Genealogy Chat

Lou, If she is the Emma found in 1881 with John [joiner]and son David [errand boy] at Peel Street, I think we can assume she was not a doctor then. This seems to be the only Emma Drakeley. Am I right? I have assumed that Emma and Martha are the same person.

Well, so have I but who knows! I need to get the parish registers checked for those baptisms cos I'm certain that only TWO girls were christened, not 3. There WAS a 3rd daughter, Mary Ann, but she died in infancy. Its her marriage cert that will give the best clue at the moment I think. If she was Doctor Martha Drakeley on 3rd July 1867, I'm certain she was Doctor Martha Smithard when she got married on 9th May 1867! Lou

Sadly I cannot contribute any more but I am fascinated by this story. Please let me know what you find out!

Martha Drakeley died March qtr 1872 aged 27 So Martha and Emma are not the same girl and I need a fresh marriage for John. I also need her marriage and death certs and see what they tell me but she can't have been a very good doc! Lou

Lou They will have trade directories for Derby at the local studies library in Irongate, Derby Derby Local Studies Library 25B Irongate DERBY DE1 3GL Tel:-01332 255393 Try ringing them Margaret

Cheers Margaret Will do that once I have these certs and something to go on rather than suspecting she may have lived in La-La Land! Hope you're feeling better! Lou xx

nudge---I want to know more

Well I can't see a 2nd marriage for John and still cannot locate sister Emma so am wondering whether they shacked up together once wifey number 1 died. Will have to add birth cert from one of THEIR kids to the list of things needed to solve this puzzle!

No help in soving the mystery of the doctor I'm afraid, but looks like Martha and Esther did have a younger sister Emma: Birth registered September quarter 1850 SMITHARD Emma Derby XIX 557

The Deceased Wife’s Sister Act was introduced in 1835 to clarify a murky area of British marriage law. The Act ruled that all marriages with one’s deceased wife’s sister which had taken place before 31 August 1835 could not be retracted, but that all subsequent unions of this type were rendered invalid. (Previously these marriages were legal, but could be annulled at any time.) Thus a single day might be all that separated a respectable wife from a mere concubine, though in practice such marriages continued to be celebrated illegally and were frequently tolerated by society.The Act was finally repealed in 1907.

Thanks Judith & Glen I'd had no luck locating a birth for Emma so that's tidied that one up for me, many thanks for looking. So she was a 'baby' and the older girls were baptised alongside which makes perfect sense. Batch baptism, I think someone referred to it as last week! So..according to the info Glen has posted for me, John could not have married Emma legally, but I guess they could have lived together and just said they were married. Pure speculation, not as if Emma was an uncommon name, it's just not being able to find a 2nd marriage for John in the period between the 1871 and 1881 census during which time Martha has died and he has 'married' again and so far not being able to be sure what happened to Emma beyond her baptism then made me wonder! This is definitely one that's intriguing me!

Hi Jim No...please tell me that she didn't marry someone called John Riley Drakeley??? Lou

Regarding the "Doctor" bit of the puzzle - as far as I can tell the first woman to graduate in USA were in 1849. In this country, the first college was Girton, which started in my town - Hitchin - in the 1870s, but the first women to graduate were in Oxford Univ, in - wait for it - 1921. So I have no idea what your "Doctor" refers to! nell

Jim It wont give us the spouse name that far back, although I COULD look under John and see whether the reference number matches. Shoot! Wonder whether Freebmd or UKBmd would have it. I can't access freebmd cos my sister's pooter's firewall wont let me and I wouldn't dream of turning it off. Could someone PLEASE check that info Jim has kindly posted on freebmd and if it's not there either I'll check 1837 under John. Nell No, me neither....Doctor of Fantasies me suspects! Lou x

Lou Just checked 1837online, she didnt marry John Riley Drakeley. Back to the drawing board Margaret

Margaret Sarah Morrlle has found a possible for Emma to a Thomas Bassendine, but at least it makes my tree a LOT less complicated! Very impressive service from Burton, by the way, it came this morning! Thanks Lou

I'm still not any closer to working out WHY she refers to herself as a doctor when she appears as a witness to her sister's marriage but Gary has now very kindly found the family on the 1851 and 1861 census for me. On the 1861 census Martha is down as a Mill Hand! That's only 2 years before she starts to call herself doctor. I now have her marriage certificate (married 7 weeks before her sister) and she refers to herself as Dr Martha Drakeley on that too. Gives me a time frame for further investigation now....1861 to 1863, did she take up apocotheray??? Or as my Dad keeps telling me 'Well if she was anything like your great grannie she was probably a witch doctor'. Oh!