Auld, Boyle  and related families

These families are the ancestors of a former colleague.   My interest started when noting in some totally different research that a family had named a child "Witton" when they were living in the Witton area of Blackburn, Lancashire.   I soon discovered that the spelling of my colleague's name was different and wanted to know more.   It took me into the realms of Scottish research and away from my Lancashire comfort zone.

One intriguing name that came up was that of Bathia Rollo Boyle.   Bathia is a form of Elizabeth but where did the Rollo, a male name come from ?  Although Bathia seems to be named after an aunt, Bathia Rollo Clark that just moved the problem back a generation.   I did discover in the area a Bathia Rollo born in 1843 to a William Rollo and a Bathia Davy.   Although I cannot establish a family link between the two it is possible that as William Rollo was a Farmer of 100 acres and employed both farm and domestic servants, Ann Johnson, the mother of Bathia Rollo Clark, had been employed by them and named her child after the family.

An unresolved problem is that both Ann Johnston and Elizabeth Thom are identified in the census as granddaughters of Elizabeth Hutcheson. Ann Johnston named a son Alexander Thom Clark which could indicate she was a sibling of Elizabeth Thom and a daughter of James Thom who married Isabella Leslie.   If this were the case the problem is why is she using the name Johnston ?  To be a granddaughter of Elizabeth Hutcheson she should have been the daughter of one of the daughters of George Leslie/Elizabeth Hutcheson who had married into the Johnston family.  Mary Leslie never married (but lived well into her 90's) and there is no trace of Jean Massie Leslie in the records other than her birth which suggests she may have died whilst young.

Another oddity is that of Harriet Bloomer (1857-1915).  She can be identified in censuses from the age of four living with her "parents".   The real issue here though is that there appears to be no record of her birth.  By 1857 civil registrations were well established so there is no obvious reason why her birth record should not be discoverable.  Extensive checks on civil registrations around 1857 shows no child with a name approximating to Harriet Bloomer.  Working from the assumption that Harriet may have been "adopted" all other registrations for a "Harriet" around this time in the district were checked in case she was the daughter of one of her "mother's" sisters but with no success.   As the family had produced three boys and no girls before Harriet the idea of an adopted daughter was worth exploring.   This has proved inconclusive - it may be that the birth was never registered or the Registrar's record was destroyed before the summary could be sent to the Registrar General's office; or that Harriet was born under a totaly unconnected name and adopted.   She remained with the family until she married at the age of 25 and was clearly treated as the daughter of George and Hannah.

Explore the families tree


Bob Calvert
August 2014