the son of John Lacey and Elizabeth Mills, John was born on 10 July 1829. He was baptised at St Mary Magdalene, Woolwich, Kent on 7 August 1829. John and Emma had 19 children according to Ethel Cyrus Lacey family tree booklet (1974) He passed away in 1888.
{Lacey, E.C. (1974). Lacey Family tree, The South African Branch.} <Lacey, E.C. (1974). Lacey Family tree, The South African Branch. pp 1. />
Baptism: "England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975" Original data: England, Births and Christenings, 1538-1975. Salt Lake City, Utah: FamilySearch, 2013; FHL Film Number: 307732, 307733, 307734 Ancestry Record 9841 #74959346 (accessed 14 February 2024) John Lacey baptism on 7 Aug 1829 (born 10 Jul 1829), son of John Lacey & Elizabeth, in Saint Mary Magdalene, Woolwich, Kent, England.
1841 Census: "1841 England Census" Class: HO107; Piece: 493; Book: 1; Civil Parish: Charlton Next Woolwich; County: Kent; Enumeration District: Royal Military Academy (1); Folio: 22; Page: 42; Line: 13; GSU roll: 306884 Ancestry Sharing Link - Ancestry Record 8978 #3227999 (accessed 14 February 2024) John Lacey (12) in Charlton Next Woolwich in Greenwich registration district in Kent, England. Born in Kent, England.
1871 Census: "1871 England Census" The National Archives; Kew, London, England; 1871 England Census; Class: RG10; Piece: 597; Folio: 51; Page: 2; GSU roll: 818905; ED, institution, or vessel: 11; Household schedule number: 4 Ancestry Sharing Link - Ancestry Record 7619 #5267741 (accessed 14 February 2024) John Lacey (42) head of household in St Saviour in St Saviour Southwark registration district in London, England. Born in Westwick Kent England.
Is John your ancestor? Please don't go away! Login to collaborate or comment, or
contact
a profile manager, or ask our community of genealogists a question.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com
DNA Connections
It may be possible to confirm family relationships with John by comparing test results with other carriers of his Y-chromosome or his mother's mitochondrial DNA.
However, there are no known yDNA or mtDNA test-takers in his direct paternal or maternal line.
It is likely that these autosomal DNA test-takers will share some percentage of DNA with John:
Lacey-1849 and Lacey-1022 appear to represent the same person because: Same birthdate and parents, different death dates are both estimates without sources.