Helping hands helping one another with our family history & genealogy research.
Richard Heyes married a Ann Moorfield - can not find a marriage.
In the 1871 census they were aged 25 yrs old he was born in Wigan she in Hindley. They had two children Margaret aged 2yrs old and Elizabeth aged 7mths, both born Hindley.
All other children born Hindley except a James. In 1881 cencus he was aged 8yrs, and born in Cassop, Durham.
I have them in all cencus from 1871 to 1901, I found Ann Moorfields name through buying a birth certificate for one of her children it says Ann Heyes formerly Moorfield, any help with her family parents siblings as well I would welcome, but it is her marriage I am interested in.
we have to remember that not all the marriages are on line, some have not been catalogued as yet..1837 might be them, I have no way of really telling ordering one of the kids birth cert.. perhaps one that has the charnock maiden name might reveal more.
1837 Jul 2 Thomas x Moorfield, full age, Winstanley tp, Collier, ba, (s of Richard Moorfield, Collier) & Margaret Charnock, minor, tp, sp [condition blank on pre 1837 PR, Occupation, residence and father's details all left out of post 1837 PR], Banns (11, 18, 25 Jun by J. Bromilow Minister) by J. Bromilow Minister, Wit; Thomas Singleton, John Lea, No. 524, No. 1
have you considered posting a request here:(listed under WigamWorld on the Lancshire page here at Looking4kin)
you must register, but it is free.. I suggest you consider doing so.. I found a lot of Moorfield records in the Cemetery page, none I can connect to Margaret, the same with Charnock.. but I am sure someone here in Wigam would answer you.
would also post on this General board:
I may have narrowed down Thomas Moofield death, (lordy that name was common) but here goes:
this Thomas died in 1852, now Margaret may well have been expecting the last child when he died..you can contact the submitter, actually there are 2 of them as I think they both did the same one..
1852 Deaths....there are earlier and later ones of course, but looking at the birth year of the last child and the 1861 census this is a good possible