Author Topic: opinions please..  (Read 1590 times)

Offline Helenp

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
opinions please..
« on: Saturday 18 June 05 00:13 BST (UK) »
Bear with me here...

My gt gt gt grandfather Henry Caudwell married a widow, Anne Kaye (nee Swift) in 1859. Henry was 41, Anne 43, married Manchester Cathedral.

There are 4 children recorded, all born between 1846 and 1854 ie before they married.

On the children's birth certificates the mother is stated as Anne Caudwell, yet she was Anne Kaye prior to being married and they were really quite 'old' to be getting married in that day and age (not far off being so 'old' myself now though  ;D :-\)

My questions are ;

1. Do you think this Anne is the same person each time or do you think maybe there was a previous wife called Anne too, to whom the children were born? Or Perhaps Anne Kaye and Henry just pretended to be married all that time?

Or

2. Is there any way the birth certificates could have been drawn up/altered after they were married and that maybe the children were Anne Kayes and her deceased husbands but she had Caudwell put on them when she married my g.g.g grandad? If that's the case I am not a Caudwell after all!

Any views would be appreciated, it's bugging me a bit.

Thanks,

Helen


Offline DebbieDee

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 729
  • Hepzibah Annie Burge 1887-1969
    • View Profile
Re: opinions please..
« Reply #1 on: Saturday 18 June 05 00:54 BST (UK) »
Hi Helen,

I have a similar situation in my tree so I will be interested to see what you find out.  Things that I have tried that might give you more answers than I have at the moment:

Have you found the family either together or separately under either surname in the 1851 census?

Have you found any baptism records for the children? The details given could be different to the birth registration.

Have you found a death record for Anne Kayes first husband?  Could Anne have pretended to be married to Henry because her husband was still alive and divorce was extremely unlikely?  Maybe Anne had to wait to have her husband declared dead before she could remarry if he had deserted her. 

Debbie  ;)

Offline RJ_Paton

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,612
  • Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
    • View Profile
Re: opinions please..
« Reply #2 on: Saturday 18 June 05 11:07 BST (UK) »
1.
Quote
Do you think this Anne is the same person each time
... possible but without further confirmation impossible to say with 100% accuracy

1a
Quote
do you think maybe there was a previous wife called Anne too, to whom the children were born?
...... again possible ... more digging into Henry's marriages must be done (I've checked the BVRI which doesn't have any listed)

1b
Quote
Or Perhaps Anne Kaye and Henry just pretended to be married all that time?
.... possible it happened far more than we acknowledge.

2
Quote
Is there any way the birth certificates could have been drawn up/altered after they were married and that maybe the children were Anne Kayes and her deceased husbands but she had Caudwell put on them when she married my g.g.g grandad? If that's the case I am not a Caudwell after all!
...... while a situation could arise where illegitimate births were "legitimised" by the marriage of the two parties concerned my experience has been that the records although altered record the full details including when the changes were made (I've only got one example to go on)

Although divorce in our time is extremely common in Victorian times it was exactly the opposite ..... bigamy on the other hand was very common  ;D

Offline Valda

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 16,160
    • View Profile
Re: opinions please..
« Reply #3 on: Saturday 18 June 05 12:03 BST (UK) »
It was not until the Legitimacy Act of 1926 that children born before a marriage could be subsequently legitimised by a marriage between their parents.
I have examples of births which were illegitimate which were registered as legitimate. Just a matter of bluffing it out with the registrar. I also have examples of late marriages, some late for no real reason, they just didn't get around to it (some just didn't get around to it at all). Of course the main reason in this case for the late marriage would be a previous marriage by either partner where the spouse was still alive.

The most obvious way to test whether the mother was the same woman is to compare the 1861 census details with the 1851 census information. From your details I think this is the family on the 1861 census

RG9 2883 folio 32    73 Jackson Street Chorlton upon Medlock  Lancashire 
Henry Caudwell 44  Stone, Staffordshire, Head Married Joiner
Ann Caudwell 48 Newsome, Yorkshire, Wife Married
Edward Caudwell 15  Eccles, Lancashire, Son  (not sure of occupation difficult to read)
Mary Caudwell 11 Mancr, Lancashire, Daughter   
John Caudwell 9  Mancr, Lancashire, Son 
Sarah Caudwell 7 Mancr, Lancashire, Daughter 

If you hold the birth certificates for Mary and John or at least one of them, you can do an area search in Manchester in the 1851 census for the family. You may also find further information from this census - always a possibility of Kaye children which could also be extremely useful.

Regards
Valda
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk