they came from. :)

---

No doubt and I am where I can but I do not know where half this stuff came from I'm afraid

---

As for the other half *grin* you do know about - why not put that in? You can find out places, for instance - look at the death record for John 1843: it says the death happened in Westminster, Middlesex, England - so you could have put that in.

Lots of yummy research in your near future.  I would recommend familysearch.org (because it's free), FreeBMD for all the certificate references, the General Register Office site (which also gives mother's maiden names) 

https://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/login.asp

Answer 1

The John Lear who died in 1843:
* on the 1841 census, he is described as a 'pauper' and is in the workhouse
* the informant on his death certificate was not Margaret, it was a lady called Elizabeth Elkes
* how did the genealogist know that John Lear's father was another John Lear (brushmaker) just from the death certificate? English death certificates would not give that information.  It could be found from the marriage certificate of John & Margaret, however.

Comments

Again I am not sure but I understand that it was the death certificate of the son (the one that died in 1857) that she was the informent of. Because she was living in the same place as Brushmaker Lear (Lear-1138) it seems more than likely that she was the husband Lear-1138 and since she was likely the mother of Lear-1137 then her husband Lear-1138 must have been the father but I do not want to give the impression that I know what is going on because I don't and she may well have had the marriage certificate of John & Margaret but unfortunately I don't.

---

Try and put a few sources in there, though.  Don't forget, you signed up to do just that when you signed the Honor Code.

---

I have been uploading all the documents I have into the photos area, I have not used information from other sites, mostly because I have not found any

---

Hi Andy,

I haven’t been able to find a record of the marriage of John (the music printer) Lear  https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Lear-1137  and Emma Brown. Maybe the genealogist couldn’t either, so she ordered his death certificate which gave the informant as Margaret Lear.

I’ve found 2 Margaret Lears in London in the 1851 census

A 27 year old unmarried house maid living in Bloomsbury

https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:SGF1-X8Q

and a 61 year old widow living in Lambeth https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:SGTW-T35

Maybe the informant’s address on the 1857 death certificate of John the music printer matched with the address of the Margaret Lear who was a 61 year old widow in 1851 which is why the genealogist thought this Margaret was John’s mother.

There is a Margaret Lear on the 1841 census who is living in Southwark with children called John and William.

Ancestry is showing a prison record for a Margaret Lear, born about 1788

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/sharing/21177764?h=cd4750&utm_campaign=bandido-webparts&utm_source=post-share-modal&utm_medium=copy-url

Hopefully someone with more genealogical knowledge than me could comment of the likelihood of John the music printer being the son of John the brush maker and Margaret. 

---

Not sure why the above comment is using a large font. Please could someone fix it. Thanks

---

I think that is exactly right and it was widow Lear (Leer?) (Unknown-523191)? that the genealogist concluded reported the death of music printer Lear (her son).

I seem to remember it struck me as odd at the time that the husband was in the poor house but the wife was not. I was wondering if he went mad and the workhouse was as good a place to put him as any but his cause of death was put down as asthma which makes that theory look a bit iffy.

I also have it in my mind that the genealogist tried to find the wedding certificate and could not and suggested that the most likely reason for this was that they were ‘non conformists’ (which in practice I think means Methodists, or possibly Catholics, rather than CoE) do they not have records as well ?

---

About the big font... I think you're the only one who can edit your comments. Can you click the 'edit' button and then highlight all of the text. When it's highlighted, click on the "size" button at the top of the box you're working in (It's to the right of "Font". I believe the font size I'm using is 16, which might show up huge as well.

This is font size 14

This is font size 12

This is font size 10

---

Thank you. I’ve just changed it to font size 14.

---

hi... I hope it's okay, but I went ahead and added sources to your John Lear, born in 1849. Do you want to take a look and see how I've added sources to the profile? 

I also added in some of the extra census records.. that might help tell his story a little more too. If you write something about the 1861 census 

<ref name="1861census"/> 

just add this to the end, and it will link back to the 1861 source record that I listed farther down in his profile.

Hopefully I didn't overstep any boundaries... I love helping, but sometimes I get carried away :)

Loralee

---

Which John lear? There isn't one born in 1849.  The closest is the one born in 1847 (Lear-1136).  The one the original question was about died in 1843  - Lear-1138 - (so he couldn't have been in the 1861). So on which John Lear did you mark the 1861 census?

---

He was born in Q4 1847 - the 1851 census age of 2 should be 3.

---

I must have made a typo. I was working on the son, who we've now confirmed was born in 1847. Lear-1136

Thanks for catching my mistake.

---

Is there any explanation (or even speculation) as to how the husband could be a pauper and the wife not?

---

I think people ended up in workhouses for a lot of different reasons. I wonder if it's possible his wife was unable to care for him (my first thought is dementia, but maybe that would have taken him to a lunacy hospital) 

I just noticed in this Wikipedia article that people listed as "paupers" hadn't yet been admitted to the workhouse. Or, that's the way I read it tonight, anyway :)

---

There were several John Lears living in London at the time which makes it difficult to be confident that the 1843 death certificate is for John the Brushmaker. 

A John Lear married Mary Maxwell on 18 May 1812 at St John the Evangelist, London, https://www.ancestry.co.uk/sharing/21198506?h=b13a5b&utm_campaign=bandido-webparts&utm_source=post-share-modal&utm_medium=copy-url

and a John Lear married Mary Hess on 30 Nov 1812 at Christ Church with St Mary and St Stephen, Spitalfields, Tower Hamlets.

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/sharing/21198529?h=a5bec1&utm_campaign=bandido-webparts&utm_source=post-share-modal&utm_medium=copy-url

Tracing the above two Johns through the census returns might help eliminate them.

I haven’t been able to find a marriage record for John Lear and Margaret.

---

I don't find the workhouse John Lear a convincing candidate for the brushmaker. He would be considerably older than Margaret and why is he in Westminster (and buried there) when he was from Lambeth/Southwark?

His absence from the 1841 census could mean he'd died already - perhaps as early as 1832 given William's age (8).

---

The death certificate for John 'music printer' lear has arrived

https://www.wikitree.com/photo/jpg/Lear-1137-2

He died at age 35 in 67 James Street and the signatory was M Lear. His wife was called Emma and he had no children (that I know of) who's names began with an M so it seems quite possible that the geniologist was right and it was his mother Margret that signed the death certificate.

So I think if it is possible to connect Margret Lear to 67 James Street Lambeth that would show that she was his Mother and consequently that John 'brushmaker' Lear was his Father, or is it possible to look up addresses in whichever census came before 1857?

---

That would be the 1851, which included addresses, and which is already on the profile.

---

Your original question mentions the death certificate of Margaret Lear who died “on 4 February 1861 at 67 James Street.  She was 72 years old and the widow of John Lear, brushmaker journeyman.”  It now looks likely that Margaret c1889 and John Lear the brush maker are the parents of John the music printer. John the brush maker may be related to (Joseph) Charles Lear, a brush maker of 294 strand https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Lear-1184

---

Ohh brilliant, i missed that :)  So now we know that Brushmaker Lear is the father of music printer Lear.

I guess the next question is, do we know that it was Brushmaker Lear that died in the poorhouse? Mathew is not convinced and, to be fair, nor am I because I can't see how Brushmaker Lear could die in the poorhouse without his wife sharing the same fate.

Any suggestions as the to the next step would be really helpful

---

On John Lear's profile you have yourself uploaded the burial register of 1843 which says that John was in the workhouse.  Once he had died, Margaret would probably not have remained in the workhouse, so her death location would be different.

Interesting to note that there is a Margaret Lear (independent), with sons John and William on the 1841 census: Margaret and son John are noted as not born in county (which was Surrey).  They are living in Tower Street, Southwark, Surrey.
note: she has been transcribed as 'Leer'

---

Yes, the question is though is the burial register is for the right John Lear. He has the right name and the right date of death but is that enough to be sure he was the brushmaker? If it had said brushmaker on the burial register I would be happier (but still not entirely convinced) but hawker?

I am afraid I can not find the 1841 census record you are referring to, would you mind posting a link please?

---

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MQV1-CW3

link to Margaret Leer

---

I posted this on her profile but maybe not everyone has seen it: the 'music printer' John Lear's daughter was christened Hannah Margaret Lear. I am therefore very confident that we have the correct mother for John.

I still don't think the Westminster poorhouse John Lear is a strong candidate though for my reasons above.

---

Owww my poor brain is hurting

Ros’s link shows Margret lear to be born about 1800 (give or take a few years) whereas I have Unknown-523191 as being born around 1787. However, the link also shows the John Leer living in the same place at the same time to have been born in 1822 which would be spot on for music printer Lear. I do not understand how there could be such a difference in ages for Margret though and although I am not denying the existence of this William Lear, he is not in my the tree so far.

As I understand Mathew’s reservations he was not happy with Margret being born in 1787 and marrying someone born around 1776, 11 years older (and regardless of whether died in the poor house I think we can safely say she did not marry him for his money). If he (Mathew) is unhappy about the idea of Margret being born in 1787 then I would imagine he would be positively livid at the idea of her being born in 1800.

However a Margret Lear was almost certainly living in 67 James street around 1861 and if I am reading his death certificate properly then ‘music printer’ Lear died in the same house, three years earlier.

Ohh dear, I am just going round in circles

---

It was only a link.  It was not a this-is-it-I've-found-her.  Just a passing remark.

---

And if Margaret's death cert says she was 72 in 1861, that makes her (potential) birthdate 1789.

---

Please do not take offence. I appreciate all the effort you have put into helping and it is very far from impossible that I have failed to understand something or read it properly. If I have not, then either the birthday is wildly wrong on that census return (and I am told that some women do occasionally lie about their age) or it is a different Margret Lear that just happens to have a son called John of the right age. The Leer spelling leads me to believe that it is a different Margret but I am very new to all of this. Having had another look what is your view?

---

sorry i think we both posted at the same time and I had not read your last one before hitting send. Let me see if that untangles it

---

'Leer' was a transcription error.  On the image itself, it is obviously 'Lear'.

---

the plot thickens :(

If the birth date was 1789 then that census report would still be (slightly) over ten years out. I have no idea if that is plausible or not.

---

I can assure you that I have no emotional attachment to when Margaret Lear was born. In fact I'd already identified Margaret Leer myself a week ago, debated internally whether they were the same woman despite the age inconsistency, and decided they were. The census-takers often relied on other people's guesstimates of ages and I think the 1841 census age is just wrong.

My biggest objection to the Westminster John is that he was in a Westminster poorhouse at all when he was clearly from south of the river. The age differential of around 12 years just adds more circumstantial evidence.

---

Edited for clarity

This link mentions that ages were rounded down to the nearest 5 years in the 1841 census. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1841_United_Kingdom_census

I’ve added a note to the profile of John the music printer to explain why we think his mother is Margaret. I’ve also added his sister, Emily. 

John Lear who married Mary Maxwell in 1812 seems a more likely candidate for the 1843 death (as the 1812 marriage and the 1843 burial were both at St John the Evangelist).  https://www.ancestry.co.uk/sharing/21198506?h=b13a5b&utm_campaign=bandido-webparts&utm_source=post-share-modal&utm_medium=copy-url

It is possible that the marriage to Mary Maxwell is the first marriage of John the brush-maker, but I think I came to the conclusion that John the brush maker was unlikely to be the same person as the John Lear who married Mary Maxwell as the baptism records of John and Mary Maxwell’s children did not give John’s occupation as a brush maker. 

---

Ohh no! just when I thought I was starting to understand what was going on. What John Lear that married Mary Maxwell?

I am not sure when the first Lambeth bridge was built but if there was a bridge there at the time then it is less than a mile walk from Lambeth to the St Margaret And St John Workhouse so it would surely have been easily the nearest place for brushmaker lear to have been put when he could no longer pay his bills.

Do we think it safe to add a William Lear born around 1833 as a son of Brush maker Lear and brother of music printer Lear? If so than that is great Progress !  Thank you everyone :)

Whilst I do not really understand T Lear’s last post I think it can safely be taken as a hint that someone that does have a paid ancestry account (which regrettably I don’t) might be able to help with. I did go to my local library the other day because I had heard that you can access ancestry for free from there but it was not working.

---

A John Lear married Mary Maxwell on 18 May 1812 in St John the Evangelist (Westminster Marriages).  Not necessarily YOUR John, but one to note down for future reference.  Likewise, I would not enter William onto WT yet, as he is still only a possible.

Many FHCs and libraries have been closed for months.  Always best to ring first to see if they are running.

Lambeth Bridge was built in 1929 and opened in 1932.

---

ok thanks. the library was open and i did ring ahead and book a computer. It was just the free ancestry.com that was not working. Hopefully they will fix it though.

According to wikipedia The first modern lambeth bridge was a suspension bridge Sanctioned by an Act of Parliament in 1860 but that rather suggests to me that there was a non-modern wooden affair there before that. Even if there was no Lambeth bridge there was a bridge at vauxhall from 1809 which would have made it a 2 mile walk and the thames was full of ferrymen at the time I think so I still think the westminster poorhouse would have been the nearest

---

Just to further muddle your thinking :

Ages on census returns are notoriously incorrect more often than they are correct - - even taking in the rounding down factor of the 1841 census.  (I have seen that rounded down literally to the next year ending in 5, rather than the next multiple of 5 - so, as an example, someone born in 1814 did not get rounded to 1810, but to 1805.)

There are some folk who get younger every ten years, and some who are younger one census, then older the next.  Unless they moved around a lot, residence helps.  Knowing who else is in a family group can also help.  (I have tracked down errant family members by looking for siblings of the parents, then looking for niece/nephew in a census - or finding mention of niece/nephew and then hunting down the parents- and not to neglect grandparents, when known.)

---

Andy,  distance is irelevant. Workhouses were paid for by the ratepayers of parishes within the union. They would not pay to accomodate someone who did not have  a settlement within the union. Settlement was gained by various means such as  birth, working for a year , residence or paying rates.  (terms varied over the 19th c.For post 1834 see  http://www.workhouses.org.uk/poorlaws/newpoorlaw.shtml#Settlement The place where you last gained settlement determined where 'relief' was provided.

Details of post 1834 parishes within each union can be found on these pages.

St Margaret and  St John the Evangelist  Westminster (the parish in which John Lear was buried)?http://www.workhouses.org.uk/StMargaret/

Lambeth ( generic) http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Lambeth/

---

Help!

So in one corner we have Mathew and Helen who say that it is not at all likely that 'brushmaker' lear died in the poorhouse since he was in the wrong parish.

In the other corner I think we have Ros and T Lear who I believe (hopefully they will correct me if I am wrong) that the genealogical evidence is sufficient to make it quite likely that he did.

And then there is me who understands less about what is going on than everyone else and has ended up with a sore brain

---

Sorry if my last comment wasn’t very clear. I think it’s unlikely that brush maker Lear died in the poor house. I think the 1843 death certificate is for a different John Lear.

---

Ahh thank you, and i would be prepaired to bet that the confusion was entirely due to me having a dud brain and nothing to do with the clarity of your answer. I had somehow thought that him marrying Margret in some way substantiated the 'died in the poorhouse' idea but if it does not and we all seem fairly confident that he did marry Margret but did not die in the poorhouse then it would be nice to know where and when he did die. I am not sure if the death date on his profile is based on the idea he died in the poorhouse, which would clearly make it invalid, or there is other evidence that that is when he died, which would explain why I was looking in the poorhouse in the first place.

I have also just remembered that (for what it is worth) I was also not convinced that he died there, not for the same reasons that everyone else thinks but because I did not understand why he would be in the poorhouse and his wife not so I am glad that is no longer a problem.

So if we have (finally) got that sorted out, I guess the question is what next? is there any way to find out if his father was yet another John and anything about him? I believe that we have gone back to the years before censuses now so it is going to get pretty tricky?

---

Is the reason you were talking about a John Lear that married Mary Maxwell because he is an alternative candidate for the John Lear that died in the poorhouse?

---

Yes, that’s why I mentioned him. Sorry if it confused things.

The 1776 birth year on John the brush-maker’s profile looks like it was based on the age 1843 death certificate (Which we now think is for a different John). John of the death certificate was 66 in May 1843 , so he would have been  born in 1776 or 1777. Maybe estimate John the brush makers date of birth as  1785 (so that he is two years older than his wife) https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Lear-1138) 

---

I have edited the birth date and removed the death date and the pictures of the poorhouse Lear and the poorhouse references in the bio. Unfortunately this has left the profile with no sources and it will not be long before Ros has something to say about that :) but I dont know what to put there. Also now that we have moved the birthday but a good 8 years how can I recheck for duplicates?

As I have said before I do think it likely that all the London (and surrey) Lears are connected. It is not a common name and there was (apparently)  an Elizabeth Lear in Bermondsey (3 miles from Lambeth) in 1552 (https://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/Lear) and her father would not have had to have had many sons in order to account for every Lear in London and then some. In fact the parents of the famous nonsense poet Edward Lear (Lear-858) could account for half of them as they apparently had 21 Children (not all of who survived passed childhood)  https://nonsenselit.com/2017/07/11/twentieth-of-twenty-one-edward-lear-and-his-siblings-1/  It would be wonderful if it were possible to tie into his tree, because that would make it part of the entire wikitree and push things back to almost 1700

---

Once you go past the censuses (1841) and civil registration (1837) you get to look at the parish records.  If you can find his baptism, it will likely also state his parents (or at least his father).

---

My interest in the name LEAR is in South Devon, where an Isaac LEAR married my great great aunt Selina in 1875 (it was her second marriage, after my gg uncle James BALL died).  Another avenue of research! (also known as a rabbit hole LOL)

---

Do you think it possible that all Lears came from a single source? or that we might discover that the legendary Shakespearean king of the same name really existed and we are all around 20 billionth in line to the throne? :)

---

"King Lear" by Shakespeare is described thus by Wikipedia:

"Derived from the legend of Leir of Britain, a mythological pre-Roman Celtic king, the play has been widely adapted for the stage and motion pictures, with the title role coveted by accomplished actors."

---

The death certificate for Margaret (his wife) is a source for John the brush maker as it says she is the widow of John Lear, brushmaker journeyman.

Death certificate https://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/ GRO Reference: 1861 M Quarter in LAMBETH Volume 01D Page 211

---

thank you, i have to pop out now for half an hour but will sort out that source when i get back. I think it would definately be worth a recheck for duplicates now that I have changed the birth date, does anyone know how to ?

---

I added Emily https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Lear-1190 as a daughter of John the brush maker as her baptism record shows her to be the daughter of John Lear, a brush maker and Margret.  Emily was born in 1815 and baptised in 1851, so she may have already been married when she was baptised. Searching for her marriage record and then searching for her with her married name in the census returns from 1851 should give her place of birth. Knowing this may help you to find out more about John the brush maker.

This website contains some information on the London Lears.https://www.londonlives.org/

And some Lear wills are transcribed here http://www.mawer.clara.net/willsH.html#learg

Full copies of the wills and of other Lear wills currently be downloaded free from https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/

The transcribed wills don’t mention John the brush maker, but they may be useful in the future when you have traced this line further back.

---

Ohh thank you. That london lives is a great site isn't it? Do you think this is our man?

https://www.wikitree.com/photo.php/d/d9/Andy_Lear_To_Do_List.png

---

It could be, but it’s difficult to be confident about this as it doesn’t give John’s age.

---

Can you (or anyone else) make out what is says after St. Mary's Lambeth? Looks a bit like The Daurol Ovoy (only that makes no sense)

---

The Dawson something.

---

Well, it starts with a name: Thos Dawson.  But I don't know what the final word is.

---

Oooh, now you have said that, Ros, it's clearly Tho^s.

---

Coroner?

---

Overseer

written as Over^r

---

Same abbreviated word is two down.

---

I don't think it is coroner (although it may be) as far as I know (which is not much) he survived his hospitalisation. Melanie is quite right, the same word that looks like Ovoy is repeted two lines down where it looks a bit more like over. If we are sure the first word is Theo then presumably he is either a doctor or hospital administrator (which I don't think will be much help even if we could read it). but it could be the person the brought him in or the person to whom he was handed over when he left which might be of use if there was a Theo Dawson living in the same house as the brushmaker. This may seem like a long shot but since two lines down it is clearly a different person this may make it less likely that it is a hospital overseer ?

---

Not a hospital overseer.  The parish overseer - and if the men came from different parishes, they would have different overseers (although there were two overseers to a parish).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overseer_of_the_poor  

And the first word isn't Theo, it's Tho^s as in Thomas.

---

I thought we had abandoned the idea that he was a pauper

---

We had.  You were the one who brought it up again from the londonlives site.

---

I'm off for the night, and in keeping with the new discussion rules.

---

Andy, this link gives guidance on finding the correct pre 1837 baptism in parish records. https://www.thornber.net/famhist/htmlfiles/tipsforp.html

It’s also possible that John the brush maker wasn’t baptised (as his children don’t appear to have been baptised)

---

Ohh no!

Now it seems to me that there was a family of  Lambeth Lears (mine) and an unconnected family of  Southwark Lears (Tracey's). Whenever I saw Southwark I would just ignore it but a disaster has just occured. Now that i have watched the source-a-thon video and know the easy way to find sources I found one for Lewis-41378 who I am sure was the wife of Lear-1135 (and therefore my grandmother). I remember her living in New Malden and a lot of the stuff I have found about her puts her in Croydon (which is compatable with my father being a Crystal Palace (football team) supporter. Now I have found her place of birth (source in profile) is.... you guessed it Southwark. This muddies the waters yet again and re-opens the debate about whether or not brushmaker lear did die in the poorhouse (a thoery that was rejected because he had no ties to the parish of Southwark)

---

I thought that the poor house theory was rejected as John Lear who died in the poor house in 1843 was buried at St John the Evangelist, Westminster.

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/sharing/21657702?h=3a4be4&utm_campaign=bandido-webparts&utm_source=post-share-modal&utm_medium=copy-url

---

Ohh for a working brain.

By the way, the Lear one name study that the fellow that was researching Bushrod Lear had not been used for years (if at all) and I emailed admin and now I have adopted it.

I am not quite sure what to do with it but if it could be used to somehow keep track of what's what it is probably a better vehicle than this g2g post ?

---

Oh I remember this thread ...

I'm not sure why it's a problem that your grandmother was born in Lambeth. The boroughs of Lambeth and Southwark are contiguous. In any case you've made an error on the birth record for your grandmother. This is the correct one: "England and Wales Birth Registration Index, 1837-2008," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:2X2P-DRS : 1 October 2014), Louisa Julia Lewis, 1883; from "England & Wales Births, 1837-2006," database, findmypast (http://www.findmypast.com : 2012); citing Birth Registration, Lambeth, London, England, citing General Register Office, Southport, England

Her parents were James Lewis and Margaret Blake.

---

Ohh thank you! could I ask where you found her parents? I have been looking for them for ages. Thank you

---

I found her birth here www.gro.gov.uk (free registration required) which gave the mother's maiden name of blake, then looked for Lewis-Blake marriages and cross-checked with the earliest census entry.

"England and Wales Marriage Registration Index, 1837-2005," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:2DRL-QKS : 13 December 2014), James Lewis, 1880; from "England & Wales Marriages, 1837-2005," database, findmypast (http://www.findmypast.com : 2012); citing 1880, quarter 4, vol. 1A, p. 615, Chelsea, London, England, General Register Office, Southport, England

"England and Wales Census, 1891," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:Q92M-PMM : 2 May 2019), Louisa Lewis in household of James Lewis, Lambeth, London, England, United Kingdom; from "1891 England, Scotland and Wales census," database and images, findmypast (http://www.findmypast.com : n.d.); citing PRO RG 12, London county, subdistrict, The National Archives of the UK, Kew, Surrey

---

I’ve just come across this marriage record while looking for something else.

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/sharing/21669120?h=8ed551&utm_campaign=bandido-webparts&utm_source=post-share-modal&utm_medium=copy-url

It looks like it is the marriage record for Hannah Margaret Lear 

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Lear-1183, daughter of John the music printer (as her age, father’s name and occupation match), but she is using the name Jane, not Hannah. I haven’t been able to find her in the 1861 census. She might be living with a relative which would give you more clues about the family of John the brush maker.

---

This looks like it could be a marriage record for a relative of John the Brush maker. George Lear, a widower of James Street, son of Francis Lear, a brush maker married Jane Robbins in Lambeth on 24 April 1859. James St is the address given on the death certificate of Margaret, the wife of John the brush maker.

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/sharing/21670006?h=b3b19f&utm_campaign=bandido-webparts&utm_source=post-share-modal&utm_medium=copy-url

George’s first marriage is witnessed by M and J Lear.

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/sharing/21670102?h=23b564&utm_campaign=bandido-webparts&utm_source=post-share-modal&utm_medium=copy-url

---

I am trying to keep up, really I am. Since I had hoped to use the Lear one name page to help with research I have put a copy of the jane margret marriage certificate along with your reasons for thinking she is the same person as Hannah. I can not find any lears at all in the 1861 census, if I could and music printer lear was living in Stanford Street at the time that would clinch it. Granted Stanford Street is only a 10 min walk from Johanna Street (where he was in 1851) I don't know if it was normal for 'children' to leave home at (or before) the age of 19.

I am afraid I cam not see why you think this George Lear is related to Brushmaker Lear. George was married in 1859. Normally if I had to take an absolutely wild guess as to when someone got married in those days I would guess at 21 but if widower meant then what it does now maybe 41 would be a better guess for when he got married that would make him born in 1818 so if anything I suppose he should be the son of Brushmaker Lear but his father was called frances and brushmaker was called John. Are you suggesting that Frances Lear and John 'brushmaker' Lear are the same person? It might explain why we (or I) have hit such a brick wall. If that is what you are suggesting apart from having the same profession I can not see anything that would lead to that conclusion.

I have just re-read this post and it could be taken to be somewhat rude and argumentative. I am really not trying to be that way and I am colossally grateful for all your assistance. I am just trying to keep up.

---

The link is James St, Lambeth. George Lear of the 1859 and 1841 marriages was living in James St when he married in 1859. Margaret Lear (wife of John the brush maker) was living in James St when she registered the death of her likely son, John the music printer in 1857. https://www.wikitree.com/photo.php/6/67/Lear-1137-2.jpg

John the bush maker and Francis the brush maker (father of George) might be brothers. Unfortunately I can’t find John’s baptism.

---

Ahh brothers, yes that would make sense but is it possible they are the same person?

In any event I will see if I can find that brushmaker's decendents group I joined once and see if they can find a francis

---

I’ve created a profile for Francis Lear, the brush maker to try and determine if he ever used the name John.

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Lear-1204

---

This is a question for Tracey as much as anyone but i will open it up to the floor :)
I am trying to make sense of the Lears and have started trying to keep track of where they were all living. One of the things that has become apparent is that throughout the 1800s even though they have all got married and (presumably) rented somewhere to bring up their families they have never moved anywhere more than a couple of minutes walk from what is now the taxi rank at waterloo station.

I have just stumbled across this  https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MQKH-871

I don't know if Chr is a name, an abbreviation or an honorific.

More to the point though, i am wondering if there is any chance that this Chr Lear might be the brother of brushmaker lear (Lear-1138) or even the same person and now that we are getting into 'pre-census territory' how I might go about finding out.

---

I am thinking not now. Not only did I not notice the different spelling (although presumably Lear and Leer are pronounced the same) but having found this https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/map-of-london-showing-where-william-blake-lived I think that Hercules Buildings would have been a bit up market for any ancestor of mine :)

---

The 1851 census show a Christopher Leer living in Hercules buildings. https://www.ancestry.co.uk/sharing/21728997?h=be7c59&utm_campaign=bandido-webparts&utm_source=post-share-modal&utm_medium=copy-url

I think this is the same person as Chr Lear from the 1841 census.

https://www.genealogy.com/forum/surnames/topics/lear/509/ The above post implies that Christopher Lear/Leer who married about 1785( father of Christopher Lear/Leer from the above census records) is related to Charles Lear, the brush maker. https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Lear-1184, but I’m not sure which generation he is referring to when he says “ The brushmaker was, if I remember correctly, a younger son of this family”  I haven’t been able to find baptism records for Charles (Lear-1184), so this may just be speculation.

There are two Christopher Leer wills on the NationalArchives website for two different Christopher Leers. It’s worth checking them to see if they mention John the brush maker. They can currently be download free of charge if you register.

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/D150434

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/D3387599

---

One of those documents PROB 11/1137/182 is the Will of Christopher Leer, Gentleman of East Greenwich , Kent and not much help but the other one PROB 11/1656/4 Is definitely our man as he is a coach maker of Saint Mary Lambeth , Surrey and on the census I found it also said coach something.

It is very hard to read. I think of the document I downloaded only the half the first page is his will and when it starts talking about John Whitehouse that is a diferent will altogether. It starts off with normal will stuff then Line 7 mentions his wife which looks a bit like Sumivle Leer (but almost certainly isn’t)  It looks like he left her the amount of ten pounds which seems a bit mean since he gave more to other people. He seems to have given something to Florence leer and Louise ‘of that something’.  Another bit that I can’t read and he gives the sons of the aforementioned someth9ing which is thirty pounds.  There is something about surviving lears. Then something (presumably the rest) is to be divided equally between his children or their heirs, wives or husbands. Something about something happening after the disposal of the property further mention of his childred and wife (Soushili ?) my eldest son Christopher john Ritt (?) and my oldest to be Sunylebrt @lozony leer to be his executioners with loyalty and twenty pounds to his eldest son Christopher john Leer and four pounds to his eldest something to this my something and about half way down the page says Christopher Jacob leer witniss Robert brookes.

If anyone can decipher  the wife’s name that would be really helpful. Apart from that we have learnt that his eldest son is called Christopher john  and I think he had 2 daughters called Florence and Louise. Apart from that we know that he owned his own house and have confirmed that he was a coach maker.

I have put the original document here https://www.wikitree.com/photo.php/3/30/Lear_freespace.pdf

<!--[if gte mso 9]> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]> Normal 0 false false false EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>

<![endif]-->

---

give me a little  while and I'll transcribe it. It's not long

---

Ok It's a quick rendition. There are a few words that I'm not sure about and are in brackets.It is rough and ready.I like to do a transcript and then come back to it because I seem to be able to read it better and then spot errors.

The second bit  starting with John Whitehouse is not a different will I haven't transcribed it in full because of time but it is another local coach painter affirming that this was the writing of Christopher Leer. Maybe there was a challenge, maybe the one witness was not to be found. Maybe there are some bits that don't really make sense!  (it doesn't explain why it was necessary  to find someone to swear to the validity of the writing , but in my experience,  this sort of statement occurs when there is a problem.

 National Archives,Kew, Surrey, England :PROB 11/1656/4

Description:        Will of Christopher Leer otherwise Christopher Jacob Leer, Coachmaker of Saint Mary Lambeth , Surrey

Date:     01 April 1822

I Christopher Leer  otherwise Christopher Jacob Leer of Bridge Road in the Parish of Saint Mary Lambeth in the County of Surrey  coachmaker [   fe] this my last will and testament in maner and form following (that is to say) I desire that all my just debts Funeral  expences and [pursing?]  ]this my last will and testament be fully paid and satisfied I do then bequeath to my dear wife Hannah Leer the rest of the house and shop occupied  by  Mr Joseph Fitshowe Sadler and Collarmaker situated in Bridge Road aforesaid  without any [sa’ctions ;sanctions?] whatsoever  [ ---- ptines  exceptines? ] the insurance from fire which she must pay during her life likewise  My will is that the stock in trade household furniture and lease of the premises with everything else I may hold in my possession and belonging to me at the time of my decease may be disposed of to the best advantage and that a sufficient sum maybe invested in the funds to bring in seventy pounds pe’ annum in addition to the above rent of the house aforesaid which is thirty pounds per annum without any securities surviving for her life and for her own use after her decease to be equally divided between my children or their heirs after they have attained the age of twenty one years and likewise my will is that the residue be equally divided as soon as possible after the disposal of the property and the securities  upon it is fully satisfied in the same manner as before specified among my said children or their heirs  I likewise appoint my wife Hannah  Leer my eldest son [I of J?] Christopher John Leer and my eldest  daughter Mary leer my executors and executrixes with a legacy of twenty  pounds to my eldest son  [ I orJ?] Christopher John Leer and ten pounds to my eldest daughter  Mary Leer to this my last will and testament dated this first day of January One thousand eight hundred and twenty two as witness my hand

Christopher Jacob Leer, witness Robert Brookes

Appeared personally John Whitehouse of Mead Place Westminster Road in the County of Surrey Coach painter and made oath that he knew and was well acquainted with Christopher Leer otherwise Christopher Jacob Leer late of Bridge Road in the parish of Saint Mary Lambeth in the County of   Surrey (the rest goes on to say that he was familiar with the writing of Christopher)  this bit is dated 29 March 1822

Proved at London 1^st April 1822 before the worshipful John Daubeny Doctor of Laws and surrogate by the oathes of Hannah Leer widow the relict  [I or J?]  Christopher John Leer the son and Mary Leer Spinster the daughter the executors to whom admon’ was granted having been first duly sworn.

Edit : the son was J Christopher John Leer. The image for the following record is on ancestry. He was   a coachmaker like his father. 

Name:	J Christopher John Leer
Gender:	Male
Record Type:	Marriage
Marriage Date:	22 Feb 1842
Marriage Place:	St John, Horselydown, Southwark, England
Father:	Christopher Leer
Spouse:	Elizabeth Arnold
Register Type:	Parish Register

---

Blimey I made a mess of that didn't i? I still think it looks more like Sumivle than Hannah (though I do not for one second doubt that you are right) and where did I get Florence leer and Louise from? Thank you so much Helen.

---

Here's the allegation (application for the licence to marry Hannah Viner https://www.ancestry.co.uk/sharing/21731405?h=fa19f1 and the marriage itself https://www.ancestry.co.uk/sharing/21731434?h=4e58f0 (but maybe we're going up the wrong branch/tree maybe not relationship to the brushmaker or the music printer)

edited second reference 

---

Yes unfortunately I don’t think he has anything to do with music printer Lear or any of the brushmakers. Music printer lear’s Father was a brushmaker (Lear-1138) and Tracey has found some other brushmaker Lear’s (Lear-1148 and his wife and son) we are working on connecting these 2 sets of brushmaker Lears but it does not seem that coachmaker Leer is going to be much help with this. It is interesting stuff though.

---

Cri is a common abbreviation for Christopher, I have it on several of my records

---

This may seem like a bit of a 'Hail Mary' but I have found an earlier John Lear in what is presumably the 'right' poorhouse now. https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QGZT-M6F4 The actual image is the page before the one the link takes you to.

Since we have come out the other side of census territory I was wondering if better brains than mine could work out if his john Lear is related to Brush Maker Lear (Lear-1138) also called John Lear, also of Lambeth