Genealogy Chat

So complicated, please read below.

I have been tracing hubbys side back. From his grans marriage cert and birth cert I traced her mum and dad living in Southwark in 1901 - dad is a railway porter. He is Thomas Jenkins born 1862 Herefordshire, mum is Harriet Hutton born 1869 Longcot, Berks. The eldest boy is Thomas born 1889/90 Clerkenwell. All the other kids born Horseferry Road, Westminster. In the 1891 I find Thomas Jenkins born 1862 Hentland Herefordshire in barracks at Westminster down as a coporal, Guards,single. I have found him enlising in 1881 in Worcestershire. BUT on the same census I also find Thomas Jenkins born 1862 Hentland Herefordshire in lodgings with Harriet and son Thomas in Bermondsey and down as married. (All right ages and right birth places). His occupation is shown as 'soldier'. Now I understood that soldiers could not marry without permission or below the age of 30 at that time, so I assumed that he and Harriet had married on the quiet and his officers didnt know. I then found their marriage in 1889 (guess Thomas junior on the way) and sent for certificate. Today I received the cert. It is in a register office 12.11.1889 in Westminster. BUT there is Thomas Jenkins shown as occupation - GARDENER??? Harriet is shown as dom serv with her father a shepherd, all correct info. Have I been following the wrong man or is this guy lying through his teeth?

Good question Heather! lol. But if he was lying, why did he change his occupation and not just his age by a year or two? Did you have to present a birth cert in those days for marriage? Jeanette x

If soldiers weren't allowed to marry without permission, he probably lied on the marriage cert. I know I would if I had to lol

No I dont think you needed any sort of id. And why a Register Office? Thats all I can think of too - that he thought he was being clever - I mean he was a Guardsman - so he says Gardener? Or was the registrar deaf? Whatever it has really thrown all my research on him.

Heather Have you got a birth/death cert for him. Maybe there are 2 men with the same name. they might of got married in a regiester office as there was a baby on the way?

I must say I am inclined to think he was lying if all the other details are correct. but it does beg a few questions doesn't it? Like you say, why a register office? Was it a quicker process in that you didn't have to wait for the banns to be read - with it being a shotgun wedding! lol

Heather Have you got thomas junoir birth cert, if so what does that say

Julie that was my worry that there were two Thomas Jenkins born 1862 in Hentland Herefordshire and I was following the wrong man. BUT then there he is with Harriet in the 1891 with occupation Soldier. And the kids all born Horseferry Road, Westminster (for those who dont know, thats where the Westminster Barracks were). Real problem this is now.

No I havent got Thomas Juniors birth cert only his sister, Ellen as she is hubbys grandmother. She was born 1894 and he is a railway porter then. I understand this was a typical sort of job for a soldier to go into after leaving service as it was really quite a regimented occupation in the railways at that time and preference given to men used to taking orders. Im a bit reluctant to spend another £7 now if the bloke is going to lie on every certificate.

Heather Id start over again, look back from today and work your way backwards you may have missed something. Id order the certs for the line that leads to him. I think there are 2 Thomas Julie

It certainly looks as if this is your man but there are two possiblilities for the occupation discrepancy: 1 He lied so that noone would ask if he had permission to marry (but I don't think the registrar WOULD have asked as the marriage rule was an army rule not a registration one 2 AS the certificate you have is a transcription, somewhere along the line guardsman was read and mistranscribed as gardener - possibly when the registrar wrote up his returns to send to the GRO if you received your cert from them. I don't think Westminster usually issue certificates for family history purposes but it might be worth asking them to check the original register to see what the occupation is on there.

I thought that Julie, but I have backtracked and cant see how he isnt same man. 1901 Born 1862 Hentland living with Harriet born 1869 Berkshire. Kids, Thomas Junior born right year in Clerkenwell, all other kids born Westminster in same place at Barracks. Birth cert 1894 for Ellen - father railway porter mother Harriet Hutton. 1891 census - Thomas Jenkins 1862 Hentland, Herefordshire, soldier, living with Harriet and son Thomas born Clerkenwell. (At same time in barracks at Westminster and shown single). 1889 - Marriage cert Register office Westminster Harriet Hutton and Thomas Jenkins born 1862 and 1869. 1881 Thomas Jenkins born Herefordshire 1862 signs up with Worcestshire Reg. Its madness. Thanks Judith, thats the only thing I can think of if he didnt lie, then Guardsman was mistranscribed at Gardener at some point.

Heather The Boer War was in 1889, maybe they got married as he was going off to war and maybe his job was a gardener before he enlisted in to the army. All maybe's i know . Julie

Certainly there are several years gap between the arrival of Thomas junior and the next kiddie, which also points to this guy being a soldier. SCREAM.

Heather sorry ive got to go to college now. Ill look in on your thread later and see how your getting on. Goodluck. Have you tried bmd to see if 2 thomas where born in that period. Julie

Julie thanks, but even if two Thomas Jenkins were born in 1862 in Hentland Herefordshire that would still not make sense that he is down as a soldier in 1891 on the census with his wife and Tom junior, but a year earlier down as a gardener on his marriage cert!!!! Thanks Lynn, it is a photocopy from GRO but obviously not the original, unless everyone had the same writing!!

Heather This was posted on the britregiment site hopefully it clears up when a man could or could not get married. 'My oldest copy of Queens Regulations is 1881 but the 1900 volume gives almost the same regulations so I am presuming that they were the same in 1840. In order to be put on the unit MARRIED ROLL he would have had to have had his Colonel's permission to marry. If he was not on the married roll he was not entitled to sleep out of camp every night and his wife was not given an allowance from his pay. There were other things but those are the two most important. The most important thing from your point of view though was that in order to obtain the Colonel's permission your man would have had to have served for 7years already. Also the Colonel could not prevent a man marrying without permission. But if a man did so he would never be put on the MARRIED ROLE.' So you could marry at any time you just didn't receive the benefits that went along with it. Keith

So it seems more likely it was a mistranscription of Guardsman for Gardener??? As Thomas had signed up in 1881 he would have been in the army for over 8 years when he married.