Martha Tabram's third sister - Part 1

[Gary Barnett]

As shown by their “birth certificates”, Elizabeth and Ann Dowsett of Suffolk were both born in Bury St Edmunds, but 16 months’ apart. It seems unlikely that, after Elizabeth’s birth, their parents came to London for a period, then returned to Suffolk so that Ann would be born there rather than in London. A more probable scenario is that the family did not come to London until after Ann’s birth in April 1807.

Thanks, Lee. It’s clear once you know what to look for. Both certificates were issued on the same day - 1st September, 1813 - at Dr Williams’s Library in Redcross Street, near Cripplegate in the City of London. Presumably, then, the family were settled in the capital by 1813.

[Keith Lee]

Agreed. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the registration date on both certificates suggests the family didn’t go to London until 1813. This is much later than Amanda Purse stated.

But I wonder how the signatures of the delivering surgeon and attending nurse or midwife got onto the certificates. Surely the two of them didn’t travel all the way to London just to sign a few pieces of paper. Perhaps one of the parents, returning to Bury to visit their family there, took the unsigned forms back with them and had the surgeon and nurse add their signatures.

In any case, it may not be possible to definitively resolve the question of whether Martha White’s mother was the Suffolk Elizabeth or the Romford Elizabeth. Charles White and Elizabeth Dowsett were married by banns, not by licence. As a result, the entry in the parish register at St Giles Camberwell doesn’t show the names of the fathers of the bride and groom or the fathers’ professions. This information can normally be relied upon to settle uncertainties like the identity of Charles White’s wife. Its absence in this case means there may always be doubt.

Unless, of course, Debra is able to perform her magic again and produce the required evidence, as she did with Sarah White’s marriage register entry.

Keith

[Gary Barnett]

Agreed. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, the registration date on both certificates suggests the family didn’t go to London until 1813. This is much later than Amanda Purse stated.

But I wonder how the signatures of the delivering surgeon and attending nurse or midwife got onto the certificates. Surely the two of them didn’t travel all the way to London just to sign a few pieces of paper. Perhaps one of the parents, returning to Bury to visit their family there, took the unsigned forms back with them and had the surgeon and nurse add their signatures.

In any case, it may not be possible to definitively resolve the question of whether Martha White’s mother was the Suffolk Elizabeth or the Romford Elizabeth. Charles White and Elizabeth Dowsett were married by banns, not by licence. As a result, the entry in the parish register at St Giles Camberwell doesn’t show the names of the fathers of the bride and groom or the fathers’ professions. This information can normally be relied upon to settle uncertainties like the identity of Charles White’s wife. Its absence in this case means there may always be doubt.

Unless, of course, Debra is able to perform her magic again and produce the required evidence, as she did with Sarah White’s marriage register entry.

Keith

Are they signatures, or just names written by the registrar?

[Keith Lee]

Are they signatures, or just names written by the registrar?

For the certificates to have probative value, wouldn’t they need to bear the actual signatures of the people certifying the accuracy of the information?

[Gary Barnett]

For the certificates to have probative value, wouldn’t they need to bear the actual signatures of the people certifying the accuracy of the information?

That’s a good point. I’ve noticed that John Creed’s name seems darker than the rest of the handwriting on both certificates, which suggests there may have been more than one pen in use.

Apparently, Dr Williams’s Library was a centre for non-conformist study, I wonder how/why it also functioned as a register office.

https://dwl.ac.uk/view.php?page=93

[Keith Lee]

Update: Isaac Jeffery’s first marriage

The 1880 marriage record for Sarah White and Isaac Jeffery, kindly supplied by Debra Arif (post 23 of this thread), shows that Isaac is a widower. This was something that my initial research into Martha Tabram’s third sister hadn’t uncovered, so I went looking for details of Isaac’s first marriage.

According to the wedding records of St Matthias church in Stoke Newington, Hackney, one Isaac Jeffrey, bachelor, married Katherine Raisbeck, widow, on February 19, 1857. This was about 7 years after Isaac had been discharged from the army.

In the marriage register, his rank or profession is difficult to decipher, but it appears to be Pensioner. The details shown for his father differ from the register entry for his second marriage only in the description of his father’s rank or profession. For the first marriage it’s shown as In Service, whereas the second marriage’s entry is Licensed Victualler. The latter matches the description in Isaac’s baptism record.

Checking the records for a Katherine or Catherine who married someone called Raisbeck in the United Kingdom between 1830 and 1857, the only candidate I found was Catharine Swan, born in Fife, Scotland on May 16, 1816. Her parents’ names were John and Catharine. (Scotland, Parish Births & Baptisms 1564-1929)

On January 9, 1831, 14-year-old Catherine Swan married Edward Raisbeck at St Andrew’s church, Holborn in the City of London. The curate who conducted the service noted on the record that the bride’s widowed mother, Catherine Swan, had explicitly consented to her minor daughter marrying.
(London, England: London Church of England Parish Registers, ref. no. P69/And2/A/01/Ms 6672/6)

Catherine and Edward went on to have three children, of which at least one died in infancy. (London, England: London Church of England Parish Registers; reference nos. P69/And2/A/01/Ms 6667/24, P91/JNB/002 and P83/PAU1/001; England & Wales, Civil Registration Death Index, 1837-1915)

So far, no death record has been discovered for Catherine’s first husband.

When Isaac and Catharine married in 1857, Isaac had just turned 33 and Katherine was 40. Since the 1861 Census shows Isaac lodging by himself in Good Easter, Essex, it appears his first marriage did not last long. However, to date, no death record has been discovered that can unquestionably be linked to his first wife. (Between the years 1857 and 1880, there are at least 15 women with the same or a similar name who died in greater London and Essex, and who could have been Isaac’s late wife.)


Marriage register - Isaac and Katherine - 1857.jpg

[Keith Lee]

Update: Isaac Jeffery’s blindness

Another surprise in the 1880 marriage record for Sarah White and Isaac Jeffery was the description of Isaac’s occupation as Factory Worker. In my original post I’d indicated that, from Isaac’s appearance in the 1861 Census forward, he’d been labelled as blind. It had been my assumption that, throughout the 19^th century, people with disabilities were not accommodated by employers, particularly in a factory setting.

So I reviewed the data, beginning with the 1861 Census report. The name spelling, birth year and birthplace of the Isaac Jeffery in the report all match the birth record and British Army personnel file. In the Rank, Profession or Occupation column of the Census form, the words Pensioner Chelsea have been entered. In the form’s final column, headed Whether Blind or Deaf-and-Dumb, the word Blind has been entered.

A check of the online records of the Chelsea Pensioners organization confirmed that, in the entire 19^th century, it paid a pension to only one soldier named Isaac Jeffery. So if the entries on the Census form are true, it must mean the former Foot soldier had lost his sight by 1861.

Now we have the register entry for Isaac’s first marriage in 1857 (see previous post), it may be there’s evidence his sight was failing even then. Isaac didn’t sign the 1857 register entry, but just put his mark. The same is true of the 1880 marriage register entry. Yet the attestation form that was completed when he enlisted in 1842 in the 98^th Regiment of Foot bears a very clear and precise signature by the recruit. Even to my untrained eyes, it appears to be in a different hand from the other writing on the form. So perhaps he was already losing his sight or had completely lost it at the time he married Katherine Raisbeck.

I still can’t explain how a blind man, in the late 19^th century, could be employed in a factory, but at least now it’s clear to me that Isaac Jeffery, Sarah’s husband, had been blind for nearly 25 years when they married.


Isaac Jeffery attestation signature - 1842.jpg