Amanuensis Monday: Anna STROESSER’s death

This was trimmed from the original at Bibliothèque nationale de Luxembourg.

Transcription:

Il a plu au Tout-Puissant d’appeler à une meilleure vie notre bien-aimée et regrettée épouse, mère, belle-mère, belle-soeur, tante et cousine

Madame Pierre HEYMANNS

née Anne Stroesser

décédée à Rambrouch, le 28 octobre 1946, à l’âge de 70 ans, après une longue et pénible maladie, munie des Secours de notre Mère la sainte Eglise. – L’enterrement suivi du service funèbre, aura lieu à Rambrouch, le jeudi, 31 octobre, à 10,30 heures du matin. --De la part de M. Pierre Heymanns, M. et Mme Jules Ries-Heymanns, M. et Mme Marcel Stroesser-Kieffer et des familles apparentées. – Rambrouch, Esch-Alz. Et Amérique, le 28 octobre 1946.

Translation:

It has pleased the Almighty to call to a better life our late beloved wife, mother, mother-in-law, sister-in-law, aunt and cousin

Mrs. Pierre HEYMANNS

née Anne Stroesser

who died in Rambrouch, Oct 28, 1946, at the age of 70, after a long and painful illness, equipped with the help of our mother the Holy Church – The burial followed by the funeral service will be held at Rambrouch will be held at Rambrouch on Thursday, Oct 31, at 10:00 A.M. – On behalf of Mr. Pierre Heymanns, Mr. and Mrs. Jules Ries-Heymanns, Mr. and Mrs. Marcel Stroesser-Kieffer and related families – Rambrouch, Esch-Alz. and America, Oct 28, 1946.

As you can see, my great-grandfather Harry STROESSER’s sister Anne or Anna died in Rambrouch, Redange, Luxembourg. She was survived by her husband Pierre HEYMANNS, or Peter HEYMANS as he appeared on the marriage certificate. Of her other survivors, Mr. and Mrs. Marcel STROESSER-KIEFFER are readily identified as her nephew Marcel and his wife, but Mr. and Mrs. Jules RIES-HEYMANNS are still, as yet, a mystery. I suspect that the Mrs. may be Anna’s daughter Susanna (whose birth record we shall see next week), but have found no evidence to support that idea. My attempts to find a marriage announcement in a newspaper have thus far been in vain.

There is also one phrase in this obituary that vexes me. I translated “L’enterrement suivi du service funèbre” as “The burial followed by the funeral service,” but in my experience the funeral service usually comes first. Perhaps it should be translated as “The burial that will follow the funeral service,” but my miniscule amount of French grammar could not make it read that way. Fortunately it is a slight point that does not affect the genealogical points of the article.

Source:

“In Pace: Madame Pierre HEYMANNS,” Luxemburger Wort, 29 Oct 1946, p. 5, col. 2; digital images, Bibliothèque nationale de Luxembourg (www.eluxemburgesia.lu : accessed 15 Nov 2014), Digitized by the National Library of Luxembourg, www.eluxemburgensia.lu.

Amanuensis Monday: Anna STROESSER's marriage certificate

Last week we saw the birth of my great-grandfather Harry STROESSER’s eldest sister, Anna. Today we leap forward a little more than 21 years to the day of her wedding. Both of her parents have passed on, and she has been an orphan since the age of 16. She is still residing in the tiny village of Schwiedelbrouch, where both her parents had died. (They had probably moved there from Heispelt in 1880.)

She is marrying a certain Peter HEYMANS, a mason who lives in the nearby village of Koetschette.

This image has been trimmed from the original at FamilySearch.

Transcription (the italicized parts were handwritten on the record):

Im Jahre tausend acht hundert acht und neunzig, den zwölften des Monats April

um fünf Uhr nach mittags, sind vor Uns Glesener Michel,

Bürgermeister, Beamter des Civilstandes der Gemeinde Folscheid,

im Kanton Redingen im GroßHerzogthum Luxemburg eschienen Heymans

Peter, Maurer , alt zwanzig drei Jahre, geboren zu

Koetschette, Gemeinde Folscheid , den zwanzigsten Juni tausend acht

hundert siebenzig vier, wohnhaft zu genanntem Koetschette,

groß jähriger Sohn der hier anwesenden und in

diese Heirath einwilligen den Ehe=und Ackersleute Heymans Nicolas,

alt sechzig ein Jahre und Susanna Marnach, alt sechzig Jahre,

beide wohnhaft zu gemeltem Koetschette.

Das Geburts datum des Brüutigams ist laut den

hiesigen Civilstandsregistern bestätigt, einerseits.

Und Stroesser Anna, ohne Stand , alt zwanzig ein Jahre

geboren zu Keispelt, Gemeinde Wahl, den

zwanzig fünften Dezember tausend achthundert siebenzig sechs, rechtlich wohnhaft

zu Schwiedelbruch, ehedem dienstmagd zu Luxemburg, groß jährige Zochter

des zu Schwiedelbruch am elften Juni tausend acht hundert neunzig

drei vorstorbenen Peter Stroesser, und der zu selbigem Schwiedel=

bruch am achten Juni tausend acht hundert neunzig vestorbenen

Barbara Thines.

Das Geburtsdatum der Braut ist laut Beilage bestätigt; die

Sterbedaten ihrer Eltern sind laut den hiesigen Civilstandsre=

ristern bestätigt, anderseits.

Welche uns ersucht haben, zu der unter ihnen übereingekommenen Vollziehung ihrer Heirath zu schreiten, und deren Verkündigungen

in der Stadt Luxemburg und in der Gemeinde Folscheid an den

Sonntagen zwanzig siebenten März und dritten April des

laufenden Jahres dem Gesetzegemäß

Statt gehabt haben.

Da uns kein Widerspruch genen gedachte Heirath verkündet worden ist, so lassen wir ihrem Begehren Recht wiedersahren; und nachdem wir alle

obenerwähnten Akten und das 6. Kapitel des Civilgesetzbuches, von der Heirath betitelt, vorgelesen, haben wir den Bräutigam und die Braut

gefragt, ob sie sich zum Mann und zur Frau nehmen wollen; da beide jedes besonders und bejahend, geantwortet haben, so erklären wir im Namen

des Gesetzes, daß Peter Heymans und Anna Stroesser

durch die Heirath vereinigt sind.

Und vor Abschluß der gegenwärtigen Urkunde richteten wir sowohl an die Brautleute als an die obbenannten Erscheinenden,

welche zu dieser Ehe ihre Einwilligung ertheilten, die Aufforderung zu erklären, ob ein notarieller Ehevertrag die Civilbestim=

mungen selber Ehe geregelt hätte und, im bejahenden Falle, wann und vor welchem Notar, worauf die Gefragten uns erklärten

ein solcher Ehevertrag sei nicht

beurkundet worden.

Von allem diesem haben wir diese Urkunde errichtet, und zwar in Gegenwart des Faas

Wilhelm, Schuster, alt fünfzig ein Jahre,

wohnhaft zu Folscheid, nicht verwandt;

Des Thill Peter, Arbeiter, alt zwanzig neun Jahre,

wohnhaft zu Folscheid, nicht verwandt;

Des Schmit Charles, Arbeiter, alt zwanzig drei Jahre,

wohnhaft zu Folscheid, nicht verwandt;

Und des Nauert Michel, Gemeindesekretär, alt fünfzig fünf Jahre,

wohnhaft zu Folscheid, nicht verwandt;

Welche, nachdem sie ihnen vorgelesen worden ist, dieselbe mit uns unterschrieben haben.

Line by line Translation:

In the Year one thousand eight hundred ninety-eight, the twelfth of the Month of April

at five O’clock after noon, before Us Glesener Michel,

Burgermeister, Officials of the Civil State of the Commune Folschette,

in the Canton of Redingen in the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg, appeared Heymans

Peter, Mason , age twenty three Years, born in

Koetschette, Commune of Folschette , on the twentieth of June one thousand eight

hundred seventy four, residing in stated Koetschette,

of age Son of the here present and in

this Marriage consenting to the Marriage= and Husbandman Heymans Nicolas,

aged sixty one Years and Susanna Marnach, aged sixty Years,

both residing in said Koetschette.

The Birth date of the Bridegroom is according to the

local Civil registers confirmed, on the one hand.

And Stroesser Anna, without Occupation , age twenty one Years

born in Keispelt, Commune of Wahl, on the

twenty fifth of December one thousand eight hundred seventy six, legally residing

in Schwiedelbrouch, formerly a servant of Luxembourg, of age Daughter

of the Schwiedelbrouch on the eleventh of June one thousand eight hundred ninety

three late Peter Stroesser, and of the same Schwiedel-

brouch on the eighth of June one thousand eight hundred ninety late

Barbara Thines.

The Birthdate of the Bride is according to the Enclosure confirmed; the

Death dates of her Parents are according to the local Civil reg-

isters confirmed, on the other hand.

Who have asked us, to proceed with the mutually agreed upon Execution of their Marriage, and their Pronouncements

in the City of Luxembourg and in the Commune of Folschette on the

Sundays twenty seventh of March and the third of April of the

current Year in Accordance with the Law

Have been held.

Since no contradiction to the intended marriage has been announced, we can honor their desire; and after we all

the above document and the 6^th chapter of the Civil Code, of the Marriage titled, read, we have the Groom and the Bride

questioned, whether it be that they want to take one another for Man and Wife; because both, each particularly and affirming, have responded, as we explained in the Name

of the Law, that Peter Heymans and Anna Stroesser

are united in Marriage.

And before Entering into the current Act we addressed both the Bride and Groom as to the above distinct Presenters,

which to this marriage their Consent give, the Request to declare, if a notarized Marriage Settlement the Civil

Provisions themselves the Marriage would have settled and, in the affirmative Case, when and before which Notary, whereupon the Requested to us declared

such a Marriage Settlement was not

has been certified.

From all this we have made this Certificate, and in the Presence of Faas

Wilhelm, Cobbler, age fifty one Years,

residing in Folschette, not related;

Of Thill Peter, Laborer, age twenty nine Years,

residing in Folschette, not related;

Of Schmit Charles, Laborer, age twenty three Years,

residing in Folschette, not related;

And of Nauert Michel, Municipal Clerk, age fifty five Years,

residing in Folschette, not related;

Who, after having it read to them, have undersigned.

Source:

Folschette, Luxembourg marriage certificate 7 (1898), Heymans-Stroesser; digital image #366 of 659, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, “Mariages 1851-1923 Décès 1894-1902,” FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 10 Nov 2014).

Mary Ann VALENTINE

In the family album there is a photograph of two elderly people, my great-great-grandparents William and Mary Ann UNDERWOOD. The gentleman is standing, looking the very picture of the era with his white beard and serious expression. In his posture I can trace the resemblance to his son, my great-grandfather Walter UNDERWOOD, Sr. The woman is seated, her clawlike hands docilely resting in her lap. Her face bespeaks a life of suffering, which has long intrigued me. She looks so much older than her husband, as though she were his mother rather than his wife. [Note: now that I say that, I am questioning whether this might not actually be a photograph of William and his mother, whose married name was also Mary UNDERWOOD...]

Actually, she was three years younger than William. She was baptized on 2 June 1834, the third surviving child of Charles VALENTINE and Mary Ann REEVE. Her brother William was four years older than she; her sister Sarah scarcely over a year older. And she was soon to have a younger brother Charles about a year and a half later. They were raised in White Notley, in the Braintree district of Essex county, England.

Their childhood seems to have been a bit rocky. Judging from the records, they seem to have lived in poverty, and in what might very well have been a broken home.

In 1841, the first census available, the children are found in a household headed by their mother, but the man who seems to be generally accepted as their father (none of the evidence I have found contradicts his relationship, but none of it proves it, either) is found in the household of his own parents. Granted, he could have been just visiting his parents on the day the census was taken, but the next census increases the mystery.

But before we examine that census, let’s finish looking at the 1841 census. Mary Ann the mother is working as a plaiter, a common occupation at that time for the rural poor. Women could still run a household while straw plaiting, and the children could help with the task. William, the oldest boy, is working as an agricultural laborer, that vague occupation of so many men—and even some women—in British censuses. The age of 11 may seem quite young to begin earning one’s keep, but these were truly the days of Dickensian child labor, and to be an 11-year-old agricultural laborer was probably much more pleasant than it was to be an 11-year-old (or younger) factory worker. With that in mind, it is almost surprising that 9-year-old Sarah has no listed occupation, but she and her sister Mary Ann, and perhaps even little Charles, likely helped their mother with the plaiting.

In 1851, the supposed father Charles is again found in his parents’ household, and is recorded as unmarried. Mary Ann the mother is again heading the household in White Notley, and she is recorded as a widow. This could simply mean that we have the wrong Charles VALENTINE. Or it could imply that there has been some sort of separation or divorce. Charles could have easily resumed his single status, but Mary Ann had a house full of children to account for. “Widow” would certainly have sounded much more respectable to the Victorian ear than “single” with five children.

Yes, five children. That is the second intriguing circumstance. Eight years after the birth of young Charles, another little bundle of joy—or perhaps it felt more like another mouth to feed—arrived. This one was named Harriet VALENTINE, and she is the only one of the family for whom I have been unable to find a baptismal record in the index.

Eight years is a substantial amount of time between children in the Victorian age, particularly when the others had all come one right after another. Mary Ann the mother would have been—and here I’m relying on her own baptismal certificate, not her impossibly slow aging on the census returns—37 years old. If we are going with the theory that the Charles VALENTINE, son of James and Sarah, is indeed her husband, it would seem that they were separated for quite a period of time, and then effected a temporary reconciliation. Either that or Mary Ann had a little—ahem—outside help. (A remarkable thing to find oneself saying about one’s own 3rd great-grandmother!)

The two boys are still living with their mother, and both working in agricultural labor. Harriet, I am glad to say, is apparently attending school; her occupation is “Scholar (first day).” I say apparently because I do not understand what that parenthetical “first day” means. I wonder if it perhaps refers to a Sunday school?

The other two girls, Sarah and my 2nd great-grandmother Mary Ann, are in that most fearful of Victorian institutions, the workhouse. The Braintree Union Workhouse in Bocking, to be exact. Although a workhouse was not quite as bleak a place as depicted in Oliver Twist, it wasn’t what you would call cozy, either. In fact, workhouses were designed to be as forbidding as possible so as to deter all but the most desperate. Therefore, Sarah and Mary Ann must have been pretty desperate. It does seem rather curious, though, to see the two of them in the workhouse when their mother and siblings were still alive and living together.

The former Braintree Union Workhouse, now St. Michael's Hospital.
Robert Edwards [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

They are both listed as straw plaiters, a skill they probably learned from their mother.

There is today a common misconception that a workhouse was like a prison in that a person was “put into” one, and was not allowed to come out. Instead, entering a workhouse was generally a choice. The workhouse system was the welfare system of the times: if an able-bodied poor person wanted relief, that person had to enter a workhouse. The idea was to prevent abuses of the system, to make sure that everyone who received relief did their part in working for it. And, although many who entered a workhouse did so for life, an inmate such as Sarah or Mary Ann could leave at almost any time, provided they gave (usually) three hours’ notice. However, the workhouse provided no assistance in starting a new life: no new clothes, no money, nothing but what had been brought in when a person entered.

I would love to get my hands on Mary Ann’s workhouse records, if they still exist. It is not known at this time when she entered the workhouse or when she left, only that she was there in the census year 1851. By the next census in 1861, she was again living with her mother in White Notley. Her mother’s occupation that year was very vague indeed: “Out door Labourer,” whatever that meant. Mary Ann the younger and her sister Harriet were the only two of the children still living at home, both of them silk winders. They likely worked at the silk mill either in Braintree or Bocking.

Within a few years, Mary Ann had met William UNDERWOOD, who would become my great-great-grandfather. They were married in 1865. Their marriage was recorded in the General Register Office in the Apr-May-Jun quarter, so they were probably married in the spring. I have yet to order a certificate from the GRO, so I cannot vouch for an actual date, but I should admit that the date 13 May 1865 has somehow mysteriously crept into my tree unsourced. I will be curious to discover how accurate the date turns out to be.

By 1871, they were settled in Hawkwell, with three children: Mary Ann, Sarah, and Charles. Fortunately, this third generation of Mary Ann was known—at least according to Aunt Elsie’s typescript—as Mary. Sarah is, of course, “Aunt Sadie,” and Charles, sadly, did not survive. Both the parents were recorded as farm laborers. All three children were born in Hawkwell, so the family must have been living there since at least 1866.

The cottage of the UNDERWOOD family appeared on the census just one entry after the location called “Clements Cottage,” so it would seem that they lived more or less near Clements Hall, one of the two local manors.

The years followed their ordinary course, and the census records reveal that the family moved at least twice in the first twenty years, but stayed in the same general area: 1881 found them in Hockley; 1891 in Hazeleigh. They lost little Charles, but had my great-grandfather Walter. The parents’ occupations remained some variation of agricultural laborer, while the children grew, attended school, took up occupations of their own, married, and moved away. By 1901 William and Mary Ann were empty nesters in Hazeleigh. William still was described as an agricultural laborer, though 68 years of age.

The last census in which they appear is 1911, still together after 46 years. They had moved to 92 Spital Rd in Maldon, and had become old age pensioners.

Note: A few of the questions that were raised in this post about Mary Ann Valentine's mother Mary Ann Reeve have been answered, although more have been raised. See Musings on Mary Ann Reeve for some updates.

Background Sources:

Clarke, Andrew. “Strawplaiting.” Web log post. The Hysterical Hystorian. The Foxearth and District Local History Society, 12 June 2005. Web. Accessed 1 Apr. 2011. <http://www.foxearth.org.uk/blog/2005/06/strawplaiting.html>.

“Hawkwell - From 1066!” Hawkwell History. Hawkwell Parish Council, 2012. Web. Accessed 22 Jan 2015. <http://www.hawkwellparishcouncil.gov.uk/history.asp>.

Higginbotham, Peter. The History of the Workhouse. Web. Accessed 20 Jan 2015. <http://www.workhouses.org.uk/>.

Warner, Sir Frank. The Silk Industry of the United Kingdom: Its Origin and Development. London: Drane’s Danegeld House, 1921. Internet Archive. MSN, 17 Mar 2010. Web. Accessed 22 Jan 2015. <https://archive.org/details/cu31924030128825>. Book contributor: Cornell University Library.

Genealogical Sources:

1841 census of England, Essex, Fairsted parish, Witham registration district, folio 7, page 8, household of James Valentine; digital images, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 19 Mar 2011); citing PRO HO 107/343/6.

1841 census of England, Essex, White Notley parish, folio 19, page 9, household of Mary Valentine; digital images, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 21 Oct 2007); citing PRO HO 107/343/12.

1851 census of England, Essex, Braintree Union Workhouse, Bocking parish, Braintree registration district, folio 330, page 12, Sarah Valentine; digital images, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 19 Jan 2015); citing PRO HO 107/1785.

1851 census of England, Essex, Fairsted parish, Witham registration district, folio 377, page 13, household of James Valentine; digital images, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 19 Mar 2011); citing PRO HO 107/1783.

1851 census of England, Essex, White Notley parish, village of White Notley, Braintree registration district, folio 426, page 10, household of Mary Ann Valentine; digital images, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 8 Feb 2010); citing PRO HO 107/1785.

1861 census of England, Essex, White Notley parish, Braintree registration district, folio 157A, page 14, household of Mary Ann Valentine; digital images, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 8 Feb 2010); citing PRO RG 9/1115.

1871 census of England, Essex, village of Hawkwell, ecclesiastical district of Rochester, folio 56, page 3-4, household (cottage) of William Underwood; digital images, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 19 Mar 2007); citing PRO RG 10/1669.

1881 census of England, Essex, Hockley parish, rural sanitary district of Rochford, folio 100, page 7, household of William Underwood; digital images, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 19 Mar 2007); citing PRO RG 11/1768.

1891 census of England, Essex, folio 66, page 4, household of William Underwood; digital images, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 14 Mar 2007); citing PRO RG 12/1397.

1901 census of England, Essex, Hazeleigh parish, rural district of Maldon, parliamentary borough or division of South East Essex, folio 57, page 1, household of William Underwood; digital images, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 8 Oct 2007); citing PRO RG 13/1690.

1911 census of England, Essex, 92 Spital Rd Maldon Essex, household of William Underwood; digital images, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 19 Jan 2015); citing RG 78, RG 14 PN 10194, registration district (RD) 196, sub district (SD) 2, enumeration district (ED) 1, schedule number (SN) 160.

Ancestry, “England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 19 Jan 2015), entry for Charles Valentine’s 1836 baptism; citing FHL Film Number 560909.

Ancestry, “England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 19 Jan 2015), entry for Mary Ann Reeve’s 1807 baptism; citing Boreham, Essex, England, reference; FHL microfilm 1,702,171.

Ancestry, “England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 19 Jan 2015), entry for Mary Ann Valentine’s 1834 baptism; citing FHL Film Number 560909.

Ancestry, “England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 19 Jan 2015), entry for Sarah Valentine’s 1833 baptism; citing FHL Film Number 560909.

Ancestry, “England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, Ancestry, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 19 Jan 2015), entry for William Valentine’s 1830 baptism; citing FHL Film Number 1702171.

Crocker, Elsie. unpublished typescript.

Graham Hart, Ben Laurie, Camilla von Massenbach and David Mayall, “England & Wales, FreeBMD Marriage Index, 1837-1915,” database, Ancestry (www.ancestry.com : accessed 21 Jan 2015), entry for William Underwood’s Apr-May-Jun 1865 marriage; citing General Register Office.

Amanuensis Monday: Anna STROESSER’s birth certificate

This week in my Luxembourg record transcription project, we return again to the locality of Heispelt, in the household of my great-great grandparents Peter STROESSER and Barbara THINES. We have already traced the lives and families of their two eldest sons, Michel and Baltasar; now it is time to embark on the line originating in their third child—their eldest daughter—Anna.

The year was 1876. St. Nicholas, called “Kleeschen” in Luxembourg, would have already visited three-year-old Michel and 16-month-old Baltasar on his feast day of December 6^th, leaving sweets or gifts in their shoes or on their plates. They might have been threatened into good behavior by the prospect of being beaten by Kleeschen’s frightening companion Houseker.

Fortunately for the two young boys, Christmas Day was not a day typically designated for the giving of gifts as it is today in the U.S. Perhaps the Christ Child left something for them, but the main gift-giving had already been done on St. Nicholas Day. However, the family did receive a most wonderful gift on that Christmas Day: Barbara gave birth to her first daughter, Anna.

This image has been trimmed from the original at FamilySearch.

Transcription (the italicized parts were handwritten on the record):

Im Jahre tausend acht hundert sechs und siebenzig, den fünfundzwanzigsten

des Monats Dezember um acht Uhr Nach mittags ist vor Uns
Theodore Welbes Bürgermeister Beamten des Civilstandes
der Gemeinde Wahl, im Kanton Redingen, Grossher=
zogthum Luxemburg, erschienen Stroesser Peter Eisenhändeler
alt vierzig zwei Jahre
wohnhaft zu Heispelt, welche Uns ein Kind weiblichen
Geschlechts vorgestellt, hat geboren zu Heispelt heuts uns
funf Uhr Nachmittags von ihn Deklarenten
und seiner Ehefrau Barbara Thines ohne Gewerb
alt dreißig zwei Jahre Eheleute wohnhaft zu Heispelt
und welchem sie den Vornamen Anna
geben zu wollen erklärt hat.
Diese Erklärung und Vorstellung sind geschehen in Gegenwart des Flammang
Martin Taglöhner, alt vierzig fünf Jahre
wohnhaft zu Heispelt und des Biver Peter Ackerer
alt fünfzig Jahre
wohnhaft zu Kuborn und haben diese Urkunde
nachdem sie ihnen vorgelesen worden, mit Uns unterschrieben.

Line by line Translation:

In the Year one thousand eight hundred and seventy-six, the twenty-fifth

of the Month of December at eight o'clock After noon is before Us
Theodore Welbes Burgermeister Officials of the Civil State
of the Commune of Wahl, in the Canton Redange, Grand-
duchy of Luxembourg, appeared Stroesser Peter Iron Merchant
aged forty-two Years
residing in Heispelt, which to us a child of the female
Gender presented, born in Heispelt today to us
five O’clock Afternoon by his Declaration
and his Wife Barbara Thines without Occupation
aged thirty-two Years Married couple residing in Heispelt
and which she the First Name Anna
has declared to want to give.
This Statement and Presentation are done in the Presence of Flammang
Martin Day-laborer, aged forty-five Years,
residing in Heispelt and Biver Peter Farmer
aged fifty Years
residing in Kuborn and have this Deed
having been read to them, with us signed.

As usual, I have added the applicable template (1876 birth certificate) to my online collection of Luxembourg transcription and translation templates. If you would like to try transcribing and translating a Luxembourgish 1876 birth record of your own, perhaps it will help you.

Source:

Wahl, Redange, Luxembourg, birth certificate no. 32 (1876), Anna Stroesser; digital image #133, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, “Naissances 1867-1890-- RINDSCHLEIDEN: Mariages 1796-1797, 1800-1804, 1805-1823 -- WAHL: Mariages 1796-1803, 1805-1890 -,” FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org : accessed 30 May 2010).

Scipio WADE’s wife

One of my favorite characters to research in the WADE family is Scipio WADE, not because he was particularly interesting, but because of his name. In a family with a common name like WADE, what a boon it is to find someone with an unusual first name like Scipio!

Scipio WADE was the oldest child of Joseph S. WADE—the younger brother of my great-great grandfather Allen C. WADE, whom I have so often mentioned, and about whom I have promised to write a post. That is a promise I have yet to make good, but I still hope to at some point.

This weekend I decided to again take a look at Scipio and see if I could find anything new. After a few relatively unexciting discoveries (mostly city directories), I took another look at my gedcom file. Although he spent most of his life in California with his sister Carrie, he had been married at one time.

For his wife, Margaret McADAMS, I had only and birth date and a death date, in addition to the marriage date. I wondered if I could find a little information if I were to search the newspapers around the time of her death. According to my information, which had come from Findagrave and an old Rootsweb board, she had died in Kincaid, Anderson, Kansas on 29 Apr 1896. So I went to GenealogyBank and typed in “Wade” in the surname field, “1896” in the date field, and checked “Kansas” for the state to search. It wasn’t long before I found an intriguing article.

Trimmed from the original at GenealogyBank

Mrs. Wade, Mrs. Cloyes and her son Joe went down in the Cherokee nation below Bartlesville to pick black berries. As they started back Sunday they drove into the river that was up and it was too deep for them. They started to float down stream and Mrs. Wade was drowned. Mrs. Cloyes got hold of one of the horses and got out all right. Joe also swam out all right. The last seen of Mrs. Wade she was holding to one of the wheels of the hack. The body had not been found at the last report.

The “Mrs. Wade” of this article is not mentioned by full name, so it is uncertain whether she is Mrs. Scipio WADE or another WADE. Her companions give no assistance, as the name “Cloyes” is new to me. The date of this newspaper is 2 July 1896, a Thursday. Assuming that the “Sunday” mentioned in the article is the most recent Sunday, the date of the drowning would have been 28 June 1896, almost fully two months after the death date I had recorded for Scipio’s wife. The 29 Apr 1896 I had recorded would have been a Wednesday. However, both of my sources for her death date were secondary at best; it is possible they were mistaken. Also, newspapers are not always entirely accurate, and the “Sunday” referred to is not clear. The location is also problematic. However, it can easily be explained by the fact that she is buried in Kincaid, Anderson, Kansas. Perhaps the person recording her death simply assumed she died where she was buried. With all these uncertainties, I can neither confirm or disprove that this Mrs. WADE is Margaret.

Another article continued the story.

Trimmed from the original at GenealogyBank

Mrs. Wade who was drowned in Big Caney in the Territory was found three days after. Her body was found nearly a mile from where she was drowned.

If she had drowned on 28 June 1896, her body would have been found 1 July 1896, a day before the previous article had been published. The news simply did not reach the newpaper in time for publication. Unfortunately, this second article gives no further information useful toward the identification of this Mrs. WADE. Perhaps Scipio WADE’s wife drowned on her way home from picking blackberries in Oklahoma, or perhaps it was another unfortunate Mrs. WADE. Only more research will tell.

Sources:

Alohawahine75@aol.com. “[IOWA] McAdams's Family.” IOWA-L Archives. Rootsweb, 18 Mar. 2003. Web.

“Chautauqua Local Items,” Sedan Lance, 2 July 1896, p. 3, col. 5; digital images, America’s GenealogyBank (http://www.genealogybank.com : accessed 10 Jan 2015), Historical Newspapers. 
 

“Chautauqua Local Items,” Sedan Lance, 9 July 1896, p. 2, col. 5; digital images, America’s GenealogyBank (http://www.genealogybank.com : accessed 10 Jan 2015), Historical Newspapers.

Find A Grave, “Find A Grave,” database and images, Find A Grave (www.findagrave.com : accessed 10 Jan 2015); Margaret McAdams Wade (Memorial #86839890); Record added 15 Mar 2012 by N. Dale Talkington.