Looking for info on John Bennett

[chempat]

sami,
I have just came downstairs, made my breakfast, and thought - wonder if he left her like he left his first one.
So, did he change his name again?
But presumably Jessie knew about his history, and went with his first change of name.
But she would keep quiet about his 'death/disappearance' if she had married again and he was still alive.

If Jessie was from Sydenham, but met with him in Leeds, why did she move up there?

[Tomster]

John/Jessie's behaviour is indeed puzzling. Why they would adopt the name Bennett if that was not their original name is a mystery. My dad (Dr. Norman Thomas Bennett) reached a point in his search efforts (before there was an internet) that maybe the family name was not Bennett. I travelled the same road as most of you have and hit one brick wall after another.  I did think that maybe Manley was a possibility but did not give it any serious consideration until I had exhausted all possibilities with the Bennett name, and here we are. It definitely looks as if Bennett is not the real family name.

Another piece of info that may lend support for the name Manley. Doris (my grandfather's sister) told my dad that there was a medical doctor in the grandparents or great-grandparents (Maybe that inspired my dad to become a medical doctor?). He did quite a bit of research to see if any Bennetts with the right dates and places were doctors but was unable to find any.

Tom

[*Sandra*]

Hi Tom,

The divorce papers gave the reason as cruelty by the petitioner Lavina.  There are many pages of the court minutes - here is a response in a letter written by John Manley.
I John Manley of 7 Sandycombe Road St Margarets Twickenham in the County of Middlesex of no occupation and make no oath and says as follows.

1. I am the respondent in this action

2. In reference to paragraph 2 of the petition in this action I say that the petitioner herself is of a violent temper and irritating disposition.  She is also grossly extravagant and without an idea of value of money and as a consequence been a bad house keeper. She is also addicted to using bad language before the children, servants and strangers and for these reasons she is not fit to have the sole control of the children.

3. In reference to paragraph 5 of the petition I say that the petitioner unlawfully absented herself for about 9 months from her home leaving 5 young children (one an infant)  on my hands. I went to the house in question which I believed and believe to be a house of ill repute and where the petitioners sister who is a person well known as of easy virtue had taken rooms. I endeavoured to induce petitioner to leave that house but she refused and a quarrel ensured. I did not kick the petitioner then or at any other time.

4. The petitioner has repeatedly left her home and children and often for long periods (extending from 2 weeks to 9 months) without my consent and on one of such occasions she left because one of the children was ill and she did not wish to attend to it.

5. In reference to paragraph 11 of the petition I say that the petitioner first asked for a dog in the house as a protection . Subsequently I made several efforts to get rid of the dog by sale or gift and once or twice offered to the petitioner to destroy the dog, which she would not permit.

6. With reference to paragraph 12 of the petition I say that on the occasions referred to the petitioner returned home, after an unauthorised absence of 5 weeks and endeavoured to come into the house in company with a woman who I and my servants took to be intoxicated. Petitioner and the woman dashed into the house after I had told the petitioner that I would not allow the woman to come in. I then sent for the police to remove the woman (who had refused to leave) and on hearing me send for the police, petitioner and the woman at once left together. I did not strike the petitioner.

7. In reference to paragraph 13 of the petition I say that with a knife I did destroy the clothes in question, under the gropest provocation and as a protest of petitioners extravagance and unreasonable and continuous demands for new clothes which she did not require. I just previously having spent £7 repairing a sealskin in question and having lately laid out large sums of money in dress for her. I never threatened to stab her or tried to strangle her but simply pushed her away from me.

8. In reference to paragraph 14 of the petition I say that on the occasion referred to the petitioner had been for hours behaving in a most violent manner and using language of the most disgraceful character before the children and servants. She finally rushed on me and received a blow and which she herself afterwards admitted to being accidental.


continuing below....................

[*Sandra*]

9. I say that the petitioner was always causing quarrels more especially at meals and in the presence of the children and others and if I happened to have anything in my hand at the time and I stopped shaving and or carving to expostulate she was in the habit of accusing me of threatening her with whatever I had in my hand. I never then or at any other time threatened her with a razor, knife or any other weapon.

10. In reference to paragraph 19 of the petition I say that on the occasion referred to I did during another violent quarrel commenced by the petitioner slap her face and that a very much decayed tooth which had been ready to break off at the slightest touch was thereby broken. The petitioner did not even mention this fact until 2 days after when being in a good temper, she laughingly added "You must now get me a new tooth which I have long been wanting" or words to that effect.

11. In reference to paragraph 20 of the petition I say that Mrs Vernon came to 7 Sandycombe Road to complain of a disgraceful disturbance created by the petitioner at her (Mrs Vernon's) house on the previous day and to exact a promise from the petitioner not to repeat the annoyance. Mrs Vernon was accompanied by her brother and was perfectly temperate in her language and demands. Petitioner was extremely violent and made all sorts of disgraceful charges against me (which caused the two servants to leave on the spot) and endeavoured to assault Mrs Vernon. I simply interposed and kept them apart the quarrel lasting all day with the neighbours and others listening outside and though grievously provoked I used no violence beyond what was necessary to keep petitioner and Mrs Vernon apart and I did not strike the petitioner or turn her into the street . She left of her own accord.

12.  I say that I have never been guilty of legal cruelty to the petitioner and have never used violence except on the occasion's herein set forth under serious provocation.

13. I say that there is no collusion or connivance between me and the petitioner in any way whatsoever.

Sworn at No8 Whitehall Place in the County of Middlesex on this day the 25 th March 1885


Regards
Sandra

[*Sandra*]

Lavina Sophia Gilliam Manley responds ..............................

Lavina lives at No 10 Madras Place, Highbury,  Middlesex

1. States she is the petitioner and married John Manley 28 August 1869 at the register Offcie St Pancras.


2. After said marriage, cohabited with John Manley at various places and & Sandycombe Road. The issue of said marriage was 6 children.  Gives names and dates for each.

3. The said John Manley is a man of violent temper and has habitually treated me with neglect and unkindness and cruelty and has habitually used abusive and threatening language to me and that on numerous occasions he has assaulted and struck me with knives and razors and thrown things at me.

4. That in or about the month of February 1881 soon after the birth of the fifth child, the said john Manley at Leeds in the County of York, kicked me.

5. That in or about the month of November 1882 at the house of Mrs Sutch in Paulton Square Chelsea in the County of Middlesex, the said John Manley kicked me on the leg.

6. Between May 1883 and December 1883 while I and the same John Manley were living at 92 St Augustines Road. Camden Square in the County Of Middlesex , he frequently assaulted and struck me and threw things at me and assaulted the children in my presence.

7. That when I was living at Hastings in the County of Sussex from about the month of December 1883  until February 1884, the said John Manley frequently assaulted and struck and pinched me.

8. That in and during the years 1883 and 1884, the said John Manley has frequently absented himself from his home until late hours and sometimes for the whole night and sometimes several nights.

9. That on numerous occasions in and since the month of April 1884 at No7 Sandycombe Road aforesaid John Manley has assaulted and struck me.




 

[*Sandra*]

10. The said John Manley struck me several times at 7 Sandycombe Road shortly before the birth of the youngest child which occurred on the 12 June 1884.

11. That the said John Manley persisted in having a large dog in the house not with standing my remonstrations and that I was extremely alarmed and annoyed by the said dog.

12. That on or about the 19 September 1884 the said John Manley refused me entry to the house and struck me on the arm and pushed me down the steps and threatened to give me in charge of police.

13. On 7 th October 1884, the said John Manley dragged me into the dining room of 7 Sandycombe Road and tore my hat and clothes and cut my boots and stood over me with a knife and tried to strangle me and that when I tried to escape from him, he followed me and again assaulted me.

14. That on or about the 20th October 1884 at 7 Sandycombe Road, the said John Manley assaulted and struck me and gave me a blow on the face and a black eye.

15. That on or about the 27th October 1884 at 7 Sandycombe Road, the said John Manley held me down and threatened me with a razor which he held in his hand.

16. That on or about the 6th November at 7 Sandycombe Road, theaforesaid John Manley struck me.

17.  That in the month of December 1884 aforesaid John Manley threatened me with a carving knife.

18. That on Christmas Day 1884 at 7 Sandycombe Road, aforesaid John Manley assaulted and kicked me.

19. That in the month pf January 1885, John Manley struck me on my mouth and knocked out one of my teeth and otherwide assaulted me, while the baby was in my arms.

20. That on the 12 th February 1885, aforesaid John Manley and a woman called Anne Vernon in his presence assaulted  and beat me and turned me out of the house into the hall and on a subsequent occasion on the same day, the sais John Manley struck me a severe blow in the mouth and loosened 3 of my teeth, cut my lip and otherwise assaulted me.

21. I say that there is no collusion or connivance between me and the said John Manley in anyway whatsoever.

Sworn at No50 Lincoln Inn Fields in the County of Middlesex -
Dated 4th March 1885


Court Minutes

Petition Filed 16 March 1885

Decree Nisi 15 January 1886

Final decree 10 August 1886


Regards
Sandra

[chempat]

Tomster,

Have you got any consistent birth dates for Herbert or Doris?

If Herbert was definitely born in Leeds(as on 1891 census) it would be very useful to find his birth.

Ask on West Riding board for any pointers?

[*Sandra*]

Birth Dates were Herbert 9 July 1890 and Doris 1 January 1892

Sandra

[*Sandra*]

The marriage cert is attached to the court papers - probably same info you already have.

By License - 18 August 1869 - register Office St Pancras.

John Manley was 19 years of age - bachelor - Mercantile Clerk - 15 St Augustine Road - Father John Manley (deceased) Surgeon.

Lavinia Sophia Gilliam Clare - 20 years - spinster - 15 Winchester Street - Pentonville - Father Joseph Gilliam Clare - Gentleman

In the presence of James Pierce and  E Barkwith.


Sandra