Introduction
For many years the Richins Surname Association has searched for the marriage record for Thomas Richins and Sarah and the christening dates of their two sons, Thomas and Henry. So far, we have failed to find them.
Thomas was the son of John Richins and Ann King. He and his brother William were christened at Hawkesbury, Gloucestershire, England on November 22, 1727. Apparently twins, they were born into a family that consisted of eight children. An older brother, John, and a sister, Mary, preceded them and they were followed by a younger brother, Richard and three sisters—Elizabeth, Ann and Sarah. The family lived at Hawkesbury the early part of Thomas’ and William’s lives. Hawkesbury was a rural village and the church was the center of activity. Even the whipping post and stocks were placed near the church so the people could see the lawbreakers punished and heed the warning. The felons received little sympathy from the townspeople, who would gather to jeer and taunt them, or even make a sport out of throwing rotten eggs at the captives. Even the poor vagrant tied to the whipping post sometimes received his 20 lashes to the cheer of unsympathetic onlookers. The trials and hardships of their time caused people to harden their feelings so not to be overcome.
With no newspapers, telephones or radios, the church bells were the voice of the village. If they clanged vigorously, it was a warning of danger, such as fire, flooding or a call for volunteers. The chimes each Sabbath called the people to worship. The bells rang to announce a wedding or tolled mournfully for a death. Their cheerful ringing announced the opening of the fair or the beginning of the holidays.
There were two turnpike roads leading into Hawkesbury. One came from Bath, a popular health resort with warm mineral waters believed to cure many ailments. This road led north to Gloucester and on to Cheltenham. The other turnpike came from Bristol and continued on to Oxford. In good weather, the people of the village could see the travelers passing through the parish on their way to the larger cities and towns.
The Lord & His Manor
Most of the English farmlands were still under the manorial system, which had gone through many changes since the days of the Feudal Lords when serfs were little more than slaves of the Manor. Though the days of the serfs were long past, there were still laws the Lord of the Manor held over the people of his Manor. No one could sell land or homes without the consent of the Lord and Lady of the Manor.
The tenant farmers were still bound to the Manor and could not leave without consent from the Lord. There was a time when they could not go out of the limits of the Manor without being fined or put in jail. Some of these restrictions were gradually eased or rescinded, but some remained. People could not build a cottage without license or consent from the Lord. The tenant farmers elected a Reeve who presented their complaints in a Manor Court. The Lord was usually represented by his Bailiff or Steward.
The land of the Manor was divided into four classes:
- Deminse: Land the Lord kept for family use. He hired an Overseer to supervise this home farm.
- Tenant Land: Land leased or rented to his tenant farmers.
- Commons: Land set aside for the tenant farmers to pasture a few head of cattle or sheep.
- True Hold Land: Land free of rent or lease; freemen could purchase a tenure of this land to hold under the Lord and Lady of the Manor.
A tenure was the length of time a person desired and could be handed down to the heirs of the family upon paying a death fee or giving a gift to the Lord and Lady of the Manor. Freemen usually inherited this privilege from one of their ancestors who had served the King as a Knight. They were called freemen, but they were still obligated to give service to the King in case of riots or invasion.
The Industrial Revolution
Life in England changed under the explosion of the Industrial Revolution—first, water-powered mills replaced the hand looms. Weavers who had earned their living by weaving at home were put out of work and angrily marched against the mills, intent on destroying them. However, they failed to stop the progress of the emerging industrialization. Then steam engine revolutionized the mills and factories. The water-powered mills had difficulty keeping up, so industry began centering around cities rather than country streams.
As people sought work in villages by the mills and factories, housing became scarce. As a result, small cottages were divided to accommodate several families under very crowded conditions. Some found shelter in people’s attics and some even lived in cellars. The crowded situation resulted in unsanitary conditions, which fostered the rise and spread of epidemics and plagues.
Villages grew into cities as mills and factories sprung up along the streams used to power them. Stagecoaches began to run between larger cities to better facilitate the transportation of merchandise and people, but the roads were not suited for such traffic. Better roads were in dire need.
New farming methods were introduced, so agriculture began to flourish. Turnips were introduced to feed cattle during the winter months, which was a great benefit to the farmers, such as John and Ann.
George III was King of England, but he was not universally liked. Many thought he had blundered in handling the American Colonies, who were fighting for their independence. During all the changes, Hawkesbury and Horton, being farming communities rather than industrial centers, were left quite untouched.
John Richins was a freeman and purchased a tenure of land and a home in Horton. He was known as a yeoman, meaning a gentleman farmer with a small estate in the country. John moved to Horton sometime between 1738 and 1744. Thomas and William were in their teens. After moving to Horton, a tragedy struck the family when John, the eldest son, died at the age of 21 years.
William became the apparent heir. He stayed at Horton and inherited his father’s property. He married Elizabeth (Betty), but we have not found the marriage entry to discover her maiden name. There were no children born to them and at his death in 1801, he left the property to his wife Betty. In his will he mentions the property that belonged to his father, John Richins, under the Lord and Lady of the Manor.
Painswick, Gloucestershire, England
Thomas apparently did not stay at Horton, as his name never appears in any of the records. He was probably receiving training in a trade in another Parish. It is my belief he was trained to become a Bailiff or Steward or an Overseer to supervise the estate of a gentleman. He must have remained a bachelor until his late 30’s, as he was 40 when Thomas was born and 42 when Henry was born.
From his father’s will we learned that Thomas had married and had two sons, Thomas and Henry. Although we have not yet found their christening records, we have discovered when they were born. Thomas was 24 when he was married in 1701, making his birth year 1767. From Henry’s age at death and other entries we know he was born in 1769.
When their grandfather, John Richins, made his will, Thomas (the younger) was about nine years old and Henry about seven years old. Although the rest of the grandchildren received their inheritance when the will was proven, Thomas and Henry were not to receive theirs until they were 21 years.
Thomas Richins (the elder) and Thomas Davis were the executors of the will in 1778. Thomas received his 20 pounds along with his living brothers and sisters, except for William, who received one shilling, as he already had his share in the property. One shilling was the legal amount required by law to be left to an heir so a will could not be contested.
After Thomas proved the will, executed the requirements of the will and divided the remaining inheritance between Thomas Davis and himself, he seems to disappear from the records for twelve years. At that point, he and his family—wife Sarah and sons Thomas and Henry—were well established in Painswick, Gloucestershire, England.
The first entry for the Richins family in Painswick is the burial of Sarah Richins, wife of Thomas Richins. She was buried May 28, 1790. John Masley was the Vicar of Painswick at this time. Thomas became a widower at the age of 63, and his two sons, Thomas and Henry, were young men of 23, and 21. Both should have received their grandfather’s inheritance of 5 pounds each.
About a year later another entry appears—the marriage of Thomas (the younger) by license. The allegation of the marriage on March 7, 1791 lists Thomas as a yeoman, age 24, a bachelor of Painswick and Ann Wilkins as a spinster, age 21. They were married two days later on March 9, 1791. It was a surprise to see that Thomas was a yeoman at age 24. Did he buy land with his inheritance or did he inherit it from his father? To find the answer, I asked our researcher in England to check the land tax record to see when Thomas had purchased the property or if he had inherited it from his father. The findings only raised additional questions regarding how Thomas acquired the land.
The researcher found Thomas’ brother, William, on the land tax record in Horton in 1792 and 1795, but there were no records of a Richins in Painswick or Sheepscombe, Stroud, etc. However, a Mr. Hitchins was found on a Tocknell estate in 1794. I believe that this Mr. Hitchins is our ancestor, Thomas Richins for the following reasons:· The Gloucestershire dialect added “H” to many words and names and deleted the “H” from words starting with “H.” · John Richins was listed in his son-in-law’s will as John Hitchins and Thomas’ sister was listed as Hitchins on her marriage record.
The land tax record of Bisley Hundred, which encompasses the Parish Painswick, among others, listed the following for the Tocknell estate:
| Proprietor (legal owner) | Occupier (to dwell in) |
| Mrs. Newland for Tocknell | Herself and Mr. Hitchins |
I researched the Tocknell family in earlier years, as they are ancestors of the Richins-Wager line. The Tocknell family owned a large mill on the Painswick stream near Gardners at Damsell. They built a large mansion home nearby. In the 1670s Edward Tocknell lived at Tocknell, but he also had holdings in Bristol.
Edward had a daughter, Elizabeth, born in 1696/1697. She married George Newland, a merchant from Bristol. They inherited Tocknell and made alterations to the home. Their grandson, George Newland, inherited Tocknell and lived there. According to the history of Painswick, he was sincerely loved. He married Elizabeth Chapel. He died January 5, 1791. Elizabeth, Chapel Newland, his widow, was the Mrs. Newland, owner of Tocknell mentioned above. For Mr. Hitchins to be dwelling at the residence indicates he was probably the Overseer of the estate.
An Overseer supervised and hired the labor to run the deminse farm, oversaw the tenant farmers and made sure they paid their rent or lease and they kept the property in good condition, repair, etc.
I have not discovered if Locke was part of Tocknell or a separate property, as they did not name a proprietor, only an occupier. Was this the same Mr. Hitchins or were there two? England gave names to homes and farms, such as Castle Hale, Sheephouse, Ludloes, etc. Land received names, such as Washbrook, Samsell, Ebworth, etc.
Additional evidence that Thomas might have been the Overseer is the fact that fathers usually taught their first son their trade. Although Thomas (son) was listed as a yeoman in his marriage allegation (1791), he became an Overseer in 1823.
The third entry for the Richins family is the final chapter of Thomas’ life—he was buried at Painswick May 23, 1801.
The few entries for Thomas Richins leave much unknown about his life, but they are tantalizing and build up a curiosity to know more. The Richins Surname Association will continue to seek for his marriage record to find Sarah’s maiden name and to find the christening dates of Thomas and Henry.
Thomas Richins & Ann Wilkins
Thomas, son of Thomas and Sarah Richins, was born sometime in the year 1767. He came to Painswick with his parents and was married by license to Ann Wilkins. The allegation did not show who paid the bond, but it listed Thomas as a yeoman of Painswick, a bachelor, age 24. The allegation was dated May 7, 1791. It listed Ann Wilkins as a spinster, age 21. She was the daughter of William and Mary Wilkins. The legal age for people to be married without their parents being present to give their consent was 21 years of age. However, Ann’s christening record indicates she was 19 or 20 at most. She was christened at Trocester December 6, 1772. Perhaps it was easier to list the legal age than to have her parents come to Painswick to be present to give their consent. Her age at death agrees with the date of the christening.
Thomas and Ann were married May 9, 1791 by the Reverend Mosely. They had six children christened at Painswick. Their first son was christened July 3, 1791 and named William after Ann’s father. Just a year later, another son was christened Thomas after his father July 4, 1792. This made three generations named Thomas. A daughter, Elizabeth, was christened January 24, 1794. She was followed by Mary Ann, who was christened July 20, 1796. John, their third son, was christened February 3, 1798. Harriet, the last child, was christened March 26, 1800.
The Vicar listed Thomas as an Overseer in 1799. An Overseer had to be mobile, as he might need to travel to oversee several estates held by the gentleman, move to another property to live and work or move with the family to various estates. Thomas’ many locations provide further indication that he was an Overseer. This would also explain the scattered deaths of the family:· Thomas’ wife, Ann, died at Cricklade, St. Samson, in the county of Wiltshire, age 47. Her body was returned to Painswick for burial February 10, 1819.· The youngest daughter died at Brimscombe, Gloucestershire, age 18 and she was buried at Painswick March 10, 1819.
Thomas died at Churcham. This is many miles northwest of Painswick. His body was also returned to Painswick and buried October 28, 1835. His age at death was in error, as they reversed the numbers and had 76 instead of 67, which agrees with his age on his marriage license, while 76 does not. It also would make 11 years between Thomas and Henry instead of two years, which is more reasonable and fits other information.
The fact that Thomas could afford to bring the bodies back to Painswick to be buried indicates he was earning a higher than average wage.
