Find Ancestors

Well I am for the bigamists
but will have to come back later as duty calls now,b****r
viv

Sean, don't confuse matters!
Her husband wasn't William, her father was.
edit - sorry, I read that as
"was there a death for first husband William"
when what it meant was
"was there a death for first husband --- William would have been about 4"

Sean, could you use a wee bit of punctuation? like:

was there a death for first husband **?**

or use the ENTER key to create new lines for different thoughts? like:

was there a death for first husband
William would have been about 4

It would just make it a whole lot easier to conduct the conversation!


-----------------------------------------------------------------

So -- aaaaaaaaaaargh, what of:

Marriages Mar 1890
? Allen Esther Banks Hartlepool 10a 143
? Boagey Hunter Hartlepool 10a 143
Kerr John Hartlepool 10a 143
MURPHY Annie Hartlepool 10a 143

Births Mar 1869
ALLEN Esther Banks Stockton 10a 83


Are *these* the Esther and Hunter Boagey in the 1891 and 1901?
The age of Esther Boagey in 1891 and 1901 fits Esther Banks Allen *exactly*.

Did Esther Bayes and Hunter Boagey just separate, declare themselves widowed, and get married again??

Frank Boagey's birth certificate is going to have to tell all. (I'm not going to trust his marriage certificate!)

def says 100% stanley crook and billy row what you thinking is there a death for 1st husband william would have been about 4 when esther got married to john

Except AAARGH we already established:


1891

Hunter Boagey 32
Ether Boagey 22

1901

Hunter Boagey 42
Esther B Boagey 32
Mary E Boagey 9
Hunter Boagey 2


Births Sep 1858
Boagey Hunter Stockton 10a 80
Deaths Mar 1927
Boagey Hunter 67 Hartlepool 10a 157

Births Dec 1864
BAYES Esther Hartlepool 10a 140


!!!! Could there possibly be TWO Esther Bayes-s who married a Boagey???

I don't THINK so!

In fact, per the GRO / FreeBMD, there weren't.

Somebody stop this spinning, I'm getting dizzy. ;)

Oh! silly me. Father William Bayes.

She IS this Esther:

Marriages Mar 1883
BAYES Esther Hartlepool 10a 152
>>> BOAGEY Hunter Hartlepool 10a 152

So.


Esther being 28 in 1888 (not 1988!) fits with the 1891 census for Mary:

John Atkinson 44
Mary Atkinson 30

John's a little old in 1891.


John's age in 1901 is consistent with 1891, Esther has lost years:

John Atkinson 54
Esther Atkinson 36


Anyhow -- she was a widow when she married. Hmm. Maybe yes, maybe no?


"Crook and Billy Row" is a census location in 1881 ... no Boagey or Atkinson there in 1881.

ive got one of the cert through today its the marriage cert of john atkinson and esther boagey itsays
october 1988
john atkinson 36yrs widower coal miner residence stanley crook and billy row
father richard atkinson decided
esther boagey 28yrs widow residence stanley crook and billy row
father william bayes
in the presence of john dougall and a x the mark of margaret dougall
district auckland durham
hope the others come tomorrow

Tell them to hurry up then as they should give all that is needed to sort out this nutty family.
viv
P.S tell mother I dont include her in the nutty ones.

no not yet due next week around the 20th

HOUSEHOLD PLACE JOHN FRANCIS M 1876 35 Sunderland Durham
HOUSEHOLD PLACE GERTRUDE MARY F 1904 7 Sunderland Durham
HOUSEHOLD PLACE GERTRUDE MAY F 1881 30 Sunderland Durham
HOUSEHOLD PLACE JAMES EDWARD M 1902 9 Sunderland Durham
HOUSEHOLD PLACE JOHN M 1905 6 Sunderland Durham
HOUSEHOLD PLACE MICKEL M 1910 1 Sunderland Durham
HOUSEHOLD PLACE THOMAS DAVID M 1908 3 Sunderland Durham

That is them taken care of.

Sorry Sean,they are still together.

Bayes was one of the names considered ,not Byers, I think it was Sean.
Have you had the readable cert through yet for boagey / atkinson?

hi all i have a hunch hear me out i think that gertrude was a place not mace ive found a gertrude m place in 1901 cen married to a john f place in durham living next door are the byers didnt we think that esther was a byers before boagey i cant find john and gertrude together on the 1911 cences would you look
if not im wondering if they were both married and ran away together both changing there names and thats why we cant find any trace of lucy because mothers maiden name is place not mace well you did say they got away with every thing in them days sean xx

Births Dec 1903
Gardiner Cicely Louisa Auckland 10a 245

Marriages Sep 1928
Gardiner Cicely L (Cave) Auckland 10a 440


1911

GARDINER CICELY LOUISA 1904 7 Auckland Durham

GARDINER TIMOTHY 1865 46 Auckland Durham
GARDINER MARIAN 1867 44 Auckland Durham

Nope.

what about this one viv looks like a cioely gardiner 1903 oct nov dec did i say charles had a slight lisp so maybe couldnt say here name right also found a william gardiner and a francis gardiner 1902 and 1904 also aq lillian 1907 gardiner 1907 may be had more children before he married our martha sean

Cant find this one in1911

Births Sep 1908
Atkinson Lucy Lanchester 10a 381

probably why not

*********************************

Deaths Sep 1908 (>99%)
ATKINSON Lucy 0 Lanchester 10a 170

LOUISA1905

1911

HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON HENRY M 1884 27 Darlington Durham
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON LAURANCE GRAHAM M 1882 29 Darlington Durham
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON LOUISA F 1905 6 Darlington Durham
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON MARY LOUISA F 1881 30 Darlington Durham
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON MAUD F 1908 3 Darlington Durham

LOUISA 1905
1911
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON DOROTHY JANE F 1905 6 Hartlepool Durham
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON JOHN ROBT M 1905 6 Hartlepool Durham
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON LAVINIA F 1909 2 Hartlepool Durham
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON LOUISA F 1881 30 Hartlepool Durham
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON LOUISA F 1906 5 Hartlepool Durham
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON ROBT M 1874 37 Hartlepool Durham
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON STEHPHEN M 1867 44 Hartlepool Durham
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON THOMAS M 1886 25 Hartlepool Durham
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON VIOLET F 1910 7 MONTHS Hartlepool Durham
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON WILLIAM M 1911 3 MONTHS Hartlepool Durham
HOUSEHOLD ATKINSON WINIFRED F 1903 8 Hartlepool Durham

lets say william was married before ive found a william gardiner a francis gardeiner and also a lillian maybe lo 1907 the others 1902 ish and 1904 ish says long shot but william and francis same family same as william francis also lillian our lo im crap at this just want to find something cant find half as much as you lot

Essentially, there are four Marthas in the 1911 born c1885 in Bishop Auckland (who don't have middle names, although the ones with middle names are outside the age range anyhow), always assuming our Martha, if living, reported her place of birth consistently:

DOUGLASS MARTHA 1886 25 South Shields Durham
LYNCH MARTHA 1887 24 Auckland Durham
RUMNEY MARTHA 1887 24 Auckland Durham
SPEAK MARTHA 1886 25 Auckland Durham


Er, who are those Atkinsons, Viv?

Oops, sorry - that's one of the Louisas from the births I posted.

I did the Martha job too ,so my guess is ,the funny farm,,or snuck off under a new name if william francis boagey was a b*****r like his son charles said.


Edit,,wasnt happy with it