Home | Summary |  Summary chart | Notes | Family charts |  Surname index | Contact us

Hiscock Additional Information - Page 2
Move back to Further Information Page 1   or forward to Page 3

Possible children of Joshua Hiscock & Philadelphia Freeland

Joshua Hiscock

Birth 1810: baptised 7th September 1810 at Battle(Source: )

Death: not known; but presumably in infancy before next Joshua was born.

Edmund Hiscock

Baptism 9th September 1813 at Battle (Source: )

Marriage to Mary Ann Hook at Westfield on 28th December 1834 (source ) See below for their children. See census returns for 1841 to 1861

Death: not known.

Maria Hiscock

Birth abt 1819 - baptism date: 07 Feb 1819 at Sedlescomb; father's name: Joshua Hiscock; mother's name: Philadelphia Hiscock (IGI batch number: I04472-0).

See below for further possible information about Maria.

Death: 1896 age 77 (Register: Sep 1896 Cranbrook 2a 443

Joshua Hiscock

Birth: probably the twin of Maria. baptised 7.2.1819 at Sedlescomb. (Source: ).

Marriage to Leonora Hailer (Register: Dec 1846 Battle 7 443) Certificate: October 14th 1846, in the parish church of Sedlescomb.   Joshua Hiscock, of full age, bachelor, labourer, of Sedlescomb, son of Joshua Hiscock, labourer; and Leonora Hailer, of full age, spinster, of Sedlescomb, daughter of Edward Hailer, labourer; Witnesses: Maria Hiscock and Selina Hiscock.

See below for possible children of their marriage.

Death: not known.

Philadelphia Selina Hiscock

Baptised in Whatlington in 1822 ()

See below for further notes on her probable children.

Death: not known.

Census data referring to Joshua and Philadelphia Hiscock

A possible sister to Joshua (Junior) above

Children of Edmund Hiscock (born abt 1816) and Mary (or Mary Ann) Hook

Census data referring to the family of Edmund Hiscock (born abt 1816) and Mary (or Mary Ann) Hook

Possible children of Joshua Hiscock (born about 1821) and Leonora Hailes  
Because both children were infant deaths, I have not looked for confirmation from certificates.

Maria (born 1819)   Uncertainty over this entry.

There was a birth in 1852 of a Maria Lamb Hiscock to a mother Maria Hiscock (Register: Jun 1852 Battle 2b 34).
The certificate - 27th April 1852 Maria Lamb gives no Surname or Father`s Name; registered 1st June 1852 by Mother Maria Hiscock of Sedlescomb).
Maria Lamb Hiscock was christened on 10 Jul 1853 at Sedlescomb, Sussex, mother's name: Maria Hiscock (IGI batch number: I04472-0). The death in Jun 1856 (Hiscock Maria Battle 2b 25) probably refers to this child.
In 1841, at Oakhill, Beckley, Sussex, Maria Hiscock, age 25, born in Sussex had probably been employed as a servant by the Selmes family - Henry, Sarah his wife, and two daughters, along with 2 elderly Bishopp`s. There were 3 other residents aged 25 or younger, (possibly also servants ?) including a Mary Noakes with a family surname well connected over the years with the Hiscocks. (RG number: HO107;   Piece: 1106;   Book/Folio: 1/5;   Page: 4
Reg. District: Rye;   Sub District: Beckley.)
In 1851, Maria was a servant to the Dowager Lady Teynham at Oaklands, Westfield, Sussex. (RG number: HO107;   Piece: 1636;   Folio: 174;   Page: 4
Reg. District: Battle;   Sub District: Bexhill;   Parish: Westfield;   Enum. District: 5C)
There were 3 other servants to the Lady Teynham at the time; one widow of 60, a 30 year old Ann Griffith from Wales and an unmarried Charles Hillay of 26 from London. Charles Hillay appears in later censuses as Charles Hillary. In 1861 he is a Butler back in Acton. He is now married, though his wife is not shown at his place of employment. His marriage might have been in 1853 in London, or in 1859 in Hastings.
A Sarah Teynham died in 1854, so it is to be expected that Maria would have moved by 1861, whether or not Maria Lamb was her child.
In 1861, Maria is a housemaid to a tailor, Henry Lulham and his wife in Hastings. (RG number: RG09;   Piece: 561;   Folio: 26;   Page: 46;
Reg. District: Hastings;   Sub District: 3, St Mary in the Castle; Parish: St Mary Magdalen; Enum. District: 6
Address: 42 Eversfield Place, St Mary Magdalen, Hastings)
There was one other younger servant, Ellen Carden.
From 1871 onwards, Maria is servant to one family, George Neve, a Land Agent & Farmer (in 1881 holding 1190 acres, and employing 40 men, 10 boys and 4 women) at Sissinghurst Castle House, Cranbrook, in Kent. In 1871 there are George`s wife, a `pupil` of 18, and 3 nephews and nieces.   There are 2 other younger servants.
By 1881 (RG number: RG11;   Piece: 938;   Folio: 8;   Page: 8;   Reg. District: Cranbrook), the family has grown.   Son Thomas, age 27, a farmer of 340 acres, employing 7 men, 3 women and 1 boy; daughter Fanny, single, age 24; son Henry, age 21, a `Farm Pupil`; and a widowed sister-in-law, age 51 with her unmarried daughter of 25 constitute the family.
Maria, now age 62, is described as a housemaid; the cook and general servant, a widow, age 48; and there are also a parlour maid and a kitchen maid.
In 1891 the other 3 servants, (cook, housemaid and parlour maid) have all changed. The address has also had a slight addition.   The family has added a nephew, a curate.
The full transcription is shown below.

Probable children of Philadelphia Hiscock (Father unnamed)

Explanation of Removal Orders from Genuki (http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/LIN/poorsettlement.html)

Beginning in 1665, the poor were allowed to enter any parish in search of work, so long as they had a Settlement Bond where they would agree to hold harmless a particular parish against any charges incurred by the person moving. These date from 1665 to 1697. Many people moved without bothering to obtain a Bond. Many considered it another form of government prying into their privacy.

After 1697, the poor were allowed to enter any parish in search of work, so long as they had a Settlement Certificate signed by the church wardens and overseers of their place of settlement and two magistrates guaranteeing to receive them back should they become chargeable. No one was allowed to move from town to town without the appropriate documentation. If a person entered a parish in which he or she did not have official settlement, and seemed likely to become chargeable to the new parish, then an examination would be made by the justices (or parish overseers). From this examination on oath, the justices would determine if that person had the means to sustain himself and, if not, which was that person's parish of settlement. The results of the examination were documented in an Examination Paper, but few of these have survived. As a result of the examination the intruder would then either be allowed to stay, or would be removed by means of what was known as a Removal Order.

Removal Orders would often take a person or a family back to a place of settlement miles across the country, sometimes to a parish they had only known briefly as a small child. It was not uncommon for a husband and wife to have their children taken from them, each being removed to separate scattered parishes. Children under seven were rarely removed to a different place from their natural parents as they would have had to gain a settlement of their own to be removed somewhere other than their father's place of settlement. Illegitimate babies and children could be removed away from their mothers in the 18th century if the child was not born in the mother's place of settlement (the settlement of illegitimate children was their place of birth) - but not always. Sometimes an agreement was made between the overseers of the child's place of settlement and the overseers of the parish where it was living so that it could be maintained by the former whilst living in the latter. Children whose mother had remarried a man with a different place of settlement from their father could be removed away from their mother as they would retain their father's settlement, but again agreements could be made between parishes as with illegitimate children above. In 1732/3 an Act prevented the removal of pregnant women and women within the first month of giving birth. After 1834, the Union Workhouse (covering a group of parishes) came into being, but removal to the "appropriate" Workhouse continued.