RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => London & Middlesex Lookup Requests => London and Middlesex => England => London & Middlesex Completed Lookup Requests => Topic started by: faulknealder on Saturday 08 September 07 13:10 BST (UK)
-
I'm looking for the parish register entry of marriage of William Farley (born 1844) at St Geo Hanover Square in 1870 (December). I have the General Register Office certificate but there is conflicting information on it. I would therefore like to check what was entered in the church records.
Thanks, Peter
-
Hi Peter
What would the conflicting information be?
Do you have your man through the census?
Wendy
-
Hi Wendy,
I have found William through all the Censuses. He married Mary Ann (maiden name Gaston, from the birth certificates of his children). He was a policeman for a short time, including in the Met in London. His father was Charles Farley a labourer. Mary Ann's parents were Mary Brooks and Trayton Gaston, all from Sussex. His first child was born in May 1871 in Chailey Sussex and he appears in the 1871 Census in Chailey married to Mary Ann.
So all of this is confirmed. But I've never been able to find his marriage to Mary Ann Gaston. The only marriage registration that is anything like close is the one in Dec 1870 St Geo Hanover Square... but the bride is listed as Mary Ann BROOKS.
The coincidences are huge if this is NOT the William Farley marriage I'm looking for:
* the bride & groom are William Farley and Mary Ann (both batchelor & spinster by the way)
* the date (Dec 1870) is about right as judged by the birthdate of his first child and the fact that in April 1871 (census day) he was married
* his father is shown as Charles, labourer (which he was)
* his occupation is shown as Police Constable and he was a policeman in the Met (so up in London) from 1866 to 1870
* Mary Ann Gaston's mother was Mary BROOKS
* Mary Brooks' father (Mary Ann Gaston's grandfather) was James a labourer and the father on the certificate is James Brooks a labourer
So... you can see that while most of the facts support this being his marriage, the wife's maiden name is Brooks not Gaston which was the name of Mary Ann's mother.
Before you ask, Mary Ann Gaston was born Dec 1843, 11 months after her mother married Trayton Gaston (in Jan 1843) so she was not illegitimate. I did orginally think she perhaps used her mother's name for that reason. But then her father should have been Trayton on the marriage certificate, not grandfather James!
I was therefore wondering if the church records would show anything different than this. Perhaps the civil reg certificate was transcribed incorrectly, the registrar using the mother's name by mistake? I can't think of how else to check this. Any ideas?
Peter
-
I'd love to spend longer trying to get my mind round this, but have a very busy day ahead!
But my first thought is that IF this is NOT 'your' marriage, then there should be another William and Mary Ann Farley on the 1871 census, somewhere (unless they died between marriage in Dec 1870 and census in 1871!)
MArriage cert, I assume showed no actual ages, so they could be of any age, and from anwhere.
IF the couple on the marriage cert are not the same couple as the ones you have traced, I would guess they are a cousin or something of William's marrying a cousin or something of Mary's. But someone should be able to find them.
Another thought is to try and trace Mary on previous censuses before her marriage ('61, '51, '41) if not already done.
Perhaps her mum Mary separated from Trayton (good name!!) when she was young and she was actually brought up by her grandparents, maybe using Brook as a surname and thinknig of James as her dad. She marrys, giving these details. But then (!) the truth comes to light, she is told she is not actually a Brooks but a Gaston, that James is not her dad but her grandfather, and from then on she puts Gaston as maiden name on her children's birth certs.
just a couple of quick thoughts - now I have to drive to Nottingham with a son and a car full of all his belongings to take him back to Uni!!!!
-
Hello Liz,
Good thoughts indeed, but I had already tried that. There are no other William & Mary Ann Farleys in the 1871 census that could be them (at least that I can find).
There are no 1st generation cousins that are named William Farley or Mary Brooks (actually there was one cousin William Farley who died as a baby). I don't know about cousins further removed than that because I have not gone back more generations yet than their grandparents.
As for Mary Ann Gaston in previous censuses, I have her in 1851 living with her father Trayton - a widower (her mother Mary Brooks had died in 1850). I cannot find Mary Ann or Trayton in 1861 (so of anyone can I'd be very impressed and please let me know). But I do have her grandfather James Brooks in 1861 and she was not with him.
So hopefully now you can see why this little conundrum is driving me crazy...!
Peter
-
Have you seen this 1861 entry ? A Mary JANE Gaston c1844, born Newick .....
Its clearly a Mary JANE on the original page - but given the names of Gastons (or Gassons !) born in the LEWES Regn District in that period, its a bit of a coincidence !
RG9/595; Folio: 100; Page: 39 - Brighton
-
Hello "Newf",
Yes I saw the Mary Jane Gaston entry but I was not convinced. First she is an inmate in a Penitents Home for Females... ok, could be but there is nothing else to suggest that she was involved in underhand activities (I believe these places were mainly set up to try to set prostitutes back on the road to salvation...). And she was not known to be in Brighton at any other time. Also "Jane" rather than "Ann" makes me doubt it.
An equally plausible 1861 Census entry is a Mary Ann BROOKS, age 18, from Newick working as a servant in Newick for the widow Ades. I prefer this as a possibility because a) it is still in Newick and b) it ties in with the subject of this thread, which is why is she named Mary Ann Brooks on the marriage certificate? (you could also add c) she is not a prostitute in this entry which is far preferable ;D). But there is nothing conclusively linking either entry to her other entries or family. If I could find her dad Trayton or brother John nearby maybe this would lean me one way or the other.
Peter
-
Impeccable logic 'Peter' ..... I just try and leave no stone unturned .... I would have left it, apart from the fact that theres no birth entry in the Lewes RD for her ....
Incidentally was Mary Ann birth entry Gasson ?
Couldnt see a Gaston in 1843/4 ...... ???
Trayton is a far more common name than you'd think :) Altho a shame his marriage name was Hayton :D
Theres a few Death entries for Johns in Lewes, but sadly at that time, age wasnt shown....
-
This is Mary Ann Gaston's birth certificate transcription:
Born: 19th December 1843 Newick (Sub Reg: Chailey; Reg: Lewes Chailey Westfirle & Newhaven)
Named Mary Ann
Father: Trayton Gaston, Labourer
Mother: Mary Gaston formerly Brooks
Informant: Mary Gaston (her mark) mother Newick
Registered: 20th Jan 1844
Registrar: Thomas Bull
GRO Ref: Mary Ann Gasson Q1 1844 Lewes&c 7 424
So "Gasson" is a transcription error in the GRO index. Like "Hayton"....
-
Thats what I was saying - 'was her Birth entry (transcribed) Gasson' :D
I think I've found that Mary (Jane) Gaston in 1851 - also in Newick, parents from Kent if I recall - so safely eliminated
Just no sign of Trayton or John in 1861 - so far ... :(
-
Maybe not relevant but the IGI has the christenings of:
Ada Helen Farley 19 Aug 1877
Lucy Farley 26 Sep 1875
both at St Nicholas Brighton
both have parents William and Mary Ann
Are these younger children of 'your' couple, that you already know about?
If so, looks like the family moved on (or back) to Brighton
If they are not 'your' family - then there is another William and Mary Ann Farley around (though her maiden name could be anything, of course
-
These childrens births are on FreeBMD
Jul/Aug/Sep 1877 A Ellen Farley - Brighton
Jul/Aug/Sep 1877 Lucy Farley - Brighton
and their family can be found in 1881. Looks like it is 'your' family:
RG11 1087 90 32
42 Blackman Street Brighton
William 35 bn Isfield, labourer
MAry A 35 bn Newick
William 9 bn Chailey
Mary A 8 bn Salisbury
Lucy 5 bn Brighton
Roses? 2 bn Brighton
Lilly no age bn Brighton
+2 lodgers.
they seemed to move around - Chailey to Salisbury then back to Brighton. Unless Mary Ann just happened to be visiting Salisbury when she went into labour with Mary A junior.
Ada Helen died Jul/Aug / Sep 1879, Brighton .
-
just for completeness, though you could well already have this info
IGI has christenings for
Lily Farley 27 MArch 1881
and
Rose Sarah Farley 2 March 1879
both at St Peter Brighton.
Obviously changed their allegiance from St Nicholas, or moved house.
Cant find William in Chailey or Mary Ann in Salisbury
...and it doesnt help with the original query!!
-
Hello Liz,
Yes these are the children of William and Mary Ann. His first child (William) was born in Chailey and then they moved to and lived in Hampshire for 2 years where he worked as a policeman (before being dismissed!). After that they returned to live in Brighton where they had their other children, and William worked on the expanding Railway like many people in Sussex at that time.
When I said earlier that Mary Ann was not known to be in Brighton at any other time, I meant BEFORE the 1861 census, not later after she was married. Sorry if that was misleading.
Peter.
-
Actually Liz I was a little hasty with that last post...
You found something that I hadn't: Ada Ellen. It seems she died age 2 in 1879, so did not appear in the 1881 census (so I missed her from the list of children). So thanks very much for that!
Peter
-
Hello Peter
Sorry for the late reply to this thread.
I have some look-ups to do at the Westmister City Archives which is where St Georges Hanover Square registers are deposited.
I'm happy to do your original look-up request if you still need it.
Dawn
-
Hi Dawn,
Yes thanks very much, that would be great if you could! I'm 95% certain that this is the marriage I'm looking for, but it would really help to see if the church registration is the same or different to the civil one. This would at least confirm or rule out any human typographic error.
Thanks in advance,
Peter
-
Hi Peter
I've had a look at the microfilm of St Georges Hanover Square marriage register for December 11th 1870
William Farley, of full age, bachelor, Police Constable of Piccadilly, father Charles Farley, Labourer
Mary Ann Brooks, full age, spinster, no occupation, of Hyde Park Place, father James Brooks, Labourer
William Farley, signed his name
now here's the interesting bit
Mary Ann signed her name Brooks after she scribbled out something beginning with G, most probably Gaston based on your earlier posts
but with the passage of time, who knows why.
Dawn
-
Thank you so much for doing this Dawn!
From your description of the signature this does indeed sound like further supporting evidence although it leaves me wanting to see the entry for myself to determine whether it could possible have been "Gaston" that she crossed out.
It certainly is intriguing - if this is in fact Mary Ann Gaston, then I now need to figure out why she consciously signed as Brooks (and referenced her grandfather as her father) rather than, as I had assumed, it was a mistake by the registry office clerks. But this is what makes family history research so addictive!
Thanks again for your help, I really appreciate it. ;)
Peter