RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: J Bux on Saturday 17 September 22 13:29 BST (UK)
-
In the 1891 census, Francis Newton (my great grand father) had married a woman named Hannah. No record could be found of the marriage but from the census it was known that Hannah had been born in Clowne Derbyshire in about 1863. In the 1991 census, Francis and Hannah's eldest child was 8 years old so the marriage would have been about 1882.
In the 1871 census, only one Hannah has been found who was born in Clowne around 1863. She was the illegitimate child of Martha Morton and was christened on the 6th April 1862 in Clowne. The birth was registered in Worksop.
In the 1861 census Joseph and Hannah Morton were living with their daughter Martha (14) and their son Thomas (2). Harriet aged 16 was working away as a domestic servant
In the 1871 census Joseph Morton (56), a widowed agricultural labourer, was living with his unmarried daughter Martha Morton (25), his unmarried son Thomas Morton (12), and his granddaughter Hannah Morton (8). All members of the household were born in Clowne. This ties in with Hannah Newton in the 1891 census.
In the 1881 census Hannah Morton (18) is living with her uncle Thomas Morton on High Street in Clowne as his housekeeper, he is 4 years older than her, both were born in Clowne.
All the information matches what is known of Francis’ wife so I think I have found her.
Unfortunately this record was found in the Derbyshire Church of England Parish Registers:-
The marriage of William Newton (bachelor) residing in Stanfree to Hannah Morton (spinster) residing in Clowne was recorded on 15th January1883 at St Mary and St Laurence Church, Bolsover, Derbyshire. Both bride and groom were recorded as being of full age. The groom's father was William Newton and the bride's father was Joseph Morton. (Deceased).The witnesses were Charles Tempril and Elizabeth Highfield. The groom and the first witness “made their mark”. The marriage was registered in the first quarter of 1883 at Chesterfield (Vol 7b; page 917) .
The date is right and all the bride’s information matches what is known. The groom’s father’s name and the groom’s residency are correct but the groom is named William instead of Francis. The record doesn't give the exact ages of the bride or groom.
Francis put his mark on the certificate, so he would not have been able to read that the wrong name had been written. No record of a Francis Newton getting married has been found.
I have think that the groom’s name was a mistake and this was the marriage of Francis Newton. Has anybody else come across wrong names being used in records, rather than just misspell?
-
The registrar (or vicar) wrote down the names he was given.
If, for whatever reason a different name was given, then that's what he wrote down.
-
I think mistakes were sometimes made. The marriage certificate records my great great grandfather's father as John whereas he was George.
-
Do the witnesses have any connection to the family? that you could use as verification.
Pheno
-
Unfortunately this record was found in the Derbyshire Church of England Parish Registers:-
The marriage of William Newton (bachelor) residing in Stanfree to Hannah Morton (spinster) residing in Clowne was recorded on 15th January1883 at St Mary and St Laurence Church, Bolsover, Derbyshire. Both bride and groom were recorded as being of full age. The groom's father was William Newton and the bride's father was Joseph Morton. (Deceased).The witnesses were Charles Tempril and Elizabeth Highfield. The groom and the first witness “made their mark”. The marriage was registered in the first quarter of 1883 at Chesterfield (Vol 7b; page 917) .
The wording you have quoted is not the wording of any official document. It reads like a robot used by some genealogy software to create complete sentences from an actual record found on FamilySearch or similar. So we look for an original record, in this case here it is complete with an image
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:2:77XT-KKVS?i=119&cc=1911752
So yes the groom is registered as William with a father named William and the groom made his mark so perhaps he didn't know he had been recorded as William. But Hannah seems to have signed her own name so could probablly read enough to have spotted an error. Most likely possibilities:
1) the vicar made a mistake and wrote William instead of the correct forename
2) the groom went by William as well as Francis, perhaps unlikely if he was christened Francis and known by that name later in life too.
There are too many matches for this to be an unrelated couple: have you checked whether there was a William Newton "residing in Stanfree"; maybe Francis had a brother named William?
-
The 1911 Census states Francis and Hannah "married 28 years"
-
By 1911 census he is calling himself Frank, married 28 years. Has produced 12 Children 3 have died
And 9 living.
Have you found a birth registration for any of these children? By using GRO site you can discover the mothers maiden name
https://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/indexes_search.asp#Results
To assist others searching, these children are per various census with age also per census
SARAH. 1883
MARTHA 1886
ELIZABETH 1887
LILY 1889
ELIZA 1891 (AGE 1 MONTH)
NELLIE 1894
JOE 1896
ANNIE 1898
JOHN 1900
THOMAS 1901
BLANCHE 1909
-
2 of the children from 1911 census birth registrations
NEWTON, THOMAS MORTON
GRO Reference: 1901 D Quarter in WORKSOP Volume 07B Page 52
NEWTON, JOSEPH MORTON
GRO Reference: 1895 J Quarter in WORKSOP Volume 07B Page 51
John
-
Hi
Have now checked all the births, all have Morton as Mother except Blanche this is Blank.
Is this your Francis/Frank in 1861. Bolsover.
Piece: 2533
Folio: 37
Son of William & Elizabeth she was born Woolwich Kent. The father is a wheelright.
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/discoveryui-content/view/22471413:8767
-
Thanks all, I have seen all the documents you refer to and I apologise if my description of the marriage certificate sounded robotic but I was trying to be concise. You have all got the right documents. He was the son of William & Elizabeth and she was born Woolwich Kent. His father was a wheelright. Francis did have a brother William who came from Stanfree but he married Frances Wilkinson in 1879. Those with Ancestry subscription can see the tree called "Buxton (31-12-2021)"
What I wanted was a bit of reassurance that is is reasonable to presume that someone's christian name can be completely different on their marriage certificate.
-
There are Three Versions of Any Marriage Certificate-
The Original - Completed and Signed in the Church by Groom Bride and Witnesses and Copy given to You
Second Copy Completed abnd Signed by All and held and kept by the Church Diocese
( sometimes they are scanned and appear on Ancestry)
The 3rd is the GRO Copy - The Vicar/ Priest Completes a Copy
to send to the General Records Office of the Marriage
You can identify this usually by the same handwriting on the Certificate Copy of the Groom and Bride and Witnesses is all the Same.
This is were Mistakes can be Recorded Copying in the Process and Wrong Names sent to the GRO and Recorded as the Truth when Not..
Which Copy are you looking at ?
What has GRO Recorded?
Hannah could have Married as a Widow under another Surname
But the Children would be Recorded correctly under her Birth Maiden Name not previous Surname.
I did have a Relative Joe but had no Birth Marriage or Death Recorded under Joe or Joseph
Because his Name was Ernest
From when he learned to Speak he hated his Birth Name so called himself Joe all his Life.
Researching the Past you cannot wear 21st Century Accuracy Eyes and expect the Past to be the Truth even Certificates are full of what people "Said" which may not be the Truth - no one could check anything then and many of our Relatives couldn't Read, Write or Count remember or knew their Parents
-
The register can be seen on Ancestry.
"William" and Charles Tempril made their marks, everyone else signed.
-
The registrar (or vicar) wrote down the names he was given.
If, for whatever reason a different name was given, then that's what he wrote down.
Correction - the registrar wrote down the name he thought he was given. :D
-
Andrew Tarr,
I did think of that but the marriage was "after Banns". At the time of the marriage, the population of England was half of what it is today, so I thought that the vicar would know all his parishioners, which would preclude getting his name wrong but I think about how often my dad called me Gordon (my brother's name).
-
Andrew Tarr,
I did think of that but the marriage was "after Banns". At the time of the marriage, the population of England was half of what it is today, so I thought that the vicar would know all his parishioners, which would preclude getting his name wrong but I think about how often my dad called me Gordon (my brother's name).
One of my ancestors was called Piercy, but the registrar wrote Pearson ! Luckily there was plenty of later evidence indicating what had happened.
-
Andrew Tarr,
I did think of that but the marriage was "after Banns". At the time of the marriage, the population of England was half of what it is today, so I thought that the vicar would know all his parishioners, which would preclude getting his name wrong but I think about how often my dad called me Gordon (my brother's name).
? "Vicar would have known all his Parishioners" - " would Preclude getting his name wrong"
- Wrong assumption !!!
My Grandparents invented there addresses to qualify to Marry in St Mary's Church Kirkdale which was The Church to get Married in Liverpool
Here is my proof of my evidence of the 3rd COPY of the Marriage Certificate that was sent to the GRO by the Vicar copying from the Original Two copies signed by the Parties
My Grandparents had
Copy One (since lost ) - signed by them and Grandmother's In Law's Alfred and Agnes Ericson
Copy Two - signed by them and the Witnesses who knew how to spell their own names- held by the Church Diocese not released to Ancestry
Copy Three - Incorrectly completed by either the Vicar or Registrar and sent to GRO which I applied for here showing Witness Sister Ericson read Incorrect Seen and Recorded for History as Fact as Everson
- she never miss Spelt her own name !
AND all writing is in the same hand, so Not the Original Copy !
-
Alamo2008
I don't think you can compare knowing someone who had lived in a village of 16 houses for 25 years with knowing someone in a city who lies about their address in a Port City the size of Liverpool. I do know that every time they is a transcription there is room for error. I have someone in my free who came from "Racherson French" it took a while to realize that this was "Radcliffe on Trent" in a Nottingham accent. Buxton has many variations (even my spell checker wants me to put Burton) but they all have been, as your example is, mistranslations. These can be accepted, but "William" is not misspelt and it was why I could not find a marriage for Francis.
-
Quite a few of the parties in that register just have the father as "Deceased" with no name given. So you were lucky to get William named as father!
It doesn't look as if much care was taken.
It is a pity if there is no surviving banns register. Would no one have noticed if the name William was called out instead of Francis on the three Sundays?
Everything else tallies, so I would agree that it is likely to be an error.
The wording you have quoted is not the wording of any official document. It reads like a robot used by some genealogy software to create complete sentences from an actual record
Ridiculous comment. It was perfectly fine.
-
Another Relative of mine with Wrong Name Recorded as Fact and History by the Registrar on Birth Certificate
The Mother of The Child Luke Crawford
was asked by her Husband to Record his new Son's Birth the same as his Birth Certificate including both Christian Names
The second Christian Name as tradition included his Mother's Maiden Name so that continues in the Family Tree
The Registrar didn't believe her what she wanted Recorded
So no doubt asked her to spell it.
Problem was she couldn't
So her as Informant was asked to Sign by the Registrar to confirm what he was Recording as Fact was what she said.
So she made her X to confirm the Registration Said was as her Husband's Name.
(The Mother's Maiden Name was HOYLE not OIL)
-
Births, June qtr 1853
Wirral Registration District vol 8a, page 422
Crawford, Luke Hoyle
Seems to be OK?
(from FreeBMD)
CRAWFORD, LUKE HOYLE HOYLE
GRO Reference: 1853 J Quarter in WIRRAL Volume 08A Page 422
(from GRO)
CRAWFORD Luke Hoyle 1853 Birkenhead Wirral BIR/23/78
(FromCheshireBMD.org.uk)
-
I have an 1841 marriage certificate (GRO copy) where the vicar has entered the wrong surname for the bridegroom and his father, ELDRED instead of ELDING.
-
Births, June qtr 1853
Wirral Registration District vol 8a, page 422
Crawford, Luke Hoyle
Seems to be OK?
(from FreeBMD)
CRAWFORD, LUKE HOYLE HOYLE
GRO Reference: 1853 J Quarter in WIRRAL Volume 08A Page 422
(from GRO)
CRAWFORD Luke Hoyle 1853 Birkenhead Wirral BIR/23/78
(FromCheshireBMD.org.uk)
Yes - nearly
That's what the Father asked his Wife to Register their Son the same as his but failed.
-
1. I'm not ShaunJ ;D
2. Dad must have done it correctly (eventually) as it appears to be correct on 3 different databases?
-
Oooops KGarrad
I should have gone to Specsavers
Another example of the wrong name being recorded
Sorry
-
Another wrong name recorded in my Tree
John McKay was Deceased but he was a Carter who was killed by Accident 8 years previously and Robert's Mother had remarried 5 years previously to a Mariner who had been away for 12 months