Find Living Relatives

I have ordered Ruth marriage to Cunningham 1933 Devonport Vol 5b Page541
Ruth Williams birth 07/07/1912 Devonport Mothers Maiden name May Vol 5b Page 545. Ordered

Ernest S Frearson married to Ruth Cunningham Wantage Berkshire Vol2c Page 11135. Ordered

I found two marriage for a Sarah E Griffiths one to a John M Morgan 2 qr 1959 Vol 8a Page433
Sarah E Griffiths to a Thomas J G Thomas 4 qr Vol 8a Page 491. might have to order both.
No mention of Ruth on Frearson Will.

I received the will for Ernest S Frearson but mention of Ruth Cunningham so made try and order the article about the court case. Still waiting for Sarah's E Griffiths if it correct I can search for her marriage. I have found a couple of marriages for Sarah E Griffiths, hopefully the certificate will be here this week.

So will order up Marriage Certificate for Ruth Cunningham and Ernest S Frearson.
Marriage 1941 Wantage Berkshire volume 2C page 11135.

Yes, your right AG, I don't think Ruth would've had a child with her on the base- my brain has gone a bit mushy on this one!

I'm pretty chuffed with the info that's been found- just a shame there weren't more details given in the irish article or the bigamy article.

And yes, please get back to us with the details of the certificate- maybe we can think of other avenues when we know for certain.

Sorry, AQ, I don't have FMP sub, so can't see 1939 details.

My feeling is that the Mullen baby would be returned to its mother, or placed in care of some sort, after (or even before) the court case. Any "adoption" was probably unofficial, as Ruth returned the money she'd received from the Admiralty. She wouldn't have needed to return it if the adoption had been official. I doubt if Ruth would still have her in 1939.

In 1939, as Ruth was separated from William by that time, she was presumably living as a single woman, and unlikely to have a young child with her on an RAF base, whether it be the Mullen child or another born in 1936.

If 5/6/36 is the child Sarah's DOB, and if she was 12 - 18 months old when the photo was taken, as Paulette thinks, then Ruth probably sent the photo in 1939.
But it doesn't mean Sarah was necessarily (a) her child) or (b) living with her.

Oh, I don't know!
I hope Paulette comes back to tell us what's on the birth cert when it arrives.

AG- do you think it's possible the Griffiths added to the 1939 was added to the person below Ruth? No surnames of Ruth were crossed through when the surname Griffiths was added.

Perhaps if Sarah was on the 1939 register under Ruth, listed as Cunningham, but then when she came to work or get married, the register was altered to reflect her birth surname?

EDIT:
Just took another look at the 1939 register. It seems to me the person under Ruth with the closed record was a waitress- possibly born in 1921 and was single. I don't think it was Sarah.

AG- I'd be suprised if it is her, but, if it has been confirmed with that DOB there is a chance.

It sounds like it'll have a father listed. We might also get more information from the address supplied on the certificate.

Even if that turns out to be the right birth, I don't see anything definitely for her later in life - assuming she was in England/Wales.

There are lots of Sarah E Griffiths-es marrying, including one in Carmarthen in 1959.

I got excited about a Sarah E Fearon , born 1936, who died in Carlisle in 1967 - but Fearon was her married surname (and not Fearson spelled wrongly) , and her ms was Jackson.

Can't see any deaths of Sarah E's with precisely that DOB - though she would only be 81, so no reason to assume she's deaceased.

Wow, Paulette- I presume the chap was from the registrar office? Did he confirm the date of birth as 5th June?

I have sent for a birth certificate for a Sarah E Griffiths date of birth 5/6/1036 mothers name William born in Carmarthen. On my photo of Sarah it's sys 5/6/1936 if this is the right person I can go that root and maybe find out more about Ruth Williams. The chap I spoke to on the phone said he thought I was on the right path so here hoping, I cannot wait for the postman to turn up each morning it like waiting for candy.
Sarah E Griffiths
Carmarthen 05/06/1936
2 Quarter
Volume 11a
Page 1563

makes you wonder where the death of Ruth was found so they opened her record on the 1939 register

or they opened it as matter of course as she was born over 100 years ago so is outside the 100 year exposure rule

I have search the records around the world I have friend in places round the world but no luck so far. I will just keep going.

As there's no sign of her death in England/ Wales, I suspect she may have returned to Ireland.

Or, of course, she may still be alive - only 105!

I don't see any emigration record for her going anywhere else - but if she flew, there wouldn't be anything online, anyway.

OK- another attempt. Looking into this one- right area and I don't see them at the address before 1954:

Electoral registers:

290 Durants Road, Enfield

1954- 1958

Robert S Griffiths
Ruth Griffiths
-----------------------

In 1959 Ruth is living there alone
------------------------------------

EDIT: Not this couple- found them on the 1939 register- Ruth (Ratti) married Charles Witkiss in 1960:

Griffiths Household (2 People) 61 South Street , Rochdale C.B., Lancashire, England
Ruth Witkiss (Griffiths) 27 Jun 1906 Female Cotton Beamer Married
Robert S Griffiths 09 Jun 1905 Male Motor Drive Corporation Married
----------------------------------------

Even though it's not the correct Ruth, I'll leave it up so others don't research the same couple.

Another PM from Paulette received today, confirms that Ruth " lived with a man called Griffiths".

She has sent for the 1936 Carmarthen birth of Sarah E Griffiths, just in case.

As AQ says, the Griffiths name doesn't seem to have appeared until 1954 - but Paulette felt it was worth a try.

Going back to the photo, if the date is the date of the photo, then that child may be the Mullen baby.

It's all so frustrating!
And as the birth record in Ireland isn't online, we can't check what that child's name was, or whether it was re-registered or corrected - though presumably it was.

Perhaps she's the closed record with Ruth in 1939 - if she was able to keep her.

my mind is going around the false birth entry of the Mullen baby that was corrected to the right name

am wondering whether she still kept the baby and brought her back to England but her birth wont be on the uk records

I agree that the Frearson marriage was the bigamous one, supported by the wording of a PM from Paulette:

" . . . . . . Also Ruth did live with Ernest S Frearson around 1941 he passed away in 1965. It a very difficult life she lead its very sad."

It does look as if she never married Mr Griffiths - maybe she never divorced William Cunningham, as has been suggested already.

You could contact the Berkshire Record Office to see if they can tell you if Ruth Cunningham was listed on the electoral registers at Foxhill Road, and other people that were living there. (they may charge for this service but it's worth enquiring)

http://www.berkshirerecordoffice.org.uk/family-history/electoral-registers-poll-books/

My feelings are that the Sarah E Griffiths birth is not correct. (although obtaining the certificate you will know for certain)

Looking at the possible information we have on Ruth, it seems that not long after she married William Cunningham she moved to Ireland- where she got into a spot of bother re falsely registering a baby in 1933 that wasn't hers.

By 1939 Ruth had returned to England- living in Hampshire. ( I had thought the birth for a Kathleen P Cunningham in 1937 New Forest was a child of Ruths- although, looking more closely, she was likely the daughter of Albert and Hilda Cunningham, who were living in New Forest in 1939- so I have now discounted this birth)

In 1941 Ruth married Ernest Frearson in Berkshire, but by 1943 it was discovered that it was a bigamous marriage and she returned to surname Cunningham- At this time she was living in Foxhill Road, Reading.

After this the trail runs cold- the surname Griffiths was added to the 1939 register in 1954 Middlesex- indicating that Ruth was likely living in that area at the time.