The family history of the Chins and Haddocks in Australia: Chin-Haddock family Ch.6: Haddock family history

John Butt Chin's wife was Ann Haddock, the daughter of John Haddock and Mary Paine nee Bywater. This chapter explores Ann's father's ancestry.

John Haddock was born 1748 (“aged in his 74th year” at his death in March 1822). The only relevant baptism record for the London area (viz. London England, Baptisms Marriages and Burials 1538-1812, and the LDS IGI records), has a John Haddock baptised 29 June 1748 at St Thomas Southwark, to parents John and Elizabeth Haddock - he had three siblings Elizabeth bap.22 Oct 1743, Rachel bap. 24 June 1750, William bap. 26 July 1752, all baptised at St Thomas.

This record would seem the most likely record of his birth.

Notably John Haddock named one of his daughters Elizabeth, probably after his mother.

John died 31 March 1822, and there is a burial record for John Haddock on 8 April 1822 at Maze Pond cemetery, St Olave, Bermondsey Parish of Southwark. This is a Non-Conformist church burial record in Maze Pond Baptist Cemetery, St Olave. His address at the time of his death was 19 Newington Place.

burial record Maze Pond Baptist Cemetery (Non-Parochial registers RG4- piece 4516)

burial cost for John Haddock at Maze Pond Cemetery (RG8 piece 75)

1872 map of Southwark showing St Thomas, St Saviour, St Olaves Churches, off High Street - Maze Pond Cemetery is next to Guys Hospital (below the red L)

Also NB. Guys Hospital for reference to Mark Haddock, below

POSSIBLE ANCESTRY OF THE HADDOCKS:

There are no records yet found of a marriage between a John Haddock and Elizabeth in the Southwark/Surrey records. The only record found was a John Haddock married Eliza Mathewman 11 Oct 1739 at St Andrew Holburn London, the other side of Blackfriars Bridge. It is quite possible that John Haddock’s family originated from the northern side of the Thames in the City of London, or that they were married on the north side of the Thames.

It is also possible that his family came from outside the London area.

MARK HADDOCK

Notably, a Mark Haddock witnessed John Haddock Jnr’s marriage to Mary Paine nee Bywater. Mark Haddock’s relationship to this family has not yet been established, however, the IGI has only a few listings for a Mark Haddock, and which are relevant is difficult to determine:
The London Times death notices of Tuesday March 10, 1818 states “On Friday last at his house, Parsonage Row, Newington, aged 81 – Mr Mark Haddock”.[i] Viz. born circa 1737.

The only birth record found in Family Search is for a Mark HADDOCK, baptised 28 May 1737 at Thorp Arch, West Yorkshire (near Walton and Wetherby), father Henry Haddock (FHL Film No. 918358). Notably, our John Haddock named one son Henry John.
Henry/Henery Haddock also had children: John b.1733; Thomas b.1734; Mark b.1737; George b.1741; Elizabeth b.1742; Henry b.1743; Ann b.1745; and Mary b. August 1748.
A Henry Haddock married Elizabeth Heslington on 1 July 1732 at Topcliffe By Thirsk, about 30 kms north of Thorp Arch in Yorkshire.
Henery's father would appear to be John Haddock who had four children baptised at Thorp Arch between 1707 and 1716.
However, as John Haddock senior married Elizabeth Mathewman in 1739 and had son John in 1748, he would have been born before 1720 and therefore could only have been Henery Haddock's brother and therefore Mark's uncle.
As Yorkshire is far from London, and the records are inconclusive, these records are possibly irrelevant.

There is a marriage which may be relevant and may explain the relationship with John Haddock:
Marriage between Mark Haddock bachelor and Elizabeth Haddock widow both of this Parish, St John Hackney, married in this church by banns, 4th February 1762 (London Marriages and Banns, No 349, page 88- Ancestry.com).
Maybe Mark Haddock was the brother, cousin, nephew or close relation of John Haddock Senior (father of our John Haddock) and married his widow Elizabeth Mathewman following the death of her husband John, as she was left with four young children. Notably Mark would therefore have been considerably younger than Elizabeth, and the marriage would probably have been a marriage of convenience for the protection of the family. Maybe Elizabeth was ill and aware of her impending death and needed security for her young children with a family member.
There is a recorded burial for a John Haddock on 23 December 1760 at St Andrew Holborn, address Fetter Lane London, which may be relevant. (City of London Burials 1754-1853, Guildhall Ref GL Mss6673/15-21- FindmyPast). Fetter Lane was an historic street in London, and the early to mid 1700's saw the beginnings of the Fetter Lane Society which became the Moravian Church whose members included George Whitefield and the Wesley brothers and was the precursor to Methodism. The Haddocks may have been introduced to the Non-conformist church here.
Another burial of a John Haddock took place on 5 April 1761 at St Alban, Wood Street, London, about a kilometre to the east of Fetter Lane. (GL Mss 11, 150A1-2)

There is also a death of an Elizabeth Haddock, buried 23 October 1763 at St Matthew Parish Bethnal Green, which is only a couple of kms south of Hackney.
(London Metropolitan Archives, St Matthews Bethnal Green, Register of Burials Jul1746-May1774, P72/MTW/087- Ancestry Eng Baptisms, Marriages, Burials 1538-1812).
If the same Elizabeth Haddock, then Mark Haddock was left as stepfather and guardian to Elizabeth's four children.

A marriage for a Mark Haddock to a Mary Matthewman took place at Eton, Buckinghamshire on the 28 April 1772 (a few miles west of London, on the Thames). Mark would have been aged 35. Was Mary the sister of Elizabeth Matthewman?
There is a baptism record for an Elizabeth Matthewman, at All Saints, Wakefield, York, on 2 May 1718, daughter of William Matthewman, taylor. There is also a baptism for Mary Matthewman on 10 June 1732 at All Saints Wakefield, daughter of William Mathewman (and several children in between- same batch number in Family Search). Whether these records are relevant is difficult to determine.

A daughter, Elizabeth, of parents Mark and Mary Haddock was born 12 April and baptised 30 April 1775 at St Thomas Southwark.

There is another marriage for Mark Haddock to Mary Millard on 13 May 1791, at Chislehurst Kent (the Greater London area, about 13 kms south of Southwark).

In his Will, proved on 14 April 1818, Mark Haddock left his entire estate and effects solely to his executor, wife Mary. Whether this was Mary Mathewman or Mary Millard can't be determined.

Mark Haddock was left a bequest in the will of John Haddock’s wife’s mother Mary Bywater, dated 9 January 1811:

I give and bequeath unto my respected friends Mark Haddock and Mary his wife the sum of five guineas and I direct my executors, hereinafter named, to present to each of them a ring.

And in a Codicil to her Will:

Also I give unto my good friends Mark Haddock and his wife the sum of fifty pounds each Stirling money instead or in lieu of the legacies of two guineas as prior given to them by my said will and a ring to each of them.

There are several interesting entries for Mark Haddock on a site “London Lives”, and in Ancestry.com.   The entries refer to “Mark Haddock, butler”. In the St Thomas’s Hospital Minutes of the Court of Governors, 29 July 1778, “Haddock Mark Allowance – We have allowed Mark Haddock the sum of ten guineas in consideration of part of his house having been taken from him to be used as a scullery – “.
A second entry related to Mark Haddock, butler, St Thomas’s Street, Southwark Sun Fire Insurance Policy Register dated 1 January 1786.
The Universal British Directory 1791 has "Guy's Hospital, founded by Thomas Guy, Esq in 1722", and lists the staff from the President to the Surgeons, Accountants, Cook, Porter, Beadle etc, including Mark Haddock, Butler.
The Land Tax Records for Surrey 1792, Proprietor/Landlords affected for: The Governors of St Thomas Hospital; Names of Occupiers etc including Mark Haddock, yearly value: £7.1s.8d
The National Archives has a listing for “Insured Mark Haddock, 5 Parsonage Row, Newington Butts, gent (Guildhall Library – Records Sun Fire”.)   This latter entry is dated 23 June 1814.
Mark Haddock Butler of Guys Hospital, St Thomas, Southwark Surrey “Will proved at Prerogative Court of Canterbury, 14 April 1818”.
The London Times death notices of Tuesday March 10, 1818 states “On Friday last at his house, Parsonage Row, Newington, aged 81 – Mr Mark Haddock”.[i] Viz. born circa 1837.

Burial at Maze Pond Baptist Cemetery, St Olave, Southwark

(Notably the burial record has the same Register reference as that of John Haddock)

It should be noted however, that, although Mark Haddock had a known close relationship with John Haddock and his wife's family the Bywaters, some of the BDM records above have not been proved and remain speculation.

ANCESTRY

Although residing there for many years, it is possible that John Haddock did not originate from the Southwark/Newington area, and may have come from the other side of London bridge, or even from another county (such as York as previously discussed re Mark Haddock's birth). There were large pockets of Haddocks in York and in Lancashire in the BDM records.
However, as they were living in Southwark where a large number of Haddocks resided and were often associated with the career of 'watermen', we should look at records in this area.

SOUTHWARK

Looking at the BDM records for the Southwark area for the century preceding John’s birth, there are numerous families of the name of Haddock living in the Southwark area during the 1600-1800 period, so it is possible that John Haddock’s father, John, could have been the son of any of them.

There are no suitable BDM records with obvious links between any of these families and John Haddock Senior.

However, the records of Haddocks in the Southwark area point to working class origins. Although John Haddock was a man of wealth with the status of banker, his money came from his wife through an inheritance, and John may have come from humble working-man’s origins.

A John Haddock was baptised 19 May 1720 at St Olave Bermondsey to parents Richard and Mary Haddock, a waterman, although a John Haddock, son of Richard, was buried 12 May 1722 (St Olave Bermondsey), which would seem to negate this record. Richard and Mary also had 4 daughters: Hannah bap.14 Nov 1714 at St Olave; Mary bap 25/4/1715; Ann bap. 20/12/1717, d. 21/8/1719; Sarah bap/18.3.1722.

The occupation of waterman on the Thames, ie. a boatman who plies for hire, is described at the Watermen’s Hall website (www.watermenshall.org ) as:

The Company of Watermen and Lighterman was established by Act of Parliament in 1555 to control the Watermen on the River Thames responsible for the movement of goods and passengers. Indeed it remains the only ancient City Guild to be formed and controlled by Act of Parliament.

Even today, it still licenses the Watermen and Lighterman working on the River Thames, the former being concerned with passenger transport and the latter with the carriage of goods. The young Freemen of the Company are eligible to participate in the Doggett's Coat and Badge Race, which has been held annually since 1715. This gruelling boat race is held each July and goes along the river from London Bridge to Chelsea. The winner has the honour of wearing the scarlet coat, breeches and silver arm badge that are based on the original costume of an eighteenth century.

Watermen’s Hall has a list of apprentices and when they were made freemen- the early records are kept at the Guild Hall London.

Watermen's payment rates in 1820

(MAPCO- Old London Maps)

The Richard Haddock (waterman) above, father of John, was baptised 25 March 1688 at St George the Martyr Southwark, father George Haddock. Notably, there were several watermen in this family, all sons of George Haddock and Mary Deacon, baptised at St George the Martyr Southwark: Richard’s brother Thomas Haddock, waterman, bap 4 April 1697, m.1. Sarah Harnell 11/2/1717, m.2.Elizabeth Butts 10/1/1719, a daughter Anne bap. Oct 1719.

Richard’s eldest brother George Haddock, waterman, and wife Rachel had numerous children, several of whom died in infancy or birth- surviving sons: Samuel b 1708, George b.1712, Joseph b.1714.

A John Haddock, waterman, parentage unknown, married to Margaret, had a dau. Constance in 1713. There are several John Haddocks living in the Southwark area at that time, all with daughters, and of working class occupations such as pinmaker, carman, etc.

The wife (Paskew) and two daughters (Martha, Ann) of a Henry Haddock of Long Lane, were buried between 1727 and 1730 St Mary Magdalen Bermondsey.

Notably John Haddock named his second son Henry John.

There are no other records related to this Henry.

There are also several records of William Haddocks, the name of John’s first son, whom he may also have named after his wife’s father, also named William (Bywater).

There are many other Haddock records, with forenames unfamiliar to this family- Foreman, Coleman, Charles, Michael, Christopher, Timothy, and several records of Thomas Haddocks, etc.

It should be noted however, that John Haddock may have come from elsewhere.

Map of Turnpike Gates in London in 1799

Southwark marked just south of the Thames around 'The Borough',

Newington in area marked blue and pink

(Mapco - Old London maps)

JOHN HADDOCK’S MARRIAGE AND ISSUE:

John Haddock, a bachelor (aged 46), married Mary Paine nee Bywater, widow, on 25 January 1794 in the Parish of St Mary Newington, Surrey (a new development just south of Southwark). Mary was the widow of Richard Rawlin Paine (died 1786), surgeon of Hitchen, Hertfordshire, and daughter of William Bywater and Mary Griffiths of London City and Southwark. (Mary’s ancestry discussed later)

Cruchley's New Plan 1827- shows Newington Place, bottom left

Also Lion Street off New Kent Road at top, location of Rev. Chin's Lion Street Baptist Church, and Manor Place, home of the Chins

(Mapco- Old London Maps)

John Haddock and Mary had 6 children (all named in his Will except William):

1.Mary Haddock. bap. 21 July 1796 Jamaica Row Independent, Bermondsey (near Southwark, Sth London Southern side of the Thames), unmarried in 1830, possibly remained unmarried. Possibly died in Sept quarter 1849 (GRO) at St Saviour.

2.Elizabeth Haddock, born unknown but circa 1795 or 1798/9, married Robert Wilson 17 July 1817 at Newington. She died 7 January 1872. A newspaper report at the time of his daughter Ann’s marriage in 1850 listed Robert as “deceased”. In the 1871 census Elizabeth was stated to be 76 years of age, a gentlewoman and a lodger at 9 High Street, St Clements, Hastings, Sussex. Elizabeth and Robert had 3 children: John George b 1819; Ann b.1821,d.1899 (m. James Breeds 1850- he died 1875, his will dated Jan 30 1876, late of Hastins proved 26^th Jan 1876, the personal estate being sworn in ₤40,000. He was a engaged in business as merchants and ship agents under firms Breeds and Burfield London and James Breeds & Co Hastings; also in partnership with Mr Fermor, a brewer at Hastings.) Chn: Elizabeth Breeds b.1852 (m. Joseph C. Mappins); Martha Clare Breeds b 1854; Robert Henry Breeds b.1862; James Breeds b.1862; Ethel Mary Breeds b.1864.

3.William Haddock, bap.12 October 1797, Jamaica Row Independent, Bermondsey. As he is not mentioned in John’s will he must have died before 1722, possibly in infancy.

4.Ann Haddock, born 25 Dec 1799 and bap.5.2.1800 Jamaica Row Independent, Bermondsey, married John Butt Chin 11/5/1826 at the Church of St Peter Walworth, d.8/8/1848 Sydney- refer to Chin chapters

(Family Search- IGI record)

Non-parochial Registers (RG4 Piece 4260)- Jamaica Row Independant, Bermondsey.

5.Henry John Haddock, born 4 October 1801 Newington Surrey, bap.30 December 1801, Mill-Hill Independent, Hendon.

He married Martha Leah Chin 18/10/1827 who died bef. 1839. He married secondly Eliza Land Chin (younger sister of wife Martha Chin) between 1842-1844.

He was a bookbinder, accountant and stationer, firstly at the Old Jewry London and then at various addresses in High St Borough Southwark. For a time he was in partnership as stationers with his brother Joseph Haddock at No 24 the Old Jewry, but the partnership was dissolved 11 January 1830. (see later)

6.Joseph Haddock, born 2 February bap. 1804, Mill-Hill Independent, Hendon.

He married Ann Coates 1825, and died 1844 NSW. He emigrated to Sydney on the “Warrior” in 1833. Coincidentally, they were accompanied on the “Warrior” on the Hobart to Sydney leg, by Walter Butler, his niece Sarah Ann Chin’s future father-in-law. It was probably Joseph’s positive reports and encouragement that convinced his sister Ann and brother-in-law John Butt Chin to emigrate. Joseph’s daughter Georgiana Haddock (b.1828) married her cousin Plumleigh Chin at South Creek NSW in 1850.

NB. Hendon is in the NW Outer London area, near Queensbury.

JOHN HADDOCK’S CAREER

John Haddock was living in No. 19 Newington Place, Surrey, on the southern border of Southwark and Bermondsey, from as early as 1798, and died there in 1822. High Street Southwark becomes Newington Place as it travels south, near to Old Kent Road Walworth, the home of the Chins.

In Holden’s Directory for 1811 there is a listing for “John Haddock Esq., 19 Newington Place, Kennington”

1817 Map - Newington Place, bottom left in Kennington Road, next to Kennington Common

(Mapco- Old London Maps)

The Newington area in 1795 showing new roads

(Mapco- Old London Maps)

The first mention of John Haddock occurred in 1798, in a list of Voluntary Contributions to Cover Assessed Taxes: Parish of Newington, Surry, First Remittance: John Haddock- £5, 5s, 0d.

(True Briton, London Wed Mar 28, 1798 issue 1641).

It is unknown what occupation John Haddock held for the first 56 years of his life. As both of his sons took up the occupation of stationer, one could surmise that it was also the occupation of their father.

John Haddock became a partner in the banking firm Whitehead, Howard and Haddock of Cateaton-street London in 1804. A report in the Jacksons Oxford Journal Sat July 6, 1805 issue 2723, names them as bankers for the Wiltshire and Berks Canal Navigation Co.

The 52 mile (84km) Wiltshire and Berkshire Canal, opened in 1810, linked the Kennet and Avon Canal at Semington to the River Thames. A plan for the canal was published by engineers Robert Whitworth Snr and his son William Whitworth in 1793. It served to bring cheap coal to several towns along its route, whilst also offering economic transport for the regional export of agricultural produce and such locally produced goods as bricks, building stone, clay pipes, etc.

The Bill empowering construction of the canal received Royal Assent in 1795. It allowed the company to raise ₤111,900 through 1,119 shares at a cost of ₤100 each for the construction of the canal. Another Act of Parliament was passed in 1801 which allowed the company to raise a further ₤200,000 to complete the canal. It was cut during the years 1796 to 1810. Following completion, a further two Acts were passed in 1810 and 1813 to alter toll rates on the canal, and another Act was passed in 1815 to allow the company to raise ₤100,000 to pay off debts collected during the construction of the canal, and to construct a reservoir. While the main canal was opened in 1810, some branches were operating before this.

The Universal Magazine New Series etc. Vol. IV, July to Dec 1805, London, p275 has:

Provincial Occurrences- Berkshire

Notice has been lately given, by public advertisement, that subscription books are now opened at the following places, viz. Newbury, Devizes, Bath, Bristol, and London, (in London, at the house of Messrs, Whitehead, Howard and Haddock) for the purpose of raising the sum of £200,000 to complete the Kennet and Avon Canal Navigation, with a preference, however, to be given to the present proprietors of shares or half shares in the said canal navigation.

The Handbook of London Bankers: With Some Account of Their Predecessors, The early goldsmiths, together with lists of bankers from 1670 including the earliest printed in 1677, to that of the London post office directory of 1890…. By Frederick G. Price, (orig pub.1876- pub 1891 by Simpkin, Marshall, Hamilton, Kent and Co.; reprinted 1970 by Burt Franklin USA, page 137), gives the history of the bank:

Whitehead and Co.

This business was started about 1784 at 5, Basinghall Street, by John and George Whitehead. In 1791 John Whitehead Junior, was admitted into the firm. In 1795 John Whitehead, the senior partner, retired, and in the following year it consisted of George and John Whitehead. In 1797 the style of the firm became Whitehead and Howard, and the next year they moved to 24, Cateaton Street (The street was renamed Gresham Street in 1845, Catte Street, corruptly called Catteten Street, beginneth at the north end of Ironmonger Land, and runneth to the west-end of St. Lawrence Church.) In 1804, they assumed a partner of the name of Haddock.

Whitehead, Howard and Haddock failed about 1815.

The Tradesman; or Commercial Magazine, Volume 13, pub 1814 by J. W. Payne, London-

English Bankrupts, 1814, page 511, has:

Whitehead J. jun. and Clarke G. Bassinghall St. Blackwellhall factors, Nov 23, Dec 3, 31 (Tomlinson and Co. Copthall Court.)

Whitehead J. Howard M. and Haddock J. Cateaton St. bankers, Nov 22, Dec 10, 31. (Tomlinson and Co. Copthall Court.)

It would appear from the two entries above, that John Whitehead’s second firm went into insolvency at the same time as the bank. Whether Whitehead’s financial problems was a leading contributor to the insolvency is uncertain, but appears likely.

The Autobiography of William Jerdan with his Literary, Political and Social reminiscences and Correspondence During the last Fifty Years, Vol.II, London, 1852, page 45, describes the effects of the bankruptcy on him personally:

Among the acceptable and intelligent gentlemen with whom I became acquainted at Mr Begbie’s was Mr Whitehead, the principal of the banking firm of Whitehead, Howard and Haddock, with whom, for reasons promising advantages to myself, I lodged the moderate sum of money I then possessed. On the 17^th of November, this old established and highly respectable house, connected with many country banks, was compelled to stop payment; and notwithstanding the first favourable report of assets, and the known worth and integrity of the partners, the hope entertained of a favourable winding up was never fulfilled. It may readily be believed that such an event materially deranged my resources and disconcerted my prospect: it was indeed a severe and unexpected blow…”

In a book called “Conflicted Life – William Jerdan 1782-1869” by Susan Matoff she wrote “Jerdan enjoyed twice-weekly visits to the home of Mr Begbie (Peter Begbie Jerdan’s beloved friend) where he met Mr Whitehead Principal of the long established and respectable bank Whitehead, Howard and Haddock. Jerdan lodged his hard earned savings with the bank but on the 17 November 1814 it was forced to wind up its business and stop all payments. It took Jerdan two years to recover from this disaster”.

Jerdan’s statement that the bankers were connected with many country banks, is born out in:

The Picture of Bristol… by Rev. John Evans, Bristol 1814, p150, Appendix No. 3- List of Bankers:

Harford, Davis, Harford, Winpenny, Corn Street, draw on Whitehead, Howard and Haddock, Cateaton-street, London.

The firm of Whitehead and Co. commenced about 1784, the partners being John and George Whitehead. Originally the business of Whitehead and Co was conducted in Basinghall Street. In 1791 John Whitehead Junior joining the firm, and in 1795 John Whitehead, senior, retired the partners then being George and John Whitehead Junior. George Whitehead, (and presumably his son) at some point, formed a company with Gauntlett Clarke.

Under a bankrupt entry recorded in the London Gazette of 19 November 1814 were listed John Whitehead Junior and Gauntlett Clarke Basinghall Street, London, Blackwell Hall Factors. The Morning Post of 21 November 1814 reported on a London Gazette item “Bankrupts – John Whitehead Jnr and Gauntlett Clarke of Basinghall Street, Blackwell Hall Factors – November 26, December 3, and 31 at 12 at Guildhall Messrs Tomlinsons Thomson and Baker, Copthall Court. It is unknown when John Whitehead became involved with Gauntlett Clarke. The dissolving of the partnership of George Whitehead and Gauntlett Clarke was reported in the London Gazette of January 2 1808 “Geo Whitehead, son, and Gauntlett Clark of London Blackwell Hall Factors”. It would seem that although the partnership of George Whitehead and Gauntlett Clarke had been dissolved there were still unresolved financial issues as an item in the Caledonian Mercury of 26 November 1814 (and uplifted from the London Gazette) stated “Bankrupt – George Whitehead Junior and Gauntlett Clarke, Basinghall Street, London, Blackwell Hall Factors”.

Blackwell Hall, in the City of London, was the centre for the wool and cloth trade in England from medieval times into the 19^th century. Cloth manufacturers and clothiers from provincial England brought their material to Blackwell Hall to display and sell to merchants and drapers. In the mid 17^th century Blackwell Hall Factors were introduced as agents who charged a fee to handle the trade.

Cateaton-Street, City of London, the address of their bank, was called Catt Eaton Street in 1676 and now called Gresham Street, runs from St Martin’s Le Grand near St Paul’s Cathedral in the west, past Guildhall, to Lothbury in the east, and adjoins Milk Street, one of the historic side streets which leads off to the south towards Cheapside. Other ancient side streets leading south to Cheapside are Foster Lane, Gutter Lane, Ironmonger Lane, and Old Jewry. Leading north are Noble Street, Staining Lane, Aldermanbury, Basinghall Street, and Coleman Street. Near Guildhall is the church of St Lawrence Jewry, by Wren. Cateaton Street is home to the Lloyds Banking Group Headquarters.

map of Cateaton Street, near St Paul's Cathedral

(Wallis Plan 1801- Mapco- Old London Maps)

(NB see next chapter for full accounts of the banking firm Whitehead, Howard and Haddock and their bankruptcy.)

DEATH OF JOHN HADDOCK AND WIFE MARY

The Examiner Sunday April 7 1822 issue 741

Deaths

On the 31^st ult., at Kennington, in his 74^th year, Mr John Haddock, of the late banking house of Whitehead, Howard and Haddock, Cateaton-street.

As he died aged 74 years he was therefore born c.1748. As previously stated he was buried at St Olave, Bermondsey on the 8^th April- a Non-Conformist burial.

Sadly, his wife Mary died shortly after her husband, on the 3rd September 1822 at Beresford Street Walworth, and buried at Maze Pond Baptist Cemetery, St Olave, Bermondsey, on the 9th September 1822 (according to Non-Conformist registers -IGI). This was where her husband was buried. (the Non-parochial register number is the same)

Burial Cost at Maze Pond Baptist Cemetery

The London Gazette of May 28 1825 described her as the widow of John Haddock, formerly of Cateaton-Street, in the City of London, and afterwards of Newington Place in the County of Surrey- however it states that her death was 3rd September 1823, which is incorrect.

John Haddock left a Will. His executors were named as John Paine (stepson), and Thomas Bridge Simpson who was married to his stepdaughter Maria Susannah Paine.

In his Will, John directed that his wife Mary should have the use and enjoyment of all his household furniture, plate, dinner china and all other household effects for the term of her life, after which, it was to be divided amongst his 6 children; the remainder of his estate was to be sold and invested in interest or public stocks and the dividends divided amongst those 6 children.

The fact that there was household furniture, plate, and an estate to be sold and invested, indicates that his bankruptcy debts were paid. (see below)

JOHN HADDOCK”S WILL

THIS IS THE LAST WILL and testament of me John Haddock of Newington Place in the Parish of Saint Mary Newington in the County of Surrey a Gentleman first I direct all my just debts and funeral expenses to be fully paid and satisfied I give and bequeath all my household furniture plate dinner? china and all other my household effects unto my esteemed friends John Paine of High Street Southwark Hardwareman and Thomas Bridge Simpson of Dean Street in the Borough of Southwark, Hardwareman their Executors and Administrators upon trust that they and the survivors of them and the Executors and Administrators of such survivor do and shall permit and suffer my wife Mary Haddock to have the use and enjoyment thereof for and during her life or so long as my said Trustees shall consider that she requires the use and enjoyment thereof (here there is a notation in the margin - and from and after her decease and previous thereto in case in the judgement of my said Trustees she shall not require the use and enjoyment thereof) upon trust to divide the same unto and among all and every my dear children viz Elizabeth now the wife of Robert Wilson late of Horo? Street Newington in the County of Surrey Mary Haddock Ann Haddock Henry Haddock and Joseph Haddock in such shares and proportions at such times and in such manner as my said Trustees shall think fit and proper and as to all the rest residue and remainder of my Estate and Effects whatsoever and wheresoever and of what nature soever the same may consist I give and bequeath the same and every part thereof unto the said John Paine and Thomas Bridge their heirs Executors and Administrators upon the trusts and to and for the ? intents and purposes hereinafter expressed and declared that is to say upon trust that they my said Trustees and the survivor of them his Executors and Administrators do and shall in the first place sell and dispose of all such parts of my said Estate and Effects as shall not consist of money and convert the same into money as soon after my decease as conveniently may be and shall and do collect get in and receive all other debts and sums of money due owing or belonging to me at my decease and then do and shall stand possessed of the monies arising from such sales or otherwise collected and got in by my said Trustees upon trust to lay out and invest the same at interest in or upon same or one of the public stocks (here there is a notation in the margin - or funds and then that they my said Trustees and the survivor of them) his Executors and Administrators do and shall stand possessed and interested in the stocks and funds in or upon which the same monies shall be placed out and invested as to one fifth part thereof to pay the dividends and interest thereof unto my dear daughter Elizabeth Wilson for and during the term of her natural life and I direct that the same shall not be subject or liable to the debts control or engagements of her present or any future husband but that her receipt alone notwithstanding ? shall fully and effectually acquit and discharge my said Trustees provided always and I do hereby expressly declare that the said Elizabeth Wilson shall

Page 2:

not in any manner charge assign or anticipate the payment of the said dividends and interest and that upon her doing this shall forfeit and lose all benefit and advantage of this my will and from and after the decease of the said Elizabeth Wilson or upon her assigning charging or anticipating the said dividends and dividends interest for and towards the maintenance and education of all and every the child and children of the said Elizabeth Wilson lawfully begotten during their respective minorities and upon trust to pay assign and transfer the said one fifth part of the said trust funds and monies unto and equally among all and every the child and children of the said Elizabeth Wilson lawfully begotten as and when they respectively attain the age of twenty one years with benefit of survivorship among the said children in the event of the death of any them under the said age of twenty one years and in case of the death of the said Elizabeth Wilson without leaving any children or child her surviving then I direct that the said one fifth part of the said trust monies shall go and be applied in manner hereinafter expressed and declared ? the other four fifth part of the same monies and as to the remaining four fifth parts of the said trust funds and monies I do direct my said Trustees to stand possessed of and interested in same upon trust to pay the dividends and interest thereof unto and among my other four dear children viz Mary, Ann, Henry, and Joseph Haddock or apply the same for and towards the maintenance and education or otherwise for the benefit of my said last mentioned children during their respective minorities and upon further trust to pay assign and transfer the said four fifth parts of the said trust funds and monies unto and equally among my said last mentioned children when and as they respectively attain the age of twenty one years and I direct that the shares of my daughters in the said trust funds and monies shall not be subject or liable to the control or engagements of any husband or husbands with whom they may intermarry and that their receipts alone notwithstanding ? shall fully and effectually discharge my said trustees and in case of the death of any of my said children under the said age of twenty one without leaving lawful issue him her or them surviving them I direct that the share and shares of him her or them so dying shall be held by my said trustees and the survivor of them his Executors and Administrators upon trust for my other surviving children and be transferred paid and applied together with the dividends and interest thereof and at the like ages and times as is hereinbefore declared of and ? his and their original share or shares and in case of the death of any of my said children on before his her or their share or shares shall become vested and payable leaving lawful issue him or them surviving them the share or shares of such deceased children shall go and be paid unto and equally between the child and children of such deceased child and children at his her or their

Page 3:

age of twenty one years and I direct the dividends and interest of the share and shares of such children in the meantime to be applied for and towards their maintenance and education during their minority and in case all my said children shall depart this life without leaving lawful issue him her or them or leaving such all the same - children shall die under the said age of twenty one years then I give and bequeath all the said trust funds and monies unto and equally between my said Trustees their Executors and Administrators as tenants in common as a token of my esteem for them and a remuneration for their trouble they may have in carrying into effect the trusts of this my will and I do hereby appoint the said John Payne and Thomas Bridge Simpson Executors of this my will and give to each of them a ? as a small token of respect for them and I do hereby direct and declare that in case either of my trustees shall depart this life desire to resign or become incapable to act in the trusts hereby reposed in them before the same trusts shall have been fully performed then it shall be lawful for the surviving or continuing trustee his Executors or Administrators or other the trustee or trustees for the time being to appoint any other fit and proper person to be a trustee or trustees in the place or stead of the trustee or trustees so dying desiring to be discharged from or becoming incapable to act in the said trusts and upon the appointment of any such new trustee or trustees the surviving or continuing trustee his Executors or Administrators or other the trustee or trustees for the time being shall execute such assignment and do all such other acts as shall be requisite for vesting the said trust estate funds monies and promises in such new trustee or trustees or in such new trustee or trustees wholly as the case shall require and such new trustee or trustees shall thereupon stand possessed of and interested in the said trust estate funds monies and promises as if he or they had been originally named and appointed trustees in and by this my will and I do hereby further declare that it shall be lawful for my said trustees and executors or other the trustees for the time being of this my will from time to time by and out of the said trust funds and monies and the dividends and interest thereof to retain and reimburse himself and themselves all such costs charges and expenses as he or they shall sustain expend or be put to in and about the execution of the trusts hereby in them reposed and I further declare that neither of them my said trustees and Executors or other the trustees for the time being of this my will shall be answerable or accountable for the acts deeds receipts or defaults of the other of them but each only for his own individual acts, deeds receipts and defaults and by no means for any involuntary losses which may happen or arise in or about the execution of the trusts hereby in them reposed and further that it shall be lawful for my said trustees or Executors and other the trustee or trustees for the time being of this

Page 4:

to retain to and reimburse themselves and himself all such costs charges and expenses which he or they shall or may be put to incur or sustain in and about the carrying into execution the trusts of this my will and lastly I revoke all former wills in witness whereof I the said John Haddock the testator have to this my last will and testament contained in five sheets of paper to the first four sheets thereof set my hand and to this fifth and last sheet set my hand and seal this thirteenth day of January in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty one Jn Haddock signed sealed published and declared by the said John Haddock the Testator as and for his last will and Testament in the presence of us who in his presence at his request and in the sight of each other have hereunto subscribed our names as witnesses to the ? execution thereof ? ? on the third sheet being first made

Saul/David? Bopard? Dean Street Southwark

Edward ? his clerk

PROVED AT London 2^nd July 1822 before the worshipful John Danberry? Doctor of Laws and Surrogate by the oaths of John Paine (in the will written Payne) and Thomas Bridge Simpson as executors to whom admin was granted having been first sworn only to administer.

THE SOURCES OF JOHN HADDOCK’S WEALTH

John Haddock became a partner in the banking firm in about 1804. It is unknown what he did for a living before this time, or how much personal wealth he had accumulated. The probable source of his wealth during his time as a banker was the inheritances of his wife who, with her brother Owen Griffith Bywater, inherited £1152, plus £562, and 5% Loyalty Stock and £52 in the books of the governor and company of the Bank of England from a distant relative (2^nd cousin) who died intestate in 1804. From this inheritance, John and Mary Haddock and her brother Owen had then invested £1,500 in 3% Consolidated Bank Annuities. This inheritance was challenged by another relative, as is outlined in the Court of Chancery case below. Mary’s brother Owen died in 1808, and when their mother Mary Bywater died on 24 November 1810, Mary and husband John Haddock inherited a substantial inheritance. In Mary Bywater’s Will, she left her properties in trust to pay the rents and profits to her daughter Mary for the term of her natural life. She also bequeathed £4000 Navy 5% Bank annuities to Mary, and to her ‘beloved’ son-in-law John Haddock she bequeathed £1,000 5% Navy Bank annuities. She also gave substantial bequests to her daughter Mary’s children Susannah and John Paine by her first husband, and £500 to each of the Haddock children on attaining the age of 21. In a Codicil she bequeathed a further £500 sterling to her daughter. The source of all this wealth has not been ascertained, but someone in this family had made some excellent investments.

John Haddock and Mary, together with Mary’s brother Owen Bywater, were defendants in an action taken in the Chancery Courts in 1804, and again in 1810, by John Woodcock concerning the estate of a John Bywater late of High Street in the Parish of St Saviour, Southwark, shopkeeper. It seems that John Bywater, a bachelor, died on the 5 April 1804 without leaving a will. The complainant, John Woodcock, a cabinet maker, from Cambridge claimed kinship to John Bywater being “his first cousin of the half blood and sole next of kin surviving as the intestate (John Bywater) was the only son of John Bywater and Sarah Oxford whose mother Hannah Oxford remarried a Richard Potrell and their daughter Ann subsequently married a Samuel Woodcock of which marriage the complainant is the only surviving issue”. Woodcock believed that John Bywater was “possessed of a very considerable personal estate consisting of stock in the public funds, money, securities for money and other property to a large amount” to which he was entitled. He further claimed that as he lived in Cambridge it was some time before he learnt of the death of John Bywater and that, in the meantime, Owen Griffith Bywater of the Navy Pay Office, Somerset House, Middlesex, Gentleman and Mary Haddock, wife of John Haddock of Newington Place in the County of Surrey represented themselves to be the sole next of kin to John Bywater and with John Haddock, obtained Letters of Administration over the estate and thus the proceeds of the estate. He claimed that Owen and Mary were second cousins to John Bywater and questioned whether they were nearer, or equal to him regarding closeness to the deceased.

On the 25 November 1805, reference C13/60/44W1805W32, Court of Chancery, Six Clerks Office, John Haddock and his wife and Owen Griffith Bywater, as defendants, filed their answers to the complainant’s Bill of Complaint. Firstly they stated “that John Bywater was only the shopman employed by the Mother of these defendants in her shop and not a shopkeeper as is erroneously mentioned in the Complainant’s Bill”. They admitted procuring Letters of Administration granted to them by the Prerogative Court of the Archbishop of Canterbury and that “by virtue thereof they possessed themselves of John Bywater’s personal estate and effects amounting to One thousand one hundred and fifty two pounds eighteen shillings and ninepence or thereabouts exclusive of the sum of Five hundred and sixty two pounds ten shillings and five percent Loyalty Stock and Fifty pounds four percent standing in the name of John Bywater in the Books of the governor and company of the Bank of England and that the same was more than sufficient to pay his debts and funeral expenses amounting to the sum of two hundred pounds eleven shillings and two pence and that they laid out and invested the sum of eight hundred and fifty three pounds two shillings and sixpence in the purchase of one thousand five hundred pounds three percent Consolidated Bank Annuities which is now standing in the names of these defendants”. They went on to admit that “they, Owen Griffith Bywater and Mary Haddock are the second cousins of the said John Bywater for they have heard and verily believe that the father of the deceased and William Bywater, the grandfather of these defendants were own brothers and that they are the only children of William Bywater one of the sons of the said William Bywater, their grandfather living at the time of the death of the said John Bywater”. In this, their Answer, they stated that “they are ready and willing to come to an account of the said deceased’s personal estate and effects and to distribute the same in such manner as this Honourable Court shall direct and they deny all and all manner of unlawful combination and confederacy wherewith they are charged”. They completed their Answer by stating “these defendants are ready and willing to ever maintain and prove, as this Honourable Court shall direct, and humbly pray to be hence dismissed with their reasonable costs and charges in the law in this behalf most wrongfully sustained”. This document was then signed by Owen G Bywater, Mr Haddock, Mary Haddock and witnessed by Thos Finch.

The action stayed at this point and was not revived until the 18 May 1810 (reference SMP W1805W32) when the complainant, John Woodcock, returned to Chancery seeking the residue of John Bywater’s estate. In this document he was referred to as the “Orator”. He made reference in this document to the fact that Owen Griffith Bywater, John Haddock and Mary, his wife, had been served with proofs of subpoena and referenced their Answer and the fact that the case “being at issue came to be heard before His Honour the Master of the Rolls on, or about, the fourteenth day of December one thousand eight and five when it was, amongst other things, ordered that it should be referred to one of the Masters of this Honourable Court to enquiry and state to the Court whether all the debts of John Bywater had been paid, and also to enquire and state to the Court who were the next of kin of the said John Bywater living at the time of his decease. As a result the Master to whom this cause stood referred certified that he had proceeded on the said enquiries and caused advertisements to be published in the London Gazette and some of the public papers for the creditors of the said deceased to come before him and prove their debts and had also caused advertisements to be published in the London Gazette and some of the public papers for the next of kin of the said deceased”. This document carried on to say “that the Master certified two claims were received by him – one from this Orator and the second on behalf of members of the Oxford family.” Further – “that in or about the month of November one thousand eight hundred and seven Owen Griffith Bywater departed this life by means whereof the said proceedings as to him became, and are abated. The said Owen Griffith Bywater died intestate and Letters of Administration were granted to Mary Bywater, his Mother, out of the Prerogative Court of the Archbishop of Canterbury and by virtue thereof the said Mary Bywater is become the legal personal representative of the said Owen Griffith Bywater and your Orator is therefore advised he is entitled to have the same benefit and relief against the said Mary Bywater as he should or might have had against the said Owen Griffith Bywater to the end therefore, that the said suit and proceedings may stand revived and be in the same plight and condition against the said Mary Bywater as the same were at the death of the said Owen Griffith Bywater”. This document then requested “a writ of supboena to be directed to the said Mary Bywater commanding her, at a certain day, to appear before this Honourable Court to shew cause why the said suit and all the proceedings therein should not stand revived and be in the same condition as they were at the time of the decease of the said Owen Griffith Bywater and to stand to perform and abide such further order, direction and decree therein as to your Lordship shall seem meet”.

No documentation has yet been found showing the outcome of this lengthy set of proceedings.[ii]

The Bywater and Griffith families will be continued the next chapter.

THE TWO SONS OF JOHN HADDOCK- HENRY JOHN HADDOCK AND JOSEPH HADDOCK:

(researched by descendant Beryl Curtis)

London Gazette, January 19, 1830- Issue 18647, p124

24 Old-Jewry, January 11 1830- Notice is hereby given, that the Partnership lately subsisting between Henry John Haddock and Joseph Haddock, Stationers, No 24, Old Jewry, has this day been dissolved by mutual consent; this is therefore, to require all persons who may be indebted to the said Henry John Haddock and Joseph Haddock, to pay the same forthwith to Messrs. Paine and Simpson, 29, High-Street, Borough; and all persons to whom the accounts to Messrs Paine and Simpson, 29, High-Street, Borough, in order to their being examined and discharge- Witness our hand.

Henry John Haddock

Joseph Haddock

NB. Paine was the previous marital name of their mother. Thomas Bridge Simpson, wholesale hardwareman of 57 High St Southwark was married to Maria Susanna Paine (dau. of Rawlin Paine Surgeon of Hitchen, Hertfordshire and Mary Haddock nee Paine nee Bywater). John and Mary Haddock’s daughter Mary Paine was named as aunt to Simpson’s children, at their birth). John Paine was brother to Maria Susanna Paine.

John Haddock Snr named John Paine and Thomas Bridge Simpson, both wholesale warehousemen in High Street Southwark, as executors of his will.

Joseph and his family emigrated to Australia three years after this dissolved partnership. In Australia, he became a school teacher.

Further refs to Henry John Haddock in Directories [iii]:

1. Tallis Directory of London “Strangers Guide to London 1738-1840 and 1847” has – “103 High Street, The Borough – Haddock Stationer

2. The Postal Directory for 1834 lists “Haddock H. Stationer and Bookseller, 103 High Street, Borough”

3. The 1846 London Postal Directory lists “Henry Haddock, Stationer & Acct, Bookmaker – 103 High Street”

4. The 1851 London Postal Directory lists “Haddock Hen. Stationer & Acct, Bookmaker – 103 Borough High Street”

Notably, 103 High Street, The Borough, was still a stationer’s in the 1902 London Directory, with Albert & Co. running the business.

Henry John Haddock:

Henry John was born at Newington, Surrey, on the 4 October 1801 to John Haddock and Mary Paine nee Bywater. Like his brother, Joseph, he was baptised at the Mill Hill Independent Chapel, Hendon, the baptismal entry reading “Henry John, son of John Haddock and Mary his wife of the Parish of St Mary Newington in the County of Surrey, born on the 4^th day of October 1801, was baptised on the 30 December 1801 by me, John Humphrys, Protestant Dissenting Minister”.

On the 18 October 1827 at St Mary’s Church, Newington, Henry John married Martha Leah Chin (born about 1808), the sister of his brother in law John Butt Chin (Ann Haddock’s husband) and the daughter of John Chin and Land Plumleigh. The marriage was published in The Times of Saturday 20 October 1837 –

On the 18^th instant at St Marys Newington, Mr H J Haddock of the Old Jewry, to Martha third daughter of the Rev John Chin of Gloucester House, Walworth”.

Henry John and Martha had seven children , –

1.Martha’s baptism took place at Walworth Locks Fields Chapel, York Street, Independent, Southwark on the 25 February 1829. She remained unmarried, living with her father and stepmother at their various addresses. She became a Governess and by the 3 April 1881 (census night) she was retired, living on insurance dividends with her stepmother, Eliza and two stepbrothers and stepsister, at 159 Manor Road, Deptford (St Paul district), Kent. She died on the 24 June 1884.

2.Mary was baptised on the 18 December 1830, also at Walworth Locks Fields Chapel, York Street, Independent, Southwark.

3.Eliza was born on the 2 April 1832 and baptised on the 28 July 1837. Dr Williams Library of Independent Baptisms has the following entry – “Eliza daughter of Henry John Haddock, Stationer, of 103 High Street Southwark and his wife Martha Leah, daughter of Rev John Chin of Grosvenor Street, Camberwell (only Henry John Haddock signed) – witnesses Ann Brown nurse of Walworth, Mary Haddock, aunt of Walworth”. On 30 March 1851 (census night) Eliza was residing at Park Road, Goldsmith House, in the borough of Lambeth and was listed as a scholar.

4.Emma was born on the 11 April 1833 and is also recorded in Dr Williams Library of Independent baptisms: “Emma daughter of Henry John Haddock Stationer of 103 High Street Southwark and his wife Martha Leah daughter of Rev John Chin of Grosvenor Street Camberwell (only Henry John Haddock signed) – witnesses George Parsons Surgeon of Marlbro Pl, Walworth, Mary Brown, Nurse, Walworth”. On the 1851 census night she was shown to be 17 and living with her father, stepmother and stepbrother and sister at 103 High Street, Southwark.

5.Henry Paine Haddock was born about December 1834, and died in Walworth, Surrey on the 25 January 1835.

6.Henry was born about April 1836 and died 14 April 1837 in Walworth.

7.George was born 15 June 1837 and died in the June quarter (i.e. between April and June) 1838. The entry in Dr Williams Library of Independent baptisms reads 15 June 1837 George son of Henry John Haddock 103 High Street Southwark Stationer and his wife Martha Leah daughter of Rev John Chin of Grosvenor Street Camberwell (only Henry John Haddock signed) – witnesses George Parsons, Surgeon of Marlbro Place Walworth, Mary Haddock, aunt of Walworth”.

In 1834 and 1835 Martha was present at, and acted as the witness to, the births of a nephew and niece, James and Sarah Oliver, the children of her sister Mary and husband Edward James Oliver.

Martha Haddock nee Chin died in Southwark on the 15 August 1837, only two months after the birth of George, their youngest child.

Following Martha’s death Henry John Haddock remarried Martha’s sister Eliza Land Chin (b.1813).

They had two children:

1.John Paine Chin Haddock born between April and June 1845. His birth was registered in the Camberwell district of Surrey and on the 12 June 1877 at Greenwich in Kent, he married Mary Emily Adams. He was still living with his parents at 137 Ken Park Road, Newington when the 1871 census was taken. In 1861 he was a clerk to (or in the office of) a Customs House Agent and occupied a Clerk’s position until 1881, however by 1891 he had become a Secretary to a Limited Company. At the time the 1881 census was taken, he and his wife were living with his parents’-in-law and sister-in-law Hannah and her husband William Knight, solicitor, at 23 Bedford Square, Brighton, Sussex. By 1891 he and his wife had moved to 17 Thornsett Road, Penge, County London. He was 57 years of age when he died in 1902, his death being registered in the district of Tunbridge.

2.Alice Chin Haddock was born about 1849 in Southwark and according to Louisa Paine’s datebook she was only 25 when she died on the 8 August 1875. Before her death, according to the census of 1871 she was an art student, still living with her parents at 137 Ken Park Road, Newington.

Henry John Haddock and Eliza resided at 103 High Street Southwark for some years, but by 1861 they, together with Martha (dau. from his first marriage), John and Alice were residing at 8 Amersham Terrace, Deptford and Henry had become a cashier at the Southwark Savings Bank. (The business at 103 High Street was, in 1861, owned by a Joseph Abbott with him and his family living on the premises.) Henry continued in the occupation of cashier presumably until his death, however by 1871 they were residing at 137 Ken Park Road, Newington.

An article in the London Times of 17 January 1865 makes reference to a Court case brought by a person called Tildesley against Haddock:

The case was a demurrer to a plea “that before action the defendant (Haddock) had tendered to the plaintiff the amount of the bill of exchange now sued on, together with interest and costs”. Mr MacNamara (for Tildesley) contended that the plea of tender was bad unless it showed that the tender was made on the day when the debt became due. Mr Piffard (for Haddock) admitted the plea was bad in form under the old rules of pleading but contended that under section 50 of the Common Law Procedure Act 1852, the Court was at liberty to see whether it disclosed sufficient grounds to bar the plaintiff from further proceeding with this action, or at all events to deprive him of his costs and all damages beyond those tendered. The Lord Chief Baron said that if a debtor made a tender to his creditor which was refused the course for him to pursue would be to give his creditor notice that, in case, of his proceeding to sue him at law, application would be made to a Judge at chambers to stay such action on payment of the debt without even the costs of the writ; but that the plea of tender in this case was a bad one, and that judgment must be for the plaintiff”.

The National Archives holds documents relating to an insurance policy with the Sun Insurance Company in the names of Henry John Haddock and Mary Haddock of 4 Harford Place, Walworth, Gent.

Henry John Haddock died on the 28 January 1874, his death being published in both the “Morning Post” and “The Standard” of Friday 31 January 1874:

"Haddock - On 28th instant at Manor Road Upper Lewisham Road Henry John Haddock aged 72.

After Henry’s death Eliza moved, with her stepdaughter Martha, to 159 Manor Road, Deptford (St Paul’s district) Kent and was living there when the census was taken on the 3 April 1881. She was listed as being 68 years of age, an annuitant on the parish. Also in the house was Kate Hare a sick room attendant and Mary A Meekings a domestic servant.

Eliza’s death is listed in the (London) Daily News of Tuesday 20 April 1886:

“Haddock – April 18 at Anerley Eliza Land, widow of the late Henry John Haddock, aged 74”.

The Evangelical Magazine and Missionary Chronicle 1853, Vol XXXI New Series, London contains two advertisements:

(NB. Henry John Haddock was a stationer at 103 High Street Southwark in 1853.)

SITUATIONS:

A YOUNG LADY, of respectable family, is desirous of a RE-ENGAGEMENT as GOVERNESS in a family, where the children are under twelve years of age. Her qualifications are the general routine of an English education, Music and French. Address, Y.Z., care of Mr Haddock, Stationer, &c., 103 High-street, Southwark.

EDUCATION:

A YOUNG PERSON, respectably connected, wishes to ENGAGE herself in a YOUNG GENTLEMEN’S PREPARATORY SCHOOL, to take charge of their Wardrobe and make herself generally useful. Not having been from home before she is willing to give the first six months of her service for board and laundry expenses. Address, O.M., care of Mr Haddock, Stationer, &c., 103 High-street, Southwark.

Whether the two advertisements above referred to his daughters is not clear- viz. Emma b.1833, Eliza b.1832, however, it would suggest so, as both girls were about 20 at that time.

Henry John Haddock remarried to Eliza Land Chin (his sister-in-law) c.1844, following the death of his wife Martha Chin. As Henry was left with numerous young children, he probably relied on his sister-in-law Eliza to help raise the children, given her experience as a governess. The fact that his two youngest daughters (by Martha) were looking for work as governesses in 1853, would indicate that their step-mother had trained them in this line of work. Notably their elder half-sister Martha also became a governess.

In the 18^th-19^th centuries, stationers were involved in the book trade- book sellers, publishers, bookbinders, etc. They all belonged to a guild known as The Stationers’ Company.

The Stationers’ Company:

The Stationers’ Company dates back to 1403 and in 1557 the Guild received a Royal Charter of Incorporation, which secured them from outside competition, and gave the Company the right to search for and seize illicit or pirated copies and to prevent publication of any book which had not been licensed by a warden of the Company and entered in what became known as the ‘entry book of copies viz. the Stationers’ Company register, which remained in force until replaced by the first copyright act in 1710.

From the Middle Ages no man was allowed to trade in the City of London unless he resided there and belonged to a Guild, later a livery company. In 1858 an Act of Common Council (the City’s Parliament) abolished this restriction.

Until the early 20^th century, the most usual way of joining the Company was by serving an apprenticeship to a freeman or liveryman. The Company is unusual among livery companies in insisting that its members work in the book or allied trades. There is a microfilm edition of the Company’s Archive 1554-1920, which includes Membership records from 1555 to the present day.

(Ref. www.stationers.org)

A John Haddock in partnership with Richard Egan Lee, booksellers and publishers of Craven Yard Drury Lane, were sued by Charles Dickens in Nov.1843 for publishing an imitation of his successful book A Christmas Story, entitled A Christmas Ghost Story, without his permission or authority. By March 1844 they went into bankruptcy. Whether this John Haddock was any relation is unknown.

Joseph Haddock, a couple of years after his partnership with his brother was dissolved, decided to emigrate to Australia. He and his family boarded the ship The Warrior which arrived in Sydney in 1833. He had married Ann Coates in 1825. They had issue:

Mary Ann b. 1826 Lambeth

Joseph b.1827

Georgiana Augusta b 1828 Southwark ; d. 1875; m. Plumleigh Chin 1850 South Creek

Louisa b. 1832

Septimus b. 1839 d.1922 Wellington NZ

John b.c.1840

Juliet b. 1841 Prospect NSW

Joseph b. 1844 Prospect NSW

My thanks to family researcher Beryl Curtis for sharing her extensive research on the Haddock and Bywater families with me.

Contact email: butler1802 @hotmail.com (no spaces)

[i] Info courtesy Beryl Curtis

[ii] Info courtesy of family researcher Beryl Curtis

[iii] Information courtesy of Beryl Curtis

20 August 2013

Chin-Haddock family Ch.6: Haddock family history

The Examiner Sunday April 7 1822 issue 741