The
Family Lineage of The Kingdom Sisters
Mary,
Ann, Elizabeth, Sarah and Sophia
The
Final Story of Their Family Trilogy
They
Called Launceston Cornwall Home
Discover Launceston
Walk around the narrow streets of
Launceston and you get a real sense of the town’s ancient history. Up on the
hill is a Norman castle and nearby prison, where notables including George Fox
of the Quaker movement was imprisoned. Overlooking the rolling countryside, you
can see remains of the defensive wall that once circled the town, there’s a
14th century gatehouse into the old town and tucked away below the castle is a
row of grand houses that Sir John Betjeman described as the loveliest Georgian
street in Cornwall.
The arms of Kingdon - Arg. a
chev. sa. between three magpies ppr. appear on one of the shields of the coffins
in church at Quithiock
The Kingdon family are an old and
respectable family of the counties of Cornwall and Devon. Their most ancient residence, of which there
is now any authentic account, was at Trehunsey, in the parish of Quithiock,
Cornwall, where they flourished in the 12th, 13th 14th and 15th centuries. In the parish church of Quithiock is a cross
aisle, on the southern side belonging to the ancient mansior and manor of
Trehunscy, with the family vault underneath, near which stands and antique
marble monument on which are the brass effigies of Roger Kingdon, who died
1402, Joanna, his wife, and fifteen children, then sons and five daughters,
with four shields of arms.
The younger sons of this numerous
family dispersed and branched forth into several parishes in the counties of
Cornwall and Devon.
William Kingdon, son of Roger was
one of the representatives in parliament for the Borough of Liskcard, in the
31st Henry VI, and Edward Kingdon, his eldest son was in the first year of the
reign of Edward IV, appointed bailie or praefect of the county of Surrey. This Edward was subsequently elected M.P. for
Liskeard, a borough he continued to represent in many successive parliaments.
Descendants of
Roger Kingdon
The
names were spelt in the old style, with many variations.
The earliest records in the
Launceston area of Cornwall refer to Gawyn Kingdon, born 1540, who married Emme
Cosen. Early research indicates he was
the son of Richard Kingdon.
Their
children were
1. 1. Thomas
Kingdon 1579
2. Richard Kingdon 1569
3. Sampson Kingdon 1574
4. Honour Kingdon 1576
5. John Kingdon 1571
2. Richard Kingdon 1569
3. Sampson Kingdon 1574
4. Honour Kingdon 1576
5. John Kingdon 1571
John
Kingdon married Alice Sergent 1544 -
1623, and their son Thomas Kingdon begins this lineage.
Thomas
Kingdon was born 1590 in Cornwall and died 1672
Their
children were
1. 1. Richard
Kingdon 1617 1709 m Edith Martin
2. Beaton Kingdon 1618 1689 m Chris Garrensee
3. John Kingdon 1620 1684 m Sarah Orchard
4. Jone Kingdom 1623 m Peter Palmer
5. Elizabeth Kingdon 1625 m Thomas Gache
2. Beaton Kingdon 1618 1689 m Chris Garrensee
3. John Kingdon 1620 1684 m Sarah Orchard
4. Jone Kingdom 1623 m Peter Palmer
5. Elizabeth Kingdon 1625 m Thomas Gache
John
Kingdon and Sarah Orchard 1622 - 1684
Their children
were
1. 1. John
Kingdon 1645 1645
2. Thomas Kingdome 1646 - 1700 m Esther Langdon
3. Lewis Kingdome 1650 - 1731
4. Walter Kingdon 1653 - 1731 m Thomasine Harvey
5. Elizabeth Kingdon 1655 1657
6. Sara Kingdome 1657 1657
2. Thomas Kingdome 1646 - 1700 m Esther Langdon
3. Lewis Kingdome 1650 - 1731
4. Walter Kingdon 1653 - 1731 m Thomasine Harvey
5. Elizabeth Kingdon 1655 1657
6. Sara Kingdome 1657 1657
Walter
Kingdon m Thomasine Harvey
Their children
1. 1. Thomasine
Kingdon 1675
2. Mary Kingdon 1680
3. Alice Kingdon 1682
4. Sarah Kingdon 1684
5. John Kingdom 1689 - 1749
2. Mary Kingdon 1680
3. Alice Kingdon 1682
4. Sarah Kingdon 1684
5. John Kingdom 1689 - 1749
.
John
Kingdom m Jane Barriball 1688 - 1762
Their
children were
1. 1. Mary
Kingdom 1715
2. Jane Kingdom 1716
3. Walter Kingdom 1717 - 1749
4. William Kingdom 1717 1783 m Joan Sprye - The Kingdom Sisters Lineage
5. John Kingdom 1719 1739
2. Jane Kingdom 1716
3. Walter Kingdom 1717 - 1749
4. William Kingdom 1717 1783 m Joan Sprye - The Kingdom Sisters Lineage
5. John Kingdom 1719 1739
Jane Barriball was the daughter
of Henry Barriball and Ann Cernicke. The
family centered around Northill Cornwall.
William Barriball 1587 - 1634 married Grace Kirbye 1588 -
1626
Their son Henry Barriball c 1620
His son Henry Barriball c 1650 married Ann
Cernicke
The family were shopkeepers in
the 1900s.
The
lineage in Cornwall can be confirmed in an online book - The Kingdom Family
and the early history at "A
Genealogical and Heraldic History of the Commoners of Great Britain, Volume 2 By John Burke 1849
Background
Being able to place different
members of the Kingdom family into the lineage, is rather difficult, unless
reference is made to records and books written in the 1800's, and without the
help of a family tree.
A search of Kingdom, provides
hundreds of references, to a Kingdom!
The Kingdoms in Launceston were
ship owners, or involved in shipping, and merchants. That seems to have followed down the
lineages, to William Kingdom.
Some unaccounted Kingdoms reveal
that in the 1560's some were Yoemen, some the Constable of the Launceston
Castle, others Carpenters, and a William Kingdom born 1760 was in the Third
Royal Veterans Battalion, discharged in 1811.
But every lineage followed naming patters, resulting in cousins being
named the same from each family.
William Kingdom was a member of
Plymouth Dock Freemasons after 1768
By researching each of the
lineages of Sprye, Mudge and Kingdom, there appears at different times, cross
links to various family members.
Without the benefit of the
extended family tree, those links would go unnoticed.
One such link is between
Katherine Archer 1770 who married John Williams.
Their daughter was Ann Eva
Williams who married William Kingdom Rains. His mother was Ann Kingdom who was
the sister of Sarah Kingdom. William
Rains was the first cousin of Isambard Kingdom Brunel and Robert Mudge
Marchant.
Then Katherine Archer's cousin
was Lieut Colonel Edward Archer of the 3rd Foot Guards. His son, her second
cousins was Lieut Edward Archer was born 8 November 1816. Educated at Oriel
College, Oxford (matriculated 1834). DL and JP for Cornwall. Colonel of Duke of
Cornwall's Rifle Volunteers. Chairman of the South Devon Railway.
The Launceston and
South Devon Railway Company remained independent until 1873 when it was
amalgamated with the South Devon Railway Company. The South Devon Railway‘s
dalliance with Brunel’s ill fated atmospheric railway from Exeter to Totness in
1847 nearly bankrupted the company and from then onwards always struggled
financially . The London and South Western Railway’s opening of a competing
route between Exeter and Plymouth in 1874 prompted the South Devon Railway to
seek a merger with the Great Western Railway in 1876.
However, Katherine's cousin Lieut
Colonel Edward Archer was the son of Dorothy Ayre Yonge who was the sister of
Rev. James Yonge. His wife was Ann Mudge
b 1748 was the daughter of Dr John Mudge and Mary Bulteel and she married Rev.
James Yonge.
She was the niece of Thomas Mudge the inventor
b 1717.
Certainly strong family ties!
Robert Mudge Marchant (1820-1902)
was Isambard Kingdom Brunel's assistant from 1838 to 1846 (Great Western,
Bristol, Exeter and South Devon Railways); from 1846-49 he was on the
Oxford-Worcester and Wolverhampton Railways. He was elected A.M. Inst. C.E. in
1849. From 1849-1855 he was a contractor for railway and hydraulic works; from
1855 to 1860 he was superintending and later Engineer-in-Chief for railways in
Brazil. From 1860-63 he was Railways Supervisor in Victoria (Australia). He was
Railway Engineer for Southland Railways (NZ) early in 1863 and on 1 March 1863
was also Town Board Engineer, Invercargill.
Things did not go to plan, and
Robert Marchant was almost bankrupted over the event. He had outlaid enormous sums, which were not
being paid. The result was a riot!
The opening of the line (Oxford,
Worcester & Wolverhampton) southward from Evesham had been delayed, not by
the fighting but by the extraordinary floods of the 1882-3 winter, which had
caused serious damage to the timber bridge over the Avon at Aldington and large
slips at several places, the worst near the Mickleton Tunnel. This tunnel had
been a constant trouble from its commencement in the summer of 1846. A few
months later Brunel had to install a new contractor, and when the works were
suspended in 1849 only a heading had been carried through and the brickwork
begun at each end.
In June 1851, not long after their resumption, the same contractor, who was again employed, had a dispute with the Company and stopped work. The Company decided to take possession of the works and plant and hand them over to Messrs Peto & Betts to complete with the rest of the line, whereupon the Contractor defied them and kept his men on guard. Sundry skirmishes took place, and eventually, on a Friday afternoon towards the end of July, Brunel himself with his resident assistant, R. Varden, came with a considerable body of men to take possession.
Having had notice of his intention, the Contractor got two magistrates to attend, as he expected a fight. After a conference with them Brunel postponed action till the next day, ‘when the magistrates were early on the ground, attended by a large body of police armed with cutlasses. Mr Brunel was there with his men, and Mr Marchant, the Contractor, also appeared at the head of a formidable body of navigators. A conflict was expected, but happily through the prompt action of the magistrates, who twice read the Riot Act to the men, they were dispersed.’
During Sunday, Peto & Betts’ men were collected from other parts of the line, and some even from the works of the Birmingham & Oxford Railway at Warwick and elsewhere which they were constructing for the Great Western, and marched during Sunday night to the scene of action, the idea being to overawe the refractory Marchant by an overwhelming display of strength and take possession before the arrival of the Gloucestershire magistrates to spoil the fun.
The first contingent from Evesham, some 200 strong, arrived at the north end of the tunnel at 3 a.m. on Monday, and the Battle of Mickleton began. It is difficult to gather from contemporary narratives just what did occur in the course of the argument, during which reinforcements to Brunel’s Army kept pouring in from all quarters till at last it was 2,000 strong.
In June 1851, not long after their resumption, the same contractor, who was again employed, had a dispute with the Company and stopped work. The Company decided to take possession of the works and plant and hand them over to Messrs Peto & Betts to complete with the rest of the line, whereupon the Contractor defied them and kept his men on guard. Sundry skirmishes took place, and eventually, on a Friday afternoon towards the end of July, Brunel himself with his resident assistant, R. Varden, came with a considerable body of men to take possession.
Having had notice of his intention, the Contractor got two magistrates to attend, as he expected a fight. After a conference with them Brunel postponed action till the next day, ‘when the magistrates were early on the ground, attended by a large body of police armed with cutlasses. Mr Brunel was there with his men, and Mr Marchant, the Contractor, also appeared at the head of a formidable body of navigators. A conflict was expected, but happily through the prompt action of the magistrates, who twice read the Riot Act to the men, they were dispersed.’
During Sunday, Peto & Betts’ men were collected from other parts of the line, and some even from the works of the Birmingham & Oxford Railway at Warwick and elsewhere which they were constructing for the Great Western, and marched during Sunday night to the scene of action, the idea being to overawe the refractory Marchant by an overwhelming display of strength and take possession before the arrival of the Gloucestershire magistrates to spoil the fun.
The first contingent from Evesham, some 200 strong, arrived at the north end of the tunnel at 3 a.m. on Monday, and the Battle of Mickleton began. It is difficult to gather from contemporary narratives just what did occur in the course of the argument, during which reinforcements to Brunel’s Army kept pouring in from all quarters till at last it was 2,000 strong.
According to one account several
heads and limbs were broken, some shoulders dislocated, and one hero, who
produced a pistol, ’was seized upon and his skull nearly severed in two’ with a
shovel.
However, no one seems to have been killed, and
eventually ’Marchant finding that all attempts at resistance were useless, from
the vast majority in numbers of his opponents, gave in, and he and Mr Brunel
adjourned in order to come to some amicable settlement’; and arbitration by
Messrs Stephenson and Cubitt was agreed upon.
So the battle was over before the arrival of the troops from Coventry, who had been sent for to aid the police. In their August Report the Directors asserted that they had taken possession of Contract ’without absolute violence or injury to any individual, though the menacing conduct of the Contractor at one time rendered such an issue probable’.
The tunnel was at last completed in the spring of 1852.
So the battle was over before the arrival of the troops from Coventry, who had been sent for to aid the police. In their August Report the Directors asserted that they had taken possession of Contract ’without absolute violence or injury to any individual, though the menacing conduct of the Contractor at one time rendered such an issue probable’.
The tunnel was at last completed in the spring of 1852.
The Battle of Mickleton Tunnel took
place in the Vale of Evesham in 1851 when Brunel's private army of 3,000
navvies fought the army of a disgruntled contractor who was backed by the
forces of the local magistrates and armed police. The contractor,
Mudge-Marchant, had stopped work on the tunnel as he was owed £34,000 by the
Oxford, Worcester & Wolverhampton Railway (commonly known as “The Old Worse
and Worse”). Brunel, as company engineer, had been instructed to evict
Mudge-Marchant and his men who had commandeered the site
Reference “History
of the Great Western Railway Volume I 1833-1863” by E.T. MacDermot
Another strong fact has emerged from researching the
relationships with the Spry Family and then the Mudge Family, and that is that
when contemplating a marriage partner, that consideration was given to one's
"social" standing. Military
marriages were extremely common, sons and daughters of Generals and Admirals,
or other high officials, were sought after, as were members of the clergy.
But in the case of William
Kingdom's daughters, that transcended into inventors, engineers, and spouses
who made a tremendous contribution to World social history. Their achievements are so well known, their
names held in very high regard within their chosen fields. Buildings and other structures are named in
their honour.
The Kingdom sisters are
1. 1. Jane 1757
2. Mary 1762 - 1856 m Dr Thomas Stewart Eminent Surgeon
3. Ann 1764 - 1853 m Captain Stephen Rains
4. Elizabeth 1768 - 1856 m Thomas Mudge
5. Sarah 1772 - 1861 m Thomas Dutton
6. Sophia 1775 - 1858 m Marc Isambard Brunel
2. Mary 1762 - 1856 m Dr Thomas Stewart Eminent Surgeon
3. Ann 1764 - 1853 m Captain Stephen Rains
4. Elizabeth 1768 - 1856 m Thomas Mudge
5. Sarah 1772 - 1861 m Thomas Dutton
6. Sophia 1775 - 1858 m Marc Isambard Brunel
They were the children of William
Kingdom and his wife Joan Spry.
They also had five brothers
1. 1. Edward 1760 - 1848 was a solicitor and died at Bath UK
2. William 1763 - 1837 m Hephzibah Dutton
3. John 1767 - 1851 m Mary Sparshott (no information) maybe a Tailor
4. Benny Spry Kingdom 1768 - 1779
5. Samuel 1769 - 1788
2. William 1763 - 1837 m Hephzibah Dutton
3. John 1767 - 1851 m Mary Sparshott (no information) maybe a Tailor
4. Benny Spry Kingdom 1768 - 1779
5. Samuel 1769 - 1788
All the children were baptised at
St Andrew's Church Plymouth, the same Church that Dr John Mudge and Rev
Zachariah Mudge were buried, and no doubt, all were known and acquainted with,
in the Parish.
The Kingdom sisters were the
daughter of William Kingdom. Their father was Chief Clerk of the Victualling
office in London.
In the 17th century a Victualling Yard was established, independent of
but adjacent to the main dockyard, to supply and victual the navy's warships. In 1743 the
Victualling
Commissioners
took the decision to move their main depot to Deptford from Tower Hill, and they embarked on the
construction of new facilities on the site: a cooperage, storehouses,
slaughterhouses and facilities for baking and brewing.
In 1858 it was renamed the Royal
Victoria Victualling Yard.
The whole family married
"well", so one might ask, how did that come about? William Kingdom, must have been a man of
social standing within the Plymouth area.
He also held substantial land holdings.
No comments:
Post a Comment