Person:John Ingram (43)

John Ingram was baptised on 28th July 1740 at Grantham in Lincolnshire, son of Margaret Ingram, formerly Stevens, and her husband Joseph Ingram, a miller. The family lived at Manthorpe, a hamlet to the north of the town itself.

John's father died in 1762.

On 1st September 1772, aged 32, John married Elizabeth Ball at Sleaford, about thirteen miles north-east of Grantham. Their marriage describes John as being a miller of Harrowby in the parish of Grantham. John and Elizabeth returned to the Grantham area after their marriage, living for some time at Manthorpe.

In 1774 John's uncle, John Ingram, died. The elder John was also a miller from Manthorpe. He appears to have had no children, instead leaving his estate to be split between his servants, the children of his niece Mary (this John's older sister), and John. John was left one hundred pounds in money, a house, a watermill, some pasture land at Londonthorpe and the four horses and two cows which were kept in it.

Between 1773 and 1783 John and Elizabeth they had six sons, four of whom were baptised at Grantham, and the other two at nearby Ingoldsby. Four of the boys died young: three as babies and their eldest when he was only six years old, being buried on the same day in 1779 as one of his baby brothers. Three of the boys were buried at Great Gonerby, just west of Manthorpe. John's mother also died in 1779.

Elizabeth died at the age of 33. She was buried at Great Gonerby on 7th April 1783.

Just over two years later, John married again. His second wife was Mary Tow, and they married on 21st July 1785 at Grantham. Their marriage also records that they lived at Spittlegate, a hamlet to the south of Grantham.

John and Mary went on to have a daughter named Elizabeth in 1787, whose baptism still records the family as living at Spittlegate. She was followed by a daughter Mary in 1788, then Ann in 1792, and Richard in 1793. None of the younger children's baptisms record a specific place of abode. In 1794 the family had to face the loss of two of the children: Richard died as a baby and was buried in the March, then Mary died aged five and was buried in July.

John rented land at Spittlegate on which he built a post windmill, which he operated himself for a time, then let out to others before finally selling it. The purchaser removed the mill from the land - it was not fixed to the ground, a point which would later prove significant.

The family clearly faced hard times in the mid 1790s, and had to claim poor relief from the parish authorities. The Grantham authorities decided that the family was not their responsibility, and managed to secure a removal order from the local magistrates to have the family removed to the neighbouring parish of Londonthorpe. No record has been found which makes clear why Londonthorpe was considered their place of settlement. Perhaps the land John had inherited there was valuable enough to make Londonthorpe their legal place of settlement. In 1795 the parish authorities in Londonthorpe went to court to appeal the removal order, claiming that John's short-lived windmill in Grantham had added sufficient value to the land he rented to transfer his legal place of settlement to Grantham. The court disagreed. Had the windmill been fixed to the ground, it would indeed have affected the value of the land, but because it had not been fixed to the ground it was irrelevant to the assessment of the value of the land. One of the judges commented that the windmill was "no more a tenement than a large coffee-mill put up by the tenant in his house". Therefore John's legal place of settlement had not transferred to Grantham and so it was indeed Londonthorpe's duty to pay the family's poor relief.

Also in 1795, the family had a son called George baptised at Grantham. Although the family was removed from Grantham to Londonthorpe, they seem to have continued having their children baptised at Grantham, having another daughter called Mary baptised there in 1797. In 1798, their son George died aged three years old and was buried at Grantham. John and Mary's final child was a boy called Charles, baptised at Grantham in 1800. In all, John and Mary appear to have had seven children together, only four of whom survived to adulthood.

In 1811, John's eldest daughter Elizabeth had a son, who is John's first known grandchild.

In 1814, John's daughter Mary was married at Londonthorpe, suggesting the family did end up living there.

John's wife Mary died in 1815, when she was said to be sixty years old. She was buried at Londonthorpe on 22nd December 1815.

John survived Mary by about eighteen months, in which time he appears to have gone to live at Foston, where his daughter Elizabeth lived with her husband. John was buried at Foston on 19th June 1817, when he was about 77 years old. He had lived to see at least four grandchildren born in his lifetime.

1. ↑ Church of England. Parish Church of Grantham (Lincolnshire). Parish registers, 1562-1990. (Lincoln, England: Lincolnshire Archives Office, 1993).

   Baptisms 1740 / July / 28 / John Son of Joseph and Marga[ret] Ingram} Manthorpe

   This baptism has been linked to the John Ingram who married Elizabeth Ball and Mary Tow on the basis that it is in the same parish as that in which John spent much of his adult life and the adult John worked as a miller, which was also the occupation of Joseph. John also appears to have been named in his uncle John Ingram's will, written in August 1772, which makes bequests to his "kinsman John Ingram of Harrowby... Miller". When John married Elizabeth Ball the following month he was also described as being a miller of Harrowby. His uncle's will also leaves bequests to the children of Thomas Lowe. Whilst Thomas's wife is not named in the will, it can be shown that she was Mary Ingram, older sister of the John baptised in 1740.

2.   Term Reports in the Court of King's Bench from Michaelmas Term, 35th George III 1794 to Trinity Term, 36th George III 1796, Volume VI (Charles Durnford and Edward Hyde East, London, 1802), Google Books, accessed 9 Jul 2019
   Page 377.

   1795
   Saturday June 20th
   The KING against The Inhabitants of LONDONTHORPE.
   
   A pauper rented land in A of the annual value of 6l. 10s. 6d, and built on part of it a post-wind-mill at the expence of 120l. which by agreement with his landlord he was to be at liberty to remove at pleasure; he let the mill for a part of the time at the rent of 9l. per annum: held that this was not the taking of a tenement of 10l. a year, and consequently that the pauper gained no settlement in A.
   
   The pauper John Ingram, his wife and family, were removed by an order of two justices from Grantham to Londonthorpe (a), both in the county of Lincoln, and on appeal the order was confirmed, subject to the opinion of this Court on the following case. J. Ingram miller took a tenement in the hamlet of Spittlegate in the parish of Grantham in the county of Lincoln at six pounds a-year, in which he resided near three years, and the greater part of that time rented of the lord of the manor of Spittlegate a piece of waste ground in the hamlet at the yearly rent of 10s. 6d upon which he had the privilege of building a post-wind-mill, and which he was to be at liberty to remove at pleasure. He accordingly built a post-wind-mill upon that ground at the expence of 120l. and worked it for about three quarters of a year, but rented the ground for two years and a half, the greatest part of which time the mill was standing thereon. The mill was constructed upon cross traces, laid upon brick pillars, but not attached or affixed thereto, which is the usual mode of building mills of that nature. And the mill was considered as the property of the tenant. He let it to one Jackson for a quarter of a year, at the rate of 9l. per annum, during which time the pauper resided in the said tenement of the rent of 6l. per annum. The pauper afterwards sold the said mill as a chattel interest, and it was taken away by the purchaser without any interruption of the landlord; no rates were ever paid or demanded for the mill, or the ground on which it stood. The question for the opinion of the Court is, whether the pauper by living upon his tenement of 6l. a year, and renting the piece of land at 10s. 6d., and afterwards building and working the mill for the time aforesaide, and letting the same for a part of the term as above stated, as to be considered as holding 10l. a year, and to have gained a settlement either in respect thereof, or as having purchased an interest in the said hamlet of the value of 30l., and residing in the said hamlet at the same time for above the space of forty days.
   Garrow and Yates, in support of the order of Sessions, contended that the pauper gained no settlement in Grantham, either by the purchase of an estate there for the consideration of 30l., or by renting a tenement of 10l per annum; not the first, because he purchased no interest in land; the 120l. being expended in erecting a moveable chattel; nor the latter, because he only rented and interest in land of the annual value of 6l. 10s. 6d.; the constructing of the post-wind-mill was no addition to the value of the land, it being a mere chattel removeable by the tenant.
   Balguy, contra, abandoned the first point, but argued that a settlement was gained in Grantham by the pauper renting a tenement of 10l. a year there. It is stated that he first rented 6l. per annum then 10s. 6d., then 9l. per annum, the last being the sum for which the mill was afterwards let by the tenant himself. This may be considered to be the taking of a tenement of 10l. per annum on the same principle on which it has been held that the renting of a rabbit warren (a), or a land sale colliery (b), is the taking of a tenement; for in neither of those cases was the land alone of sufficient value to confer a settlement; in the one case the value of the rabbits, and in the other the value of the horses, gins, ropes, and other chattels merely for working the mines, was added to make up the amount required. So here as long as the mill continued on the land, the whole together exceeded the annual value of 10l. And notwithstanding the mill was afterwards removed by the tenant, it had remained there long enough to give him a settlement. Upon the whole it appears that he did not go into the parish of Grantham in a state of vagrancy, but was of sufficient ability to take a tenement of the value required by the statute of Charles the Second.
   Lord KENYON Ch.J. There is no doubt but that the taking of a wind-mill attached to the ground of the value of of 10l. a year will confer a settlement; a praecipe will liefor such a wind-mill. The taking of a rabbit-warren was also held to give a settlement, because it was a tenement; and so in the case of the land sale colliery. But this wind-mill, as described in the case, is nothing but a chattel. And if in questions of this kind we were merely to consider the ability of the pauper, without at the same time considering whether he rented a tenement, we should abandon the statute altogether and the decisions upon it. It might as well be said the an iron malt-mill would give a settlement. This post-wind-mill was the sole property of the tenent himself; and it was not fixed in the ground, but detached from it. But in order to confer a settlement it should be so connected with the land as, in legal contemplation, to fall within the description of a tenement.
   GROSE J. This mill was a mere chattel, and was the property of the tenant, and not of the landlord. And it is no more a tenement than a large coffee-mill put up by the tenant in his house.
   Order of Sessions confirmed.
   
   (a) It was not stated in the case that the pauper had gained any settlement in Londonthorpe: but it is presumed the fact was so, and was so proved at the sessions: otherwise this question could not have arisen between these two parties.
   (a) Kinver v. Stone, I Str. 678; and R. v. Piddletrenthide, ant, 3 Vol. 772.
   (b) R. v. North Bedburn, 2 Const's Bott. 155.

3. ↑ Burials register, in Church of England. Parish Church of Foston (Lincolnshire). Parish registers, 1776-1940. (Lincoln, England: Lincolnshire Archives Office, 1993).

   BURIALS in the Parish of Foston in the County of Lincoln in the Year 1817
   No.	Name	Abode	When buried	Age	By whom the Ceremony was performed
   30	John Ingram	Foston	1817 19th June	80 years [1736/7]	Rev[eren]d G. Lawton