RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: Ayashi on Wednesday 01 February 12 18:25 GMT (UK)
-
This is half of a rant and a few questions.
In background, I’ve got an ancestor, John Richards, who moved from Cornwall to Plymouth and got married. His wife, according to the birth cert of their eldest, was Ellen formerly Gill. According to my elderly cousin, Ellen was actually born Jane Ann. Now, yes, there was a Jane Ann Gill of the right date born in Tavestock but there is also an Ellen Gill of the right date born in the more specific (and correct) area of Whitchurch, Tavestock. So, I’m not sure if that’s all a load of baloney, but when I asked in what I thought was a polite way if she had any paperwork or if it was word of mouth, she stopped talking to me. The thing is, my cousin’s mother knew Ellen personally so it’s entirely possible that it was direct family word, but she hasn’t confirmed that.
Anyways, the marriage has proved somewhat elusive. There are no marriages for a John Richards to an Ellen Gill, or even a Jane Ann Gill. What I did find, however, was a marriage in a registry office for 1867 (two years after their first child would have been born) of a John Richards to an Ellen Richards. John’s details mainly match, with the right area, right occupation, right father and right father’s occupation (although it specifies the type of miner he was and I don’t know what specific John’s father was) and was correct in putting that his father was dead. Ellen is more awkward because obviously her name should have been Gill and to make it more awkward, she has her father as William Richards, labourer (the Ellen Gill I found on census had father William Gill, labourer) but her father puts his mark as witness. The ages don’t quite match; they should have been around 24 and 26 respectively but on the cert they are both put as 23 (I know these things aren’t 100% accurate but if they could do it on census, why not on the cert? It wasn’t like they were underage…)
I can’t find any other possible marriages… and on the next census, the only John Richards with wife Ellen living in Plymouth are mine.
What does everyone think about this? Perhaps Ellen and John had some kind of civil arrangement beforehand where she took his name? Perhaps her father introduced himself as the father of the bride rather than William Gill and the registrar assumed, and since William couldn’t read he didn’t notice? I’m really just frustrated because I can’t definitively prove or disprove the marriage and if I disprove it… I have nothing else.
Thanks.
~ Edited to correct date
-
Do you have any more details?
I can't see the marriage in 1876 (on FreeBMD)?
Also can't see a John Richards, born Cornwall, living in Devon with wife Ellen on the 1881 census?
I would imagine that the reason your elderly relative has stopped talking to you is the fact that you dared to question her views/beliefs/memories?!
-
If I recall correctly, FreeBMD is the only place I found the marriage in the first place!
My apologies, it was a typo that I didn't notice. It is August 1867, not 1876 (sorry!), East Stonehouse, Plymouth.
They should be there somewhere... they had children John Frederick 1865, Albert 1871, Ernest 1873, Ellen 1875, Alice 1877, Edith 1880 and Sydney 1883.
I have a few relatives who aren't talking to me now over FH... people can get sulky if you tread on their toes lol
Edit- I have a possibly slightly dumb question. In 1867, or prior to 1867, would a Wesleyan Methodist marriage have been officially recognised, ie certificate-worthy? Or would they have had to marry "properly" as well?
-
from the start of civil regsitration until the 1890s, a marriage in a Methodist Church would have needed a registrar in attendance, and should appear in the GRO index like any other marriage. The marriage act of 1898 changed the need for a registrar.
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,305987/prev_next,next.html
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATID=12211&CATLN=3&accessmethod=5&j=1
-
Thanks :) It was just a thought... might have explained a thing or two!
-
Hi - I've had a couple of thoughts ...
Have you looked for a death of the Jane Ann Gill who was born in Tavestock? Perhaps she and Ellen were cousins or some other relation, born around the same time, but Jane Ann died? There might have been some confusion on your elderly relative's part between the two children, especially since it was her mother who knew Ellen, and not she herself who knew her. Perhaps your cousin only heard part of a story.
Also, have you looked for a possible Ellen Richards in censuses prior to the 1867 marriage, to see if there is anyone in the vicinity with this name, or searched for another couple called John and Ellen Richards in censuses after the marriage? It's possible that your John and Ellen/Jane Ann never actually married, and the marriage you have found is another couple entirely.
Something to think about, maybe?
-
I did look up Jane Ann and there is a possible marriage for her before 1871. My cousin did the family history herself and I wonder if she came across Jane Ann and made an assumption, especially in the days before computerised records when she might not have found Ellen. Who knows, she won't say... I even emailed her again but no answer.
I think I did, but can't recall there being anyone obvious. After the marriage the only John and Ellen Richards belong to me.
Yeah, I had thought they might not have married... which would be awkward!
-
Have you tried expanding your search period?
I only ask because my gggrandparents married about 10 years after their first child was born. I searched for ages trying the find a marriage for them around the time of the first birth but found nothing. I actually found them by mistake as i put the wrong date in the search and low and behold there they were.
Luckily the parish marriage certificate was on ancestry so i was able to see that my gggrandmother had been married before and it seems she had to wait until her first husband passed away before she remarried.
Although they waited to marry all the children were registered under her "married" name even though the marriage had yet to take place and she recorded herself as married in the census returns too!
Best of luck with your search
-
Yeah, I couldn't find them for any time. I am now in contact with my cousin and she has clarified a few points (she agrees that Ellen was Ellen and not, as she previously said, Jane Ann and also that she thinks the marriage I found looks reasonably likely).
Thanks :)
-
If I were you, I would record this couple as a "probable", noting them as such in your records. I have one or two instances like that myself, where there does not seem to be any alternatives, and I record them accordingly, with a big caveat in the notes.
To paraphrase Sherlock Holmes, "When you have ruled out everything else, whatever is left, however unlikely, is the correct one".
But because we, as genealogists, require proof, you need to record any cases like this with a flag, or a sticky note etc.
Darren
-
Yes, that's what I have done.