When you say you 'got the info' from Ancestry I am assuming this is from one of the online public trees which has no real sources. Just because an individual has posted this information doesn't make it fact! Which is why you have to check sources.
There in not a single baptism that lists parents as Philip and Jane - if it is the tree I looked at it has Jane bc.1786 living at West Thurrock (Purfleet) in 1841 with sons William 30 (bc.1811) and Thomas (bc.1821) which 'they' have assumed is the Jane Cannon who died in 1849 Colchester (without actually checking).
However, the Jane Cannon in West Thurrock in 1841 is still alive in 1851 and living still in West Thurrock with a sister in 1851.
People 'guesstimate' unfortunately, post things online and people looking at the online tree think it's fact! Because, no doubt, the Thomas Cannon 20 (son of Jane 55 in West Thurrock) appears to be the only Thomas Cannon born Essex ca.1822 (son of a Philip) they have assumed the 1841 family in West Thurrock is 'theirs' and having found a Jane Cannon died 1849 Colchester (where your Thomas is from) they have assumed it was the Jane in West Thurrock when she is still alive and kicking in 1851 and still living there.
As I said in my earlier post, I'm pretty sure that the Jane who died in 1849 Colchester is the daughter of Philip and Ann.
Continuing with this couple, I took out a days subscription on SEAX (for something else) and decided I'd look for the baptisms of Thomas ca.1822 and Jane ca.1824 at St. Mary Magdalene, Colchester and found both with surname shown as Canning!:
Thomas bp.21/10/1821, son of Philip and Ann
Jane bp.20/6/1824, dau. of Philip and Ann.
I also checked re. the 4 year old 'Betsy' born 1837. Her baptism was on 13/12/1837 as Elizabeth Cannon and she was shown as grand-daughter to Ann Cannon in 1851 - however, her parents are shown as Philip and Ann too??? So, either there was a son Philip whose baptism we haven't found and who also married an Ann (which I somehow doubt) or they were trying to maybe legitimise somehow the illegitimate child of one of their daughters. Who can say?
As to the name 'Kitty' - it's an Irish name and usually short for Catherine but perhaps in this case it was just her nickname. Again, who can say!
You are lucky that Philip had the more uncommon Christian name else this whole dilemma may have been harder to solve.
However, if nothing else I hope I have proved to you to take all online trees with a large pinch of salt and check all the given 'facts' especially when no clear source is given. Philip was only married to an Ann (no Jane) and indeed the Jane Cannon said to be his wife (with no baptisms to prove it anyway) who they said died in 1849 Colchester (almost certainly this was Philips daughter born 1824) was still hale and hearty and living in West Thurrock in 1851.
Annette
