Genealogy Chat

OC Just remember the old song: I'm 'Enery the Eighth I am, ..... Every one was an 'Enery .... J

Thank you all for your comments. It really does make you realise that you have to think the improbable may actually be fact and that you have to back everything up with evidence. Graham

Kim I have been caught out more than once myself! Timothy Holden married Susannah Briggs. They had fifteen children, neatly spaced every 18 months. Wasnt till I looked at the ORIGINAL PR that I found the Vicar's note against the baptism of the 7th child 'Mother buried same day'. I looked in the marriage register - yep, he immediately remarried ANOTHER Susannah Briggs!!! Another was a man having children over 52 years. All wives called Mary - must be three different men, thought I - no, from the MI, it was ONE man, married three times, each to a Mary! OC

OC You are so right in what you say, it is a possibility. Did a cemetary search about a year ago, for someone on this site, when I saw the head stone, it originally had MARY, but the Y was re-etched with an E then a Y. He had remarried a Mary so obviously needed to know which head stone related to which wife!! lol KIm

Hi Mayoress Thanks for the list - nothing seems to jump out at me as being the right area - I will have to study them further. There is always the possibility - just to make life easy - that Ellen wasn't her real name!! Graham

Hi Old Crone Thanks for being realistic! I had thought of that - but had put it at the back of my mind in the hope it wasn't true! - but I suppose that I must always face the possibility. Graham

From Free BMD Births Mar 1848 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THOMAS Ellen Anglesey 27 311 THOMAS Ellen Penzance 9 184 THOMAS Ellen Westminster 1 437 THOMAS Ellen Stoke on Tt 17 164 THOMAS Ellen Augusta Totnes 9 344 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Births Jun 1848 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thomas Ellen Bath 11 23 Thomas Ellen Blackburn 21 4_ Thomas Ellen Conway 27 * Thomas Ellen Elizabeth Hastings 7 407 Thomas Ellen Jane Holborn 2 160 Thomas Ellen ___ary Shoreditch 2 413 Thomas Ellener Pontypool 26 160 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Births Sep 1848 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thomas Ellen Todmorden 21 750 Thomas Ellen Burnley 21 244 Thomas Ellen S Columb 9 62 Thomas Ellen Wakefield 22 702 Thomas Ellen Poplar 2 341 Thomas Ellen Walsall 17 225 Thomas Ellen Pwllheli 27 _25 Thomas Ellen Bangor 27 305 Thomas Ellen Georgina Camberwell 4 * Thomas Ellen Jane Atcham 18 * Surname First name(s) District Vol Page -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Births Dec 1848 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THOMAS Ellen Anglesea 27 335 THOMAS Ellen Ashton 20 39 THOMAS Ellen Anglesea 27 335 THOMAS Ellen Falmouth 9 93 THOMAS Ellen Gorsage Durham 24 93 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Births Mar 1849 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thomas Ellen Bradford _ 8 301 Thomas Ellen Madeley 18 109 Thomas Ellen Kensington 3 345 Thomas Ellen Pwllheli 27 377 Thomas Ellen Bridgend _ 26 362 Thomas Ellen Hunslet 23 301 Thomas Ellen Anglesea 27 422 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Births Jun 1849 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THOMAS Ellen Anglesea 27 437 THOMAS Ellen W Derby 20 1081 THOMAS Ellen Anglesea 27 447 THOMAS Ellen Rochford 12 212 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Births Sep 1849 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THOMAS Ellen Redruth 9 217 THOMAS Ellen Carnarvon 27 321 THOMAS Ellen Prescot 20 748 THOMAS Ellen West Derby 20 946 THOMAS Ellen Elizabeth Bath 11 30 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Births Mar 1850 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thomas Ellen Birmingham 16 300 Thomas Ellen Cardigan &c 27 35 Thomas Ellen Honiton 10 121 Thomas Ellen Cranbrook 5 83 Thomas Ellen Falmouth 9 75 Thomas Ellen Anglesea 27 389 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Births Jun 1850 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thomas Ellen Anglesea 27 447 Thomas Ellen Pwllheli 27 403 Thomas Ellen Liverpool 20 300 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Births Sep 1850 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thomas Ellen Battle 7 283 Thomas Ellen Dorchester 8 46 Thomas Ellen Pembroke 26 762 Thomas Ellen Hereford &c 26 200 Thomas Ellen Redruth 9 260 Thomas Ellen Pwllheli 27 380 Thomas Ellen Blower Thomas Newport Mon 26 109 Thomas Ellen Priscilla Haverfordwest 26 714

And here's another spanner for the works - First Margaret could have died and he married another Margaret - don't discount this possibility! And they may never have married.... As everyone else says, you cannot be certain until you get a few certs - Ellen's is the one to go for first. OC

Thanks Glen I know these boards can't find answers to all problems but it does help sharing the problem with others and getting their comments. I think, as you say, I need to keep searching for certificates. Graham

Hi It does seem sad, if they had more children after Ellen, that they were all wiped out in some form of epidemic. I wonder if Ellen was born around the Wrexham area where the parents seem to have been born (according to the census), the family moved, what seems to be quite a long way (possibly for work) where they were recorded in 1851. By 1861 their children had died so they returned 'home' to Wrexham to start again. Only speculation - but I wonder! But it is proving or disproving it that will be difficult I expect. Graham

Possible solution as based on the census details i don't think you could say one way or the other with any certainty. How about trying for the birth cert for Ellen,if her parents details appear the same as those from your later birth cert it might prove useful. If it trnspires you prove Ellen isn't from the family you are tracing then you have a cert you don't need BUT you have eliminated some of the census results and helped narrow the marriage search. I know my reply doesn't answer your big question;Is this the right family in 1851,but i don't think you will know without a cert/parish record or two. Glen

Hi Graham Going off what you say about Epidemics.. The answer is yes.. Cholera swept the Country between the 1830's and 1860's.. A flu Epidemic was an utmost killer back then.. As any childhood disease was..back then As well as the dreaded Consumption.. (TB) Mo I would if I were you order the Birth cert for this Ellen using the father and mother you have as a checking reference..

Hi Glen I am grateful for all the help people like you give on these boards. I did spend time looking for a marriage about 1860 until I found the 1851 census which threw my searching into disarray - I didn't think that there were any children before Peter (lesson - don't assume anything). Do you think that this is them in 1851 and I now have to solve the question of Ellen and move my search for a marriage back 10 - 12 years? Thanks

Hi Graham, I wasn't ignoring your question,just buying myself some time LOL. It is always difficult with some combinations of names,lots of possibles and not a lot to help narrow the search. I'd be tempted to try for a likely looking cert,and hope that the occupations and possibly an address looks to help pin down the facts a little more.Perhaps the names of the witnesses might also help in that respect. Not a great help with anything specific i know,but sometimes the devil is in the detail,something that seems very minor at the time might be the big clue to prove which family you need (or not) Glen

Hi I think those may be a bit early as, if we take the ages on the census, John was born about 1827/28 - he would only have been a young teenager in the early 1840's. I have found a marriage in Q3 1848 but that would only be possible if I accept the 1851 census as being them.

Graham 2 possible marriages, but don't know how you would tie them in though, but these marriages are in the area of birth John Thomas Bala June qtr 1844 Cormen June Qtr 1841 Kim Sorry meant Corwen!

Thanks Janice. However that 1860's date would only fit in if that is not them in 1851 with a daughter Ellen. I am thinking that I will need to move back to abt 1849 to find the marriage if the 1851 census is indeed them. I did order a certificate or 2 for marriages around 1860's before I found the 1851 census entry.,

There's a John Thomas marriage to either Margaret Jones or Jane Owens at the registry office in Corwen in 1863. Could be a possibility - worth the risk of a cert? Janice

Thanks for that advice. The only problem is that there are few Thomas's marrying Jones's - Oh I wish for a less common name! Do you think that this is the same family as the later census and I just have to sort out who Ellen was? or do you think I have the wrong family altogether. Thanks

Hi I would say the marriage cert is the way to go,not least because a marriage index is far more likely to be complete than a birth or death index. Births and deaths were only registered when an informant provided details to a registrar,marriages were and still are conducted in the presence of a registrar,hence the likelyhood they won't be missing from an index. Also births were often not registered anyhow,anything up to 10% of births were never registered prior to 1875 when the regulations were tightened up. There is the chance that they had children whe died in infancy and will miss the census returns,i have a few like that,born after one census and died before the next,infant mortality rates were high at the time,and there is always the chance that children were raised by relatives,and recorded as son/daughter/grandson etc. Assuming you are checking the full ancestry index i would look at a wider range of years than what you suspect is the time of the 'first child'. Glen