Hayward/ Gloucestershire (Help please)

[fm]

Hi Rootschatters.

Looking for help with a marriage somewhere between1855-1880 i am presuming in Gloucestershire. At the moment have reached a dead end.
Thomas Hayward born circa 1842 at Quenington, Gloucestershire married Mary Ann Scott born circa 1837, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire.
Thomas was the son of William and Martha Hayward of Quenington, Gloucestershire. Mary Ann was the daughter of William and Louisa Scott of Cheltenham, Gloucestershire.
1881 census shows Thomas and Mary Ann Hayward living in Cheltenham, Gloucestershire at 3 Beauford Cottages. Theie marital status was married but have been unable to find a marriage between a Thomas Hayward and Mary Ann Scott in any records. Their children George, William and Sarah Ann were also recorded with them.
Have her death certificate stating that her name before marriage was formerly Scott. Its a mystery.
Any suggestions welcome. Cheers

[CaroleW]

Hi

The 1881 shows a gap in ages between William (16) and Mary (9) so I would guess this is a second marriage

As Mary Ann is older than Thomas then I'm guessing Mary was married before.

Unlikely she was Scott when she married Thomas - that would be her birth surname and she would have married under her previous married name

[Tati]

Hi both 

They are already shown as married in 1871, with a daughter Charlotte age 13 born Cheltenham. Back in 1861, there's a Charlotte Scott age 3 with (mother?) Mary Ann Scott in Cheltenham so we may be looking for a marriage between 1861 and 1871 

[fm]

Thank you both. Much appreciated. Had already considered it may be a second marriage for her but if she were married and widowed between two census have no idea who to. Also i had found her with her daughter in the census you refer to. After Mary Ann married Thomas Haywood, Charlotte also changed her name to Hayward in a later census.. Mary Ann Scott was with her grandparents in the 1851 and 1861 census.
There are so many Mary Ann Scotts. If she wasnt married as that name she may have married as Mary Scott or Ann Scott. Have tried concentrating on Thomas Haywards in Gloucestershire in all the search sites but have found nothing. Where can I go now.

[Necromancer]

have you got any of the post 1864 kids Birth Certs - wondered what sequence of names that Mary Ann might be using then ?

The ost obvious marriage of a Thomas H would be that 1864 Cheltenham one ..... but then again was his name also Edward ?

[CaroleW]

Hi

Having looked at the census entries I now doubt this was a second marriage for Mary

She was unmarried in 1861 and married by 1871.  Child after Sarah was b 1873/74.  The only marriage on freebmd that fits the time scale was to a Mary Ann Ivens in March qtr 1871 - not Mary Ann Scott - mmmmmmmmmm

[fm]

Hi to you all. Thank you so so so much for being on the case.
Thomas was Thomas only and not Thomas Edward as established on his birth certificate  on 25th February 1841so not him.
Have the birth certificate of their daughter Sarah Ann Hayward on 16th November 1963 at 51 St Pauls St North, Cheltenham where it states mothers name as Mary Ann Hayward (formerley Scott) under maiden name. Another child born 14 years later Arthur George on 17th January at 1 Berkeley Passage, Cheltenham also has the same entry details for the mother as formerley Scott.
She was definately a Scott at the time of their marriage but where and when was it. Have tried all avenues over a ten year period but have drawn a blank. Help.

[Necromancer]

assuming that you've trawled the full GRO Index, then you might just have to say they didnt marry !

[fm]

But what if they did, Thats giving up. Not too good at that.
They lived in the St Mary's ecclesiastical parish of Cheltenham. There is a church there called St Mary's so am assuming they may have married there if they were Church of England. It is possible that they were of another denomination that may not have entered all their records on the databases yet. Have found no records on the IGI of any of their children being christened as yet. Could there be implications behind that. Might mean they werent married as you say and they couldnt have children christened. Doh