Name: Louisa Freeman
Burial Number: 0069
Gender: Female
Occupation: Laundress
Born: 00/00/1827
Died: 16/9/1882
Buried: 16/09/1882
Story
Louisa was born in 1827 in Arundel Sussex to George and Mary Meyers. In 1841 Mary was living with her family in Shipyard Arundel, Louisa’s Father was working as a labourer.
Louisa married Samuel Freeman (born 1826 Durrington Sussex) on 11th December 1848 (The marriage certificate shows the name Freeland instead of Freeman). Samuel was working as a shoemaker.
They had 6 children –
George Samuel Freeman born 1850 died 1873
Barbara Frances Freeman born 1853 died 1921 married William Powell on 28th Jan 1877
Rose Ann Freeman born 1854 married Robert Bailey in 1876
William Edward Freeman born 1859 died 1881
Thomas Henry Freeman born 1862 died 1912
Albert James Freeman born 1864 died 1891
By 1851 Louisa and Samuel are living with Samuel’s Grandparents at 7 Paragon Street Worthing and Samuel is still working as a shoemaker. Samuel only got occasional work as a shoemaker and was relatively poor.
In 1861 they are living at 1 Rob Roy Square Broadwater
In 1871 they are living in Norfolk Street.
By 1881 Louisa is living at 13 Chapel Street she is still married but Samuel does not appear to be with them, she is working as a laundress.
Louisa died on 16th September 1882.
In 1891 Samuel is living at 47 Chapel Street, Samuel is still a Shoemaker and his son Albert who is living with him is a Shoeblack. Both are described as ‘imbeciles’
In 1901 Samuel is now aged 76 and living in the East Preston Workhouse, he is described as feeble minded
Samuel died in 1908
Researcher: Jackie Rooney
The Grave
Location in Cemetery
Area: Unknown Row: Unknown Plot: Unknown
Exact Location (what3words): rate.pest.select
Ashes or Urn: Unknown
Headstone
Description:
None Found
Inscription:
None Found
Further Information
Birth
Name: Louisa Freeman
Gender: Female
Born: 00/00/1827
Town: Arundel
County: Sussex
Country: England
Marriage
Maiden Name:Meyers
Marriage Date: 11/12/1848
Spouse First Name: Samuel
Spouse Last Name: Freeman
Town of Marriage: Unknown
County of Marriage: Unknown
Country of Marriage: England
Information at Death
Date of Death: 16/9/1882
Cause of death: Unknown
Address line 2: 13
Address line 3: Chapel Street
Town: Worthing
County: Sussex
Country: England
Obituary
No obituary has been entered.
Personal Effects
Money left to others: No value recorded
Current value of effects: Not calculated
Census Information
1841
Ship Yard Arundel Sussex
George Meyers (age 44,) Mary (age 46), Edward (age 18), Sarah (age 17), Louisa (age 14), Mary (age 6), William (age 2) Fanny (age 8)
1851
7 Paragon Street Worthing
Samuel Bartlet (Head) age 67, Ann (Wife) age 66, Samuel Freeman (Grandson) age 25, Louisa (Granddaughter in Law) age 24, George (great Grandson (age 1)
1861
1 Rob Roy Square Broadwater Worthing Sussex
Samuel Freeman (Head) age 27?, Louisa (Wife) age 26?, Samuel (Son) age 11, Barbara (Daughter) age 8, Rose Ann (Daughter) age 7, William (Son) age 2
1871
Norfolk Street Worthing Sussex
Samuel Freeman (Head) age 46, Louisa (Wife) age 46, Barbara (Daughter) age 18, Rose (Daughter) age 17, William (Son) age 13, Thomas (son) age 9, Albert (Son) age 7
1881
13 Chapel Street Worthing Sussex
Louisa Freeman (Head) age 54, William (Son) age 24, Albert (Son) age 16
1891
47 Chapel Street Worthing Sussex
Samuel Freeman (Head) age 70, Albert (Son) age 20
1901
East Preston Workhouse
Samuel Freeman age 76
Miscellaneous Information
West Sussex Gazette 14th June 1855
Samuel Freeman v Zephaniah Greenfield – A charge of assault.
Mr Greenfield, in answer to the charge, said, I did strike him under great provocation.
Chairperson – Perhaps you had better plead not guilty then.
Mr Greenfield – Not guilty
The facts were briefly as follows:- the plaintiff, who is a shoemaker, and in poor circumstances, suspected the defendant with having told the parish board that he could earn 12s. a week. Three of four weeks ago complainant went to the board, as usual, for relief, which was refused; he afterwards saw the defendant in the shop of Mr Tate, a shoemaker, who occasionally employs the complainant, and charged him with having told the Board. Defendant denied it repeatedly, when complainant called him a false man, and a liar. Defendant told him if he called him so again he would hit him, and as he did so defendant spat his face with his open hand, upon which the complainant pulled off his coat, and threatened the defendant, calling him hideous names. The defendant then again spat his face, and set him on to the floor. A tussle ensued and, to use the complainants expression, the defendant “throated him with all his might and main.” The complainant’s own version disclosed a very great amount of provocation, whilst his witness said the blow was not a hard one, and that the provoking language was used before the first blow was struck.
The magistrates were unanimously of opinion that the case was so trifling, considering the provocation, and dismissed the information.
