Two Reveley families in Yorkshire & Sarah Reveley, convict
SarahReveley
therefore took the opportunity to go down to the Borthwick Archive Centre on
the university campus, to try and see whether I could sort out the Reveley
family any further. I spent some time checking the microfilms of the
sometimes rather faint register transcripts for the relevant parishes.
http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/bihr/Guidesandfindingaids.htm
My conclusion at the moment is that there seems to have been [past]
confusion between two separate Reveley families - both large, and both of
which included children who happened to be named Elizabeth, Mary, and
Thomas.
A William & Bridget Reveley nee Lovel, living at Hutton Buscel
c1818-c1820, and thereafter at Hunmanby from c1820-1870s.
B Thomas & Mary Reveley, living at Flixton in the parish of Folkton,
1820s-30s. Thomas was widowed by 1860s and was living with one daughter in
Flixton (1861), and with another daughter, Elizabeth Witty, in Hunmanby by
1871.
It is not clear whether William Reveley and Thomas Reveley were related.
They were apparently born in separate parishes, but they were seemingly
living next door to each other in Stone Gate, Hunmanby, by 1871
(coincidence?).
The following seems to be well-documented:
CHILDREN OF WILLIAM & BRIDGET REVELEY
(married at Hutton Buscel 17 Feb 1818; father later described as a labourer)
1818 Jul 7 Mary Ann Reveley baptised at Hutton Buscel.
Married John Bonsall at Hunmanby on 5 July1848; mother of my great
grandmother Lucy Bonsall, and others. Died at Acomb, York, 2 Feb1908.
1820 Dec 10 William Reveley baptised at Hunmanby.
1823 Jun 6 Thomas Reveley baptised at Hunmanby.
Probably the same Thomas Reveley who was buried at Hunmanby on 23 Sep 1852
aged 29. Possibly the same Thomas who married Ann Spink on 20 Dec 1845.
1825 Oct 17 Alice Reveley (1) baptised at Hunmanby; buried at Hunmanby 15
Apr 1828 age 2 years.
1828 May 1 Edward Reveley baptised at Hunmanby. [Later served with
police force in Co. Durham, with his niece Hannah Bonsall lodging with him
in 1881.]
1830 Jun 18 Elizabeth Reveley baptised at Hunmanby.
1830 Jun 18 Alice Reveley (2) also baptised at Hunmanby the same day.
1836 Nov 2 Hannah Reveley baptised at Hunmanby.
1871 census, Stonegate, Hunmanby:
William Reveley age 76 [or 72?], born Hutton Buscel
Bridget Reveley age 78, born Seamer
Elizabeth Reveley, daughter, age 40, born Hunmanby.
1877 Jul 3 Bridget Reveley buried at Hunmanby, allegedly aged 86
1880 Feb 24 Possible burial entry for William Reveley at Hunmanby (the
reputed age of 82 might conflict with earlier censuses, although the ages in
the 1851 and 1871 pages were not particularly clearly written in any case.)
1881 census, 10 Mill Cottages, Victorian Road, Scarborough
Jane Atkin, head, age 59, born Cowton
Elizabeth Reveley, visitor, age 50, born Hunmanby
1901 census: Stonegate, Hunmanby
Elizabeth Reveley, age 70, head, single, born Hunmanby (living alone)
CHILDREN OF THOMAS & MARY REVELEY
(father sometime a labourer living at Flixton, parish of Folkton, near
Hunmanby)
1823 Dec 8 Elizabeth Reveley baptised at Folkton
1825 Dec Mary Reveley baptised at Folkton
1828 Jan 29 Thomas Reveley baptised at Folkton
1830 Dec 14 Sarah Reveley baptised at Folkton; buried at Folkton 30 Jan
1831, aged 7 weeks.
1832 Jan 31 Sally Reveley baptised at Folkton
Note that no baptismal entry for a surviving Sarah Reveley has been
discovered - either at Hunmanby or at Folkton!
[The above entry clearly poses a problem about accepting the idea that Sarah
Reveley the convict was born in 1829. After her trial in 1849 it was claimed
that she was just fifteen. Could Sarah have been the same as Sally? Or was
there another daughter Sarah, born c1834 - who for some reason was omitted
from these registers, with her parents adopting the fairly common
contemporary practice of re-using the name of a deceased daughter for a
subsequent child (cf. Alice, daughter of William & Bridget Reveley, above).
If the trial papers are correct there would also have been still further
siblings, who were either not registered at all or were registered
elsewhere.]
1861 census
Flixton [near Folkton], Yorkshire
Francis Outhart?, head, Mar., age 52, Ag. Lab., born Burniston, Yorkshire
Ann do., wife, age 39, born Flixton
Thomas do., son, age 8, scholar, born Flixton
Sarah do., daughter, age 5, scholar, born Flixton
Thomas Reveley, Father in Law, age 68, widower, (late) Ag. Labourer, born
Scaddlethorpe [Scagglethorpe?], Yorkshire
1871 census
Stonegate, Hunmanby, Yorkshire
George Witty, head, mar, 54, labourer, born Hunmanby
Eliz. Witty, wife, 47, born Flixton
Geo. Witty, son, 13, scholar, born Hunmanby
William Witty, son, 10, scholar, born Hunmanby
Thos. Reveley, wife's father, 79, widower, born Scaddlethorpe
[Scagglethorpe?], Yorkshire.
1874 May 12 Burial entry at Hunmanby for Thomas Reveley, aged 84.
[Hunmanby in the registration district of Bridlington, cf.
www.freebmd.org.uk entry]
(This would fit in with the details of the death of Sarah Reveley's father,
referred to in her second letter from Tasmania, c1875, as quoted at
http://listsearches.rootsweb.com:80/th/read/CUMBERLAND/2004-07/1090973808
An elder brother again called Thomas would also fit with the details in
the letter. [Apparently he later became a teacher in an elementary school
at Wilton, Ellerburn, near Pickering.]
1881 census, Stone Gate, Hunmanby
George Witty age 64, ag lab., born Hunmanby
Elizabeth Witty, wife, age 57, born Hunmanby
Ella Witty, daughter, age 35, born Hunmanby
(Except for the detail of Elizabeth's birthplace, this would also fit in
with the Witty/Reveley marriage, referred to in Sarah Reveley's second
letter from Tasmania)
1891 census: Wilton, ecclesiastical parish of Ellerburn, near Pickering,
ref. RG12/3991
Thomas Reveley Head Widower, age 62 Teacher in Elementary School,
born Yorkshire, Flixton [living alone]
The FamilySearch/IGI website www.familysearch.org (which should always be
treated with due caution) mentions:
Thomas Reveley (son of Jonathan & Jane) baptised at Appleton Le Street 27
Sep 1789
Thomas Reveley (son of Thomas & Ann) baptised at Rillington, 18 Apr 1792.
William Reveley (son of Jonathan & Jane) baptised at Appleton le Street on
13 Feb 1791, and again (son of Jonathan & Jane) on an unspecified date in
1798 (the latter person allegedly dying on 22 Feb 1880).
The absence of a precise date in 1798 makes me suspicious as to whether the
information has been derived from a reliable source, or whether it's just
someone making a guess without any real evidence - something which the IGI
tolerates all too frequently (so-called "patron submissions"). Appleton le
Street is not the parish which one might have expected from the later census
returns, nor do the years 1789 and 1791 fit in particularly well for our
purposes. If Scaddlethorpe = Scagglethorpe (which had no parish church, and
which had a Methodist chapel only at a much later date), then Settrington
would strictly speaking have been the main parish church for that area
http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ERY/Settrington/index.html . However
Rillington might still have been possible, since it's the next parish. But
even without looking beyond the IGI, there seem to have been a fair number
of other Thomas Reveleys and William Reveleys around in the 1790s. For the
moment I think I'll just reserve judgment as to whether or not either of
these is the correct Thomas and William for our purposes, and whether or not
they were brothers. Hopefully some additional evidence might crop up one
day, which may resolve the matter one way or the other.
DAUGHTER OF WILLIAM & MARY REVELEY (note the distinction with the previous
two couples; father a labourer)
?1831 Apr 13 Jane Reveley baptised at Hunmanby
[entry reported by East Yorkshire Archives at Beverley
http://www.eastriding.gov.uk/cs/culture-and-information/archives/archivesloc
]
SarahReveley
June 30 1849
YORKSHIRE GAZETTE
SIX INCENDIARY FIRES AT KILHAM
A succession of no less than six incendiary fires took place at Kilham on
Monday and Tuesday last. About 7 o'clock on Monday evening, a shed, on the
farm of Mr. Samuel LAMPLUGH, at the west end of the town, was observed to be
on fire, and it was, with several agricultural implements, destroyed. No
sooner was this subdued than flames were seen bursting from a stack of straw
on the farm of Mr. William LAMPLUGH at Little Kilham, a few hundred yards
distant. Every exertion was made to prevent the spreading of the fire, which
was subdued without communication with any of the buildings.
At half past five o'clock on Tuesday morning, the inhabitants of Kilham were
again alarmed by the fire bell, another fire having been discovered in
another farm of Mr. Samuel LAMPLUGH, situate in the middle of the town. Fire
had been set to a large straw stack in the middle of the fold yard. A
messenger was immediately dispatched to Driffield to have the fire engine in
readiness, but the straw having soon been consumed, the fire prevented
communication with any of the buildings, the engine was not brought into
use. One of Mr. Lamplugh's men remained to watch the premises. At noon, he
went into the house to get his dinner, and very soon after her entered the
house, one of the female servants went to the door and discovered the barn
in flames. The fire bell was again rung, and the inhabitants again mustered,
and by great exertions kept the fire confined to the barn. The fire engine
was again sent for from Driffield and immediately despatched, but when it
arrived, the fire had been got under. The engine, however, proved of service
in cooling the walls and preventing further outbreaks. In the barn were
fifteen quarters of oats in the sheaf, a quantity of which was saved but the
barn was unroofed and greatly damaged.
The inhabitants had hardly left the scene of this conflagration than they
were called to witness another. A man galloped through the town and shouted
that Mr. William LAMPLUGH's farm was again ablaze. The fire bell was again
rung and the inhabitants hastened to the spot. The fire was found to be
confined to a shed, and every endeavour was made to subdue the progress of
the flames, which was ultimately effected. Whilst engaged with the shed, the
alarm was given that a stack of (w)hins on the other side of the farmstead
was on fire. From the situation of the stack, the fire threatened to be the
most alarming and destructive. Unfortunately, no water could be found,
except from a draw-well which was not sufficient to supply the engine, but
by the most vigorous efforts the fire was kept from adjacent buildings. Had
this fire once communicated with the buildings, the whole homestead must
inevitably have been destroyed. The wind was blowing in a direction towards
the buildings, but by pulling the stack to pieces, and in the absence of a
sufficient supply of water, by applying mud from a pond and throwing ashes,
and using every other available means, the flames were arrested.
Six distinct fires upon three distinct farms of two farmers, and all at a
distance from each other, there can be no doubt of an incendiary.
The diabolical perpetrator has not however been discovered. On the whole,
two sheds, several agricultural implements, a barn, about forty loads of
straw and about fifty quarters of corn have been destroyed.
The inhabitants of Kilham exerted themselves in the ----- and the conduct
of the women in carrying the water etc., was most praiseworthy.
Both the Messrs. LAMPLUGH were insured in the Yorkshire Fire Office.
--------------------------------
July 14 1849
YORKSHIRE GAZETTE
INCENDIARY FIRES AT KILHAM
The two persons Sarah REAVELY and William CARR, who were last week remanded
on suspicion of being concerned in the origin of these fires, were brought
before the Rev. F. O. MORRIS, and E. H. REYNARD, Esq., at the magistrates
room in Driffield.
A number of persons were examined, but the evidence which most materially
affected the two prisoners, was a confession made by the girl, Sarah
REAVELY, implicating herself and CARR, as having without any motive,
concerted the plan of firing the stacks etc.
They were both committed for trial at the present assize
****************