Find Ancestors

Hi Terry,

The one thing which does 'jump out at me' from those marriage details is that all the info we have so far points to Arthur Henry being born c 1876/77.

The one on this marriage cert puts him at being born c 1885. - Whereas he may have lied about his age, it is a big difference. - I just wonder if we have the correct marriage here?

Also the couple on 1911 say they have been married for 11 years which again could be a lie as they had several children before 1911.

Are you absolutely sure this marriage cert relates to 'your' Arthur Henry?

What other info do you have on him which you know to be correct?

Dea x

For info - this appears to be Jane:

1891 England Census
about Jane Perring
Name: Jane Perring
Age: 9
Estimated birth year: abt 1882
Relation: Daughter
Father's Name: George
Mother's Name: Sarah
Gender: Female
Where born: Plymouth

Civil parish: St Andrew
Ecclesiastical parish: St Peter
Town: Plymouth
County/Island: Devon
Country: England

Street Address:............... 3 Alice Street !



Registration district: Plymouth
Sub-registration district: St Andrew
ED, institution, or vessel: 14
Neighbors: View others on page
Household Members: Name Age
George Perring 49 ??? Labr.
Sarah Perring 49
Thomas Perring 14
George Perring 12
Jane Perring 9 *****

Source Citation: Class: RG12; Piece: 1735; Folio 17; Page 28; GSU roll: 6096845.

Dea x

Hi Dea,
The detail on my Gran (Jane) are correct, having spoken to several members of the family and a cousin to verify this. Her age on the marriage cert is also correct 23 in 1910 which would make her birth in 1882. I know that my Grandparents had about 12 children according to my gran when she was alive, but i only knew about six Aunties. including my mother. In the 1911 census info from Viv. some of the children born would have made Jane 9,11, 13 and 15 yrs old at their births which would have been to young, they did have a daughter Sarah Ann born in 1909. It get's more confusing with more info.
Terry K

On 1911 Jane would have been 19 when Kathleen the eldest was born ,not 9

viv

Add these 2 births and you get 6 aunties,plus a couple of uncles,Wiliam and Charles.
I make it 8 kids not 12,but maybe I have missed some.
If this is the correct family of course.....


Births Jun 1913

Foote Florence M Perring Plymouth 5b 467

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Births Mar 1816

Foote Lilian Perring Plymouth 5b 390

Well,

I believe Viv has posted the correct info on 'Harry' born in Wincanton to William + Julia.

She posted 2 possible birth (the 1875 looks favourite, though it really could be either).

Either he lied about his age at marriage or, more likely, it has been mistranscribed on the cert? (He should be 35 'ish not 25 ! ).

Anyway, it looks like the mystery is now solved.

Dea x

And changed his name for some reason,mind you Arthur Henry does have more of a ring to it than plain Harry...

The best thing to do is check out ALL the childrens names born to Arthur and Jane and see if they add up to what we have on here.

Kathleen {kate}
Mary Jane
William Henry
Charles{charley}
Sarah ann
Susan Elizabeth
Florence
and Llilian.

Hi,
Sorry Viv. your right, I'm looking at a lot of info. so got confused. I will now look at purchasing William's details and go from there. If I need anything further hope I can contact you all for help. Many thanks to all you good people for all your help in my reseach.
Kind Regards
Terry K

I am sure we will be here,,,,,none of us seem to get out much Terry;)
If you need more help on the family just tag another message on here and we will see it,even after quite some time.
Good on here we are...
good luck.
viv

There was a marriage for a Harry Foot in Wincanton 1894 to a Elizabeth Amelia Godfrey,maybe if he got married before and there wasn't a death or divorce this could be the reason Harry didn't marry jane until 1910.

Maryb

If it was Harry born wincanton 1875 5c 513 there was also a jane with same 5c 513 she died 1875

Maryb

Well spotted Maryb

Dea x

I think it might be a 'red herring' though Maryb as Harry seems to be with Elizabeth + family on 1901.

Although it is not unheard of to be on census twice!!

I will post this purely for info as I can't trace them on 1911.

Births Dec 1865
Godfrey Elizabeth Amelia Wincanton 5c 539
...............

1891 England Census
about Elizabeth Godfrey
Name: Elizabeth Godfrey
Age: 25
Estimated birth year: abt 1866
Relation: Daughter
Father's Name: James
Mother's Name: Helen
Gender: Female
Where born: Horsington, Somerset, England

Civil parish: Horsington
Ecclesiastical parish: Horsington
Town: Horsington
County/Island: Somerset
Country: England

Registration district: Wincanton
Sub-registration district: Milborne Port
ED, institution, or vessel: 7
Neighbors: View others on page
Household Members: Name Age
James Godfrey 61
Helen Godfrey 51
Elizabeth Godfrey 25
Julia Godfrey 20
Frances Godfrey 15


Source Citation: Class: RG12; Piece: 1902; Folio 80; Page 8; GSU roll: 6097012
//////////////////////////

1901 England Census
about Elizabeth Foot
Name: Elizabeth Foot
Age: 35
Estimated birth year: abt 1866
Relation: Wife
Spouse's name: Harry
Gender: Female
Where born: Horsington, Somerset, England

Civil parish: Horsington
Ecclesiastical parish: St John the Baptist
Town: Horsington
County/Island: Somerset
Country: England


Registration district: Wincanton
Sub-registration district: Milborne Port
ED, institution, or vessel: 7
Neighbors: View others on page
Household schedule number: 69
Household Members: Name Age
Harry Foot 30 .............Baker
Elizabeth Foot 35
Godfrey Foot 5
William Sheppard 20

Source Citation: Class: RG13; Piece: 2304; Folio: 82; Page: 11.

This would 'appear' to be another Harry (possibly the 1873 birth?)


Dea x

That clears that one then,were there two Harry Foot's born same year and place then??

Maryb

Not necessarily Maryb.

There seem to have been 2 born within 2 years of each other in the same place.

However, as I said about the census, it is not unknown for the same person to be registered twice so I would not discount what you have found at this stage.

Dea x

Hi everyone,
This side of the family, my mothers side is really confusing and I'm only at the first hurdle in my research. I'm having trouble believing that my grandma would have five children outside of wedlock from 1901-1909, the stigma would have been enomous in those days.
Terry K

So who was to know that they werent married if they didnt tell anyone?
And it happened all he time,weddings were expensive,some people couldnt marry the person they lived with as one or both of them were married to someone else.
Divorce was even dearer and very hard to be granted,especially in the working class.
My great grandmother and great grandfather were married,but not to each other,they were both married "elsewhere" and my g.grandfathers spouse outlived him and my G.grans spouse died just 6 months before her.
It happened..a lot !

Thanks Viv when it's put like that It makes a lot of sense. Would it have been possible to not register your children as i cannot locate the first four in the BMD index, these were Kate (Kathleen) 1901,Mary Jane 1903, William Henry 1905 and Charles 1907.

Terry K

Births Mar 1901
-------------------------

FOOT Kathleen Plymouth 5b 242

Births Sep 1902
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Foote Mary Jane Plymouth 5b 256a


Births Sep 1904
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Foote William Henry Plymouth 5b 260


Births Sep 1906
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Foote Charley E. Stonehouse 5b 273


Births Mar 1909
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FOOTE Sarah Ann Plymouth 5b 237

Births Mar 1911
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Foote Susan E Plymouth 5b 236

All from

http://freebmd.org.uk/cgi/search.pl

Many thanks again Viv without that I would have been serching for ages.

Terry