Unfindable couple / Male was in Navy

[mckha489]

But it is also possible that Mary Elizabeth Harmer hoped to assert a position as the deceased widow, perhaps for financial reasons, but was confronted by the actual widow Martha Hall  and "persuaded" to be truthful.

Sue

[sparrett]

 

What's your take mckha?

Sue
ADDING
Sorry, rather incomplete post

What is your feeling on the part played by the genuine widow?
 

[mckha489]

I don’t know. But I agree if there is money involved there is at least likely to some argument.  Although the correction date isn’t very long after the initial registration.

[Neale1961]

My thoughts ….....

Mary Elizabeth genuinely signed as widow Brooks on the death certificate, because that is how she saw herself. She would not willingly / openly admit to being a party in an adulterous affair. I don’t think she had any devious intentions when she informed on Joseph’s death.

A short while later, problems occurred with the military pension and final payout of funds – name and address of the real wife conflicted. Mary Elizabeth then was required to make amendments at the registry office, so everything was legally correct. We only have Joseph’s pension index card, as all other pension related papers, that might have told the full story, have been destroyed.

What is important here is that this is confirmation that M E Brooks and M E Harmer were one and the same person, and that she was Joseph’s partner. The signature on the 1921 census where we see Mabel changed to Mary endorses the fact that Mary was known as Mabel. (As I pointed out earlier, Mabel is a derivative of the name Maria. )

I think we have correctly identified the parents of Brad’s ancestor. The only way to be certain is through DNA. As Joseph Brooks and Mary Elizabeth Harmer both had children, there is the potential to do that.

[sparrett]

Hi,
All possibles I guess, but yes, it's true the good thing is we have pretty positively settled the original question except for the absolute DNA avenue.

A good delve and dig experience!
Sue

[bradwaterss]

Hi everyone,

Thanks for all the help, deciphering and theory’s , I believe this has given me a very good understanding of the situation.

I will relay all this information onto my family summarising all the above information.

It’s been a interesting journey

Brad

[BushInn1746]

The Index Card was a

World War I Pension Ledgers and Index Card.

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/search/collections/61588/records/157209377?tid=&pid=&queryid=d8c30741-8687-4ebc-8cfa-f43a084adc83&_phsrc=Rnp636&_phstart=successSource

A Disability pension was in payment for Joseph Brooks.

The Pension Card also records his Wife's address as 25 Balmes Rd, Southgate Rd, N1 (same on the 1921 Census for his estranged Wife and their children).

Also 1921 Census for Joseph Brooks, "Royal Navy Unable to work" "Invalid" (between two lines).

Brooks actual Widow would complete a Form and obtain a Copy 1922 Death Certificate to prove Death and post it for her and/or child dependants Pension/s, her status was now "Widow".

When the Copy Death Certificate was produced, his estranged Widow would complain to the Registrar, that isn't correct, I'm his Widow and I can't send that to the Ministry of Pensions, I wasn't present at death.

Harmer would be compelled to go back to the Registrar and admit by Statutory Declaration with a Family Witness, that the information she originally gave needed to be corrected.

Comment
If I was the Widow, I wouldn't send the Copy Death Certificate with my claim or change of circumstances that I was now a Widow, which implied that I was present at Death, when I was not present and lived at another address.

Mark

Added:

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/disability-dependents-pensions-first-world-war/

"Pensions were granted for servicemen who served in the First World War and relatives were able to claim even if the serviceman died from a war related injury many years after the end of the war."

[sparrett]

Yes, the way the form reads is very misleading and the corrections by declaration do not fully correct it.

The widow was not present at the death and was not the informant.

Ambiguous, whether by intent or design we may never know.
Sue

[bradwaterss]

Hi All,

Unsure if anyone would still be interested in this, my great aunt read this thread and has been in contact with Barnardos Charity as they have a section of adoption papers ect, so hopefully some information comes out of that

I am now re picking this line of family back up to see if i can find anything else.

1. Other than an entry of FindMyGrave (224916668) - Memorial ID, i cannot see any records of Mary Elizabeth Harmer or any other variants of her name dying in 1964 in Chatham or surrounding areas. Would anyone be able to help with this?

2. Joseph Brooks Snr who died in 1922 i cannot seem to link him to any parent names or follow his family tree, Ancestry keep suggesting his father as someone with the surname Field and mother with the surname London.

Anymore help would be much appreciated as always thank you.

Brad