Genealogy Chat

see below

OK, there's probably a very simple and logical answer to this puzzle that maybe I'm not seeing. In 1881, Matilda STOALING is living with her father, John STOALING. She's aged 18, and is shown as being married ('M'), though if so then why is she not listed by her married name. Could be a transcription error, mind you. In 1891, she is still living with her father but has now become Matilda MILLER and is listed as being married and has a 2 year old son, George G.MILLER (born in Penarth, near Cardiff). No sign of hubby though. I can't find Matilda in the 1901 census but just to baffle me further, I've discovered the following on FreeBMD: Marriages, June 1899 Colley James Cardiff 11a 589 Miller George John Cardiff 11a 589 Moore Rose Anna Cardiff 11a 589 Stoaling Matilda Jane Cardiff 11a 589 So, my problem is if she was already married to a guy called Miller in 1891, why would she turn up in 1899 in the marriage indexes under her maiden name. Secondly, is that George John Miller the husband to whom she was already married. Hopefully you're getting my drift, but it's a puzzle. I do have a contact who may be able to help me a little but I wanted to see what you all thought, first of all. Should point out also that Stoaling appears to be a unique family name, and it's very doubtful that I'm dealing with two Matilda Stoalings here. Cheers, Andy.

Andy, I would find the birth record for the son and send for the cert. You will then hopefully see who his father was. I would also send for the cert for the marriage that you found, it might give some clues. Good Luck. Cathy.

I wonder if the marriage was transcribed wrong and should have been 1889. Although I have a couple who I do not think were married until after their first 2 children but said they were on 1901 census. Have you found son George on 1901 or husband George? Good luck Shirley

I would agree with Elizabeth. I looked at Freebmd thinking that it may have been transcribed wrongly but both entries have been double transcribed so you have to asume that they are correct. Also, there are no other marriages before the 1891 census on bmd unless they haven't been transcribed yet. George

Thanks for your thoughts, I'm thinking that Matilda's married status in 1881 is a bit of a red herring. Just remembered that she had an illegitimate child, John Stoaling, in 1884 who died not long after. Yes, I'm thinking that purchasing the marriage and birth certs could alleviate the confusion. Liz's theory may be a sound one; perhaps Matilda wasn't married in 1891 and that she took her future husband's name to conceal the possible fact that son, George was illegitimate also. There are 4 or 5 George Millers who possibly fit the bill of Matilda's son on the 1901 census, but I cannot find Matilda. I don't know enough about her husband other than his name was possibly George, in order to search for him. thanks, Andy. any other (helpful!) theories are most welcome.