Line in Record @I1073@ (RIN 283394) from GEDCOM file not recognized:
OCCU a motor engineer
Alfred was an only child.He never married nad had no children.
He was bandmaster of Liskeard Silver Band for many years. A photograph in the Cornish Times of 27 Mar 1987 showed the band, taken on 2 Apr 1939, which included Bandmaster AC (Cecil) Repper, H Repper (Herbert Repper) of March in Cambridgeshire and E (Ernest) Repper. Winifred Vera Stanlake believes that Herbert and Ernest were brothers to one another and cousins to Alfred Cecil Repper.
During his term as bandmaster (December 1937 to 1954) the band won two prizes at Exeter in the West of England Championships. In 1946 they won fourth prize in the third section, and in 1947, under Mr CH Baker of St Austell, who took over while Mr Repper was indisposed, they gained third prize.
Supplied much of the information for this apat of the tree to Colin Squires CFHS#5353 who passed it on to me by letter 27/12/1993.
Line in Record @I1080@ (RIN 283401) from GEDCOM file not recognized:
OCCU a blende miner
1871 census - Perranzabuloe - District 22 Schedule 059:
* John Collins Repper (head, lead miner) aged 20.
* Grace Repper (wife) aged 24
* Mary Repper (daughter) aged 2
* Richard Repper (son) aged 11 months
* Mary A Hicks (boarder) aged 9
* Harriet Hicks (boarder) aged 8.Living in Perranzabuloe in 1881 census with family. John was aged 38 and a blende miner.
In the 1881 census Grace is recorded as aged 34 and at home with family.
In the 1881 census John is listed as aged 10, a scholar and at home with his family.
In the 1881 census William is listed as aged 6 and at home with his family in Perranzabuloe.
Doris was mentally handicapped.
Vi remained unmarried.
It is possible that Willam and Margaret had a fourth child, Henry Gilbert (bp. 1797).
The 1841 census for Gunwalloe shows William aged 75 living with Mary (aged 50, born Kea Cornwall) along with Richard aged 4 and Joseph aged 3. The 1841 census shows no family relationships and rounds ages to the nearest five years.
The 1851 census shows Mary (I have no evidence as to whether she was cited as being Head of Household) but not as a widow. She is living with her two sons, Richard & Joseph.
Beth Morcombe's research suggests the following scenario:
* At sometime after the death of Margaret, William Gilbert (b1763) remarried at the age of 73 to Mary Allen in 1836. No place is given for the marriage but a precise date of 17th January 1836 is shown. A review of the marriage entry would be worthwhile, if the place could be found. Until the exact register with the marriage entry can be located the marriage must be regarded as evidence requiring confirmation.
* They had two children after 1836. The children were Richard born in 1837 and Josephus born in 1838.
Whilst it is not impossible it is for William to have been the father of the children at the age of 73 it is somewhat medically improbable. It is also more likely that Mary would have married somebody closer in age to herself.
The relative strength of the evidence has prompted me to consider a more reasonable scenario. The following scenario fits the known information and may be more likely.
* William Gilbert (b1763) had a son William Gilbert (b1787).
* The William who married Mary Allen was William Gilbert who was born in 1787.
* William Gilbert (b1787) and his wife Mary lived with their children and with William's father - William Gilbert (b1763).
* The 1841 census shows William Gilbert aged 75; Mary (probably his daughter-in-law) aged 50; Richard aged 4 and Joseph aged 3, both being the children of William (b1787) and Mary.
* William (b1787) was not at home for the 1841 census.
* As there is no Margaret Gilbert aged about 75 shown here in the 1841 census, it is likely that she had died before the census was taken and that William (b1763 was a widower).
* The 1851 census shows Mary (I have no evidence as to whether she was cited as being Head of Household) but not as a widow. She is living with her two sons, Richard & Joseph.
* William (b1787) was not at home for the 1851 census.
* By 1851 William Gilbert (b1763) had died.If this scenario is shown to be correct the families of Richard & Joseph would be direct descendants of the Repper line, rather than the Allen family.
On balance, the second of these two options more closely fits the facts as known, bearing in mind the ages and reproductive capabilities of the two Williams and Mary. Until this has been proven one way or another and in order to determine the most likely family relationships I have elected to use this second option as more likely.
Beth Morcombe has been searching for the parents of Margaret Repper for many years. So far she has not been able to find them.
She writes "My research for the REPPER family has drawn a complete blank - on the IGI Margaret is registered by William GILBERT (her husband), it says she was born about 1765 in Helston, Cornwall. The only explanation for this that I can think of would be she was born out of wedlock and never registered by her parent(s), consequently she could not have married until she was recorded as being born! So her William husband did this." She also expresses scepticism about her assumption.
I believe her assumption may not be far from the truth. We must take the statement that Margaret was born about 1765 in Helston as fact. There is no reason to doubt her name, no reason why the place is incorrect, her husband was very specific in naming his residence as Gunwalloe. He was born in 1763 and for her to be of a similar age, albeit just about two years younger, is customary. The fact that her birthdate is not specifically known may be an indication that her parent(s) did not consider this as being an auspicious date. Indeed, in the religious atmosphere of the time it was usual to consider baptism as more important date as the date of entering God's House.
In Helston in the mid 1700's there were few people and the parish registers recording their baptisms, marriages and burials are quite comprehensive. The number of people capable of having a child Margaret Repper in 1765 is limited by circumstances of age and the birth of other children.
The Repper families with the potential to give birth to Margaret are:
* Alexander & Phillipa Repper, but they didn't marry until 1769, following the death of Phillipa's first husband after 1765, when their third child William Guy was born. This family is unlikely to have been the parents of Margaret.
* Benjamin & Susannah Repper. They had children in the years leading up to 1764, in 1764 and 1767. There is a gap in the family to accommodate the birth of a daughter. Benjamin & Susannah were assiduous about their children being baptised, all their known offspring having been entered into God's House soon after birth. It is unlikely that they would have not baptised one healthy child who was likely to survive into adulthood.
* Benjamin & Ann Repper. The same argument regarding the baptism of their children applies as it does to Benjamin & Susannah, as they too baptised all their children as infants. They also had a child in 1765 and the years immediately either side. It is not possible to find a period of time for Ann's fertility to be capable of producing another child.
* Richard & Jane had been having children up to 1751, but none at all after that. 15 years to wait for another child seems too long. They too baptised their children as infants.
* William & Mary had been producing children up 1761 and another child would fit into their family, but once again all their children had been baptised at a young age.
* William & Margaret seem to be the most likely parents, potentially naming their child Margaret after the child's mother. William & Margaret did have a daughter whom they named Margaret buit the child was buried in October 1766, with no capacity in the fertility cycle of the mother to have another child called Margaret in the date range suggested for the Margaret we are searching for. All their children were baptised at a very young age.
As there are no more potential Repper families, the Repper unmarried females with the potential to give birth to Margaret are:
* Phillipa Repper was born in 1746 and no further details are known about her. No known children exist. It is possible she had died at a young age and this would warrant further investigation in the parish burial register.
* Prudence Repper, the daughter of William & Ruth had two children, whose baptisms are not recorded, but whose burials are recorded in 1759 and 1762, one of them shown as a bastard. It seems that Prudence's children are not baptised as being born outside wedlock they are not worthy of entry into the church of the time. This was the circumstance that Margaret found herself in when marrying William Gilbert in 1786.
There are no other potential mothers for Margaret in this small community and following the above rationale I have associated Margaret as the daughter of Prudence.
Prudence had at least two children who died as infants, bearing their mother's name, presumably as she was unmarried. A third child survived into adulthood, Margaret. The rationale behind linking Margaret to Prudence as her daughter is shown in Margaret's notes.
William, son of Prudence Ripper, was buried (probably as a child - the mother's name being mentioned) but no corresponding baptism entry seems to exist, on 19 Oct 1759.
Her second child, Prudence, was buried, also at Helston on 18 Apr 1759.
In the Helston Overseers Accounts for 1759 is the following entry "To a woman stripping Ripper's base child, deceased 1s 6d"