Mar 082008
 
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

 I’ve been doing some pondering on the data that June sent me and would welcome any input that you  might have..  

Whilst I like Samuel being the son of Moses and Sarah I feel that we need something more concrete. 
We have a reliable descendent tree from Samuel but how can we determine whether he is a son of Moses and Sarah? 
Samuel married twice, once in Hobart, Tasmania and the second time in Holitika, New ZEaland.

On both occasions there is no provision on the marriage certificate for bride and groom’s parents so this doesn’t help us. 
His age varies, but this is not unusual:-
At the time of his first marriage in 1849 he gives his age as 23 (makes dob 1826)
When his daughter Sarah is born in 1859 he gives his age as 40 (makes dob 1819)
At his second marriage in 1876 he says that is is 52 (makes dob 1824)
On the birth certificate for his daughter Caroline in 1879 he gives his age as 50 (makes dob 1829)
When his daughter Rose is born in 1883 he claims to be 63 (makes dob 1820)
His death certificate of 1885 gives his age as 68 (makes dob 1817) 
This gives a birth date range of 6 April 1816 to 25 Jan 1826, with an average of 28 Oct 1820 
We know from the birth certificate of his daughter Caroline, that he was born in St. Giles, London.
All other documents say either London or Middlesex.
 
His first marriage is in 1849 and unless we have reason to think he returned to England,  we can eliminate all UK censuses except for the 1841 
In 1841 there are 52 Samuel Jacobs listed
However, if we take birthplace into account, this can be reduced to 16 candidates
Given the vagaries of ages in the 1841 census, 3 are worth considering (based on a range of 1812 to 1830)               
Son of Nathanial & Sarah (Nathaniel is a musician)
               
Son of John & Elizabeth (John is a hay dealer)
               
Son of Michael & Rachel (Michael is a clothes dealer)
 
Is it possible that Samuel was already in Australia?
Yes.
However, as far as I know we haven’t found Moses & Sarah in the 1841 census, so did all the family go to Australia and then some return, including Lawrence who is with the family in 1851, and Samuel stay behind? 
Australian records are not readily available on the Internet, but what passenger lists I have found don’t contain a suitable family, but this certainly does not rule it out.[Dave Simpson]

The census for 1841 for Soho or Berwick Street appears to be missing o, moses is on the 1851 census.
He was also in prison in 1838, so could he afford to rush of to australia with all his children when bankrupt.
Also he lived at 101 Berwick Street in 1838 and 101 Berwick Street in 1851
 
Why and how does June tie Samuel back to Moses, where does that information come from. If I remember didn’t you say his marriage certificates didn’t mention fathers name?[Debbie Bozkurt]

I’ve checked my notes, I do have the reference to Moses being in Debtors court in 1838 unfortunately I hadn’t linked it to the database. 
This kicks my theory of all the family going to Oz into touch.[Dave Simpson]

I think you need to check carefully with Peter on this subject because both he and I have already done work on Moses and Sarah plus I have census records for them and trade directory records amongst other docs.
Peter and I believe Samuel is related to Moses and Sarah,[Phil Kirby]

Regarding Samuel Jacobs we know word of mouth from June’s ancestors (arguably the best research aid) that Lawrence and his brother Samuel went to Australia and New Zealand, I think via USA.
I know some of the other information in their stories do not exactly tie up, but I think we have sufficient proof of their arrival in Australia and New Zealand.
We have proof that Lawrence was definitely the son of Moses from 1851 Census and his marriage certificate from Melbourne.
We also have a New Zealand newspaper report for the death of Lawrence Jacobs which indicates brother Mr. S. Jacobs.
There was also a mention in the Jewish Chronicle on the death of David Jacobs in 1869 for Australian and New Zealand Papers to please copy.
I would have thought that this is sufficient proof.
[Peter Wales]

It is good that we are checking up on the data.
That is precisely what Pat Coppel and myself did regarding our Crawcour data and as you can see on our data bases we always put source of evidence.
On the subject of oral tradition my dad said our ancestors were Irish and is still adamant that we are- well we are not!!
In addition one of my Crawcour relatives was also convinced that because her grannie had told her the family history it must be true- it was not!
That is not to ignore crucial oral tradition but always where possible back it up with primary evidence. 
I rest my case.
[Phil Kirby]

I am quite happy with Lawrence  – there is no doubt that he is the son of Moses & Sarah.
Also I am happy with all the details about Samuel once he arrived ‘down under’ 
What I was looking for was some tangible link with Moses and Sarah. 
I agree that word of mouth through the family is a common way of getting information, but I am always looking for supporting evidence whenever possible. [Dave Simpson]

When I was searching through the Post Office Street Directories in the Family Records Office about a year ago, I recorded that in 1841 David Jacobs was listed under Publicans Glasswarehouse at 101 Berwick Street Soho in 1841.
However in 1851 Samuel Jacobs is listed at the same address under China and glass Warehouse. Does this together with the other information give you the link with Moses?
I think this might be as good as it gets.
[Peter Wales] 

 Posted by at 2:47 pm