It's enough to make you cry!
- Thread starter TonyV
- Start date
janetbooth
Top Dog Stalwart
There is a death registration in the March qtr 1867 at Leicester reg district of an Elizabeth VINES, aged 68. If this is your Elizabeth, it would definitely fit with her age in the 1861 census record.
I have been trying to find any other DEACON records in Kilby as Elizabeth consistently gives this as her birthplace in both the 1851 & 1861 census records. However, I can find no baptism for her there and the only DEACON baptisms I can find, are 3 in the late 1770's/early 1780's, i.e. William in 1774, Robert in 1777 & Sarah in 1781, their parents being John & Ann DEACON. Also a marriage at Kilby in 1799 for a Joseph DEACON. I wonder if this Robert could be the Robert DEACON who married Jane MOULD at Wigston.
Janet
I have been trying to find any other DEACON records in Kilby as Elizabeth consistently gives this as her birthplace in both the 1851 & 1861 census records. However, I can find no baptism for her there and the only DEACON baptisms I can find, are 3 in the late 1770's/early 1780's, i.e. William in 1774, Robert in 1777 & Sarah in 1781, their parents being John & Ann DEACON. Also a marriage at Kilby in 1799 for a Joseph DEACON. I wonder if this Robert could be the Robert DEACON who married Jane MOULD at Wigston.
Janet
TonyV
He who cleans up after his ancestors...
Janet
Thank you for taking so much time on my problems.
The death you refer to is indeed the correct one, that is if all my assumptions still pertain. But of course it puts her birth at around 1800 rather than 1809. My only comfort is that in the 1861 census her son Joseph had in effect become the man of the house and maybe he advised the enumerator of his mother's age without really knowing what it was. Likewise at her death he would have been the person to register it so it is likely that the age for her he gave in 1861 and in 1867 would have been consistent, as it was.
I also found some records in Kilby parish and others in the nearby parish of Wigston Magna. The Kilby church was a so-called chapelry of Wigston and the two are connected by a fairly short road. So my Robert and Jane entries are taken from Wigston rather than Kilby but I believe that this is a reasonable assumption i.e. that there were times when church events took place in the 'senior' church, either by individual choice or maybe because the incumbent required it.
Thank you for taking so much time on my problems.
The death you refer to is indeed the correct one, that is if all my assumptions still pertain. But of course it puts her birth at around 1800 rather than 1809. My only comfort is that in the 1861 census her son Joseph had in effect become the man of the house and maybe he advised the enumerator of his mother's age without really knowing what it was. Likewise at her death he would have been the person to register it so it is likely that the age for her he gave in 1861 and in 1867 would have been consistent, as it was.
I also found some records in Kilby parish and others in the nearby parish of Wigston Magna. The Kilby church was a so-called chapelry of Wigston and the two are connected by a fairly short road. So my Robert and Jane entries are taken from Wigston rather than Kilby but I believe that this is a reasonable assumption i.e. that there were times when church events took place in the 'senior' church, either by individual choice or maybe because the incumbent required it.
janetbooth
Top Dog Stalwart
It's a pleasure - hope I have helped in some small way along with the other contributors. Our ancestors certainly made it difficult for us in many cases, didn't they.
Janet
Janet
TonyV
He who cleans up after his ancestors...
Janet
As usual members of this forum have rallied to the cause and I am very grateful to you all. Sadly I am no further forward but if nothing else you have all confirmed some of my own findings.
If any other thoughts occur or something comes up I shall be very happy to hear from you all.
Tony
As usual members of this forum have rallied to the cause and I am very grateful to you all. Sadly I am no further forward but if nothing else you have all confirmed some of my own findings.
If any other thoughts occur or something comes up I shall be very happy to hear from you all.
Tony
MollyMay
Knows where to find the answers!
Not that this helps one jot in answering your dilemma, but I spent some time today with the Coton clan.
When William Coton married Elizabeth Deacon in 1828 one witness was Ann Deacon the other Malby Coton.
Luckily Malby lives through 4 census and dies 1874 (he is easy to find). He gives his pob as Grantham Lincs
There is a bap for Malby s/o Ambrose and Mary 19/4/1803.
Malby is a cabinet maker
I then looked to see if I could find a brother William for Malby
No William bap in Grantham but
A William Coton was bap in Stamford Lincs 9/12/1799 s/o Ambrose and Ann
William Coton married Sarah Duel 19/3/1820 at Leicester all Saints they then baptise 3 children there
William 29/9/1820
Mary Ann 18/11/1824
Sarah 31/8/1826 - buried 1827
William is listed as a cabinet maker
Sarah Corton(sic) is buried 24/6/1828 age 28 - her address Sanv[o]y Gate matches the baps of the 2 girls
This leaves William free to mary Elizabeth Deacon on 1/9/1828 - just a couple of months later
After all of this I am no closer to finding a death/burial for William Coton 1828-31 (or later if he was still alive in 1831)
When William Coton married Elizabeth Deacon in 1828 one witness was Ann Deacon the other Malby Coton.
Luckily Malby lives through 4 census and dies 1874 (he is easy to find). He gives his pob as Grantham Lincs
There is a bap for Malby s/o Ambrose and Mary 19/4/1803.
Malby is a cabinet maker
I then looked to see if I could find a brother William for Malby
No William bap in Grantham but
A William Coton was bap in Stamford Lincs 9/12/1799 s/o Ambrose and Ann
William Coton married Sarah Duel 19/3/1820 at Leicester all Saints they then baptise 3 children there
William 29/9/1820
Mary Ann 18/11/1824
Sarah 31/8/1826 - buried 1827
William is listed as a cabinet maker
Sarah Corton(sic) is buried 24/6/1828 age 28 - her address Sanv[o]y Gate matches the baps of the 2 girls
This leaves William free to mary Elizabeth Deacon on 1/9/1828 - just a couple of months later
After all of this I am no closer to finding a death/burial for William Coton 1828-31 (or later if he was still alive in 1831)
TonyV
He who cleans up after his ancestors...
Hi MollyMay
Great detective work, thank you.
I had also come across the earlier William Coton marriage but not done all the additional work you have. The death of Sarah Coton left William with two children to care for so it is easy to see why he would look for another wife quickly. At least two of my other ancestors in the 19th century re-married quickly after a first wife's death leaving youngsters to care for.
The second wife in each case might then find that the marriage was not a love match, more one of convenience, and find it unsatisfactory. Whether that would have led to desertion and then a bigamous second marriage is anyone's guess. But even if Elizabeth did that, it doesn't explain why there is no record of William's death, then or later. Unless of course he moved away from Leicestershire and died before 1837.
Another interesting but maybe unremarkable issue is that after Elizabeth married Charles they had Henry in 1833 and then apparently no more children until about 1838. That is quite a long interval but maybe there were infant deaths in between which they didn't register (or that I can't find anyway).
Tony
Great detective work, thank you.
I had also come across the earlier William Coton marriage but not done all the additional work you have. The death of Sarah Coton left William with two children to care for so it is easy to see why he would look for another wife quickly. At least two of my other ancestors in the 19th century re-married quickly after a first wife's death leaving youngsters to care for.
The second wife in each case might then find that the marriage was not a love match, more one of convenience, and find it unsatisfactory. Whether that would have led to desertion and then a bigamous second marriage is anyone's guess. But even if Elizabeth did that, it doesn't explain why there is no record of William's death, then or later. Unless of course he moved away from Leicestershire and died before 1837.
Another interesting but maybe unremarkable issue is that after Elizabeth married Charles they had Henry in 1833 and then apparently no more children until about 1838. That is quite a long interval but maybe there were infant deaths in between which they didn't register (or that I can't find anyway).
Tony
MollyMay
Knows where to find the answers!
I too have a girl, who married a man over twice her age (he lived next door) within weeks of his wife's death. That marriage did not last, she ran away with another man leaving her children with their father and his other children from the first marriage.
Back to the Cotons. I have tried - without success
to find William b1820 and Mary Ann b1826, I cannot find any trace of them (you would know if they stayed with Elizabeth and took the Vines name), so I can only surmise William took off with his children and then used a different name (if Cotton - we do not have a hope of ever finding them, I have Cottons and they used William and Mary in every family in every generation), leaving Elizabeth to marry your Charles.
I will continue to ponder.
Back to the Cotons. I have tried - without success
to find William b1820 and Mary Ann b1826, I cannot find any trace of them (you would know if they stayed with Elizabeth and took the Vines name), so I can only surmise William took off with his children and then used a different name (if Cotton - we do not have a hope of ever finding them, I have Cottons and they used William and Mary in every family in every generation), leaving Elizabeth to marry your Charles.I will continue to ponder.
TonyV
He who cleans up after his ancestors...
I don't think that William's children ever stayed with Elizabeth and/or Charles and there is no sign of them with Malby in 1841 either. Like their father they seem to have been teleported to Uranus or somewhere. It was a good idea of yours to look for them and one that hadn't occurred to me although it should have done because a few decades later Charles and Elizabeth's son Henry used aliases and I had to use children's names to find him. He too had a second wife and adopted children from the second wife's earlier pecadilloes.
What a family!
Charles and Elizabeth had a daughter Mary but her calculated date (no birth/baptism record again) is 1838. She appeared on the 1841 census in Uppingham and possibly in the 1851 census in Leicester as Mary Ann Vines. After that she too disappears into the ether later. But she certainly is the wrong age for William's daughter.
What a family!
Charles and Elizabeth had a daughter Mary but her calculated date (no birth/baptism record again) is 1838. She appeared on the 1841 census in Uppingham and possibly in the 1851 census in Leicester as Mary Ann Vines. After that she too disappears into the ether later. But she certainly is the wrong age for William's daughter.