Missing records for Thomas Bulman

[Mhairi28]

Thomas Bulman aged 20, a moulder, married Harriet Walker 9th September 1867 at All Saints Church, Newcastle.
His father is listed as Thomas Bulman (dec) an iron smith but I have not found any prior census or birth records to confirm this.
To confuse the issue in 1871 he gives his age as 21. He is missing in the 1881 census although his wife & family are listed in Middlesborough. He reappears with his family in 1891 in Stockton aged 40. In 1901 his family are still in Stockton but he seems to be in West Hartlepool as a boarder aged 50.
There is a possible record for 1851 of a 10 month grandson living with his grandmother Ann Bulman. If this is he, then he may have been illegitimate but I have not found baptism records to show his mother. He would have only been 17 when he married.

I would be grateful for any comments.

[Milliepede]

There is this birth registration

Dec 1850 Newcastle Upon Tyne no mothers maiden name

He could have made out he was older when he got married and made up a fathers name.

[Milliepede]

The grandson family has a daughter Elizabeth age 20.  She could possibly be his mother.

Think she marries in 1855 to George Lawson.

[Mhairi28]

There is another Thomas Bulman baptism 8th December 1850 to James and Margaret. BMD lists 2 births for this quarter.
If 1851 census is 'my' Thomas then Elizabeth could well be his mother but as I said there doesn't seem to be a record for his baptism.

I agree also that the information on his marriage record is probably false however his wife was also illegitimate and no father recorded so not sure why he would feel the need to invent one. Possibly he didn't know?

Thank you for your interest

[Milliepede]

Who were the witnesses on the marriage certificate in case they were on his side?

Also what was down as his residence at time of the marriage?

If he was under age that could be reason to put down a father’s name, although probably not a deceased one if you see what I mean.  A deceased father couldn’t give consent for him to marry.

[Mabel Bagshawe]

The grandson family has a daughter Elizabeth age 20.  She could possibly be his mother.

Think she marries in 1855 to George Lawson.

Elizabeth and George Lawson are with siblings on 1881, including her brother William and Walter Bulman, both of whom are iron moulders.  So this may well be the right family

Given Thomas lied about his age when he married (he'd have been a minor) another lie about parentage wouldn't be a surprise.

I can't them them on 1841, but have found baptisms which suggest the siblings' parents were George and Ann. They did have a son called Thomas born in 1814, but have found no records to suggest he survived to adulthood

[Mhairi28]

Unfortunately both witnesses were from his wife's family.
Harriet & Thomas have given their place of residence as Gibson Street.
Harriet was 18 but I hadn't considered that Thomas might have needed a parent's consent though I have seen a mother's consent on a marriage record where the father was deceased.

[Mhairi28]

I think there is good evidence that the 1851 census is my missing Thomas Bulman aged 10 months. Checking the previous census page it shows their address was Forth Bank. Thomas gives Forth Bank as his birth place on the 1871 census.
Following the family in the 1861 census it is possible that Thomas Ridley aged 10 is in fact Thomas Bulman.
However which of the Bulman children is his parent is still uncertain.

[Milliepede]

Well you could always get the birth for the illegitimate Bulman birth from 1850 to see where he was born and if his mother was Elizabeth.