Holt or Shrawley

[Trees]

Please has anyone access to either Holt or Shrawley baptisms?
On my direct line I have Thomas Marshall who was buried in Shrawley 12 Apr 1758 but of HOLT. He  wasChurch Warden for two different  terms in Holt.
His first marriage was to Hannah Jones on 20 Jan 1728 in Shrawley and his second to Mary FOXALL was  26 Aug 1744 in Hartlebury. This marriage by licence given for three churches Holt Stone or Hartlebury.
My problem is I can not fond baptisms for Thomas Marshall or Hannah Jones (There is a possible for Mary Foxall in Hanley William)
There is a patron submission on Family Search for a Hannah daughter of William and Hannah Jones 1690 n Holt but as there are  conflicting entries for a son to this couple I need it to be checked
Hope some one can help please
Trees

[miriamkinga]

There's a baptism for a Thomas Marshall in Shrawley 11/01/1697 son of William (from the Worcestershire baptisms).

[miriamkinga]

Do you have Hannah's age at death? There's a baptism for a Hannah Jones (daughter of James) in Shrawley 17/12/1689 but that would make her 39 when she got married

[Trees]

First many thanks for the Thomas baptism. However the allegation for a licence to marry Mary says he was 35 that was in 1744 that gives a birth about 1709 and Mary was said to be 26. So I wonder has he knocked ten years off to impress Mary .(would a Church Warden have been so bad at maths or did he really not know how old he was or just liberal with the truth?)  Then again if he was born in 1709 he was only 18 marrying Hannah and that seems young He was first elected Church warden at 28 which again seems young. Sadly there is no age on Hannah's burial record but if Thomas was born on 1697 Hannah would only be 8 years his senior. I am 6 years older than my husband and married at 32 first and only marriage for both of us celebrating our ruby wedding in the summer, so it is possible Umm lots of "what ifs" here

[miriamkinga]

Sorry  trying to be helpful but looks like I've made it even more confusing. It's a frustrating hobby

[Trees]

Big apology I have been away for a few days. Please don't think I am not grateful for your find it is more than interesting. I am wondering if the age he gave on the Allegation was wrong but why would he have done that? he would have been12 years older than he declared which seems a lot
This is a real mystery
He picked up the licence on the day of the wedding it says they must marry between 8 an 12 of the fore noon and married in Holt, Hartlebury or Stone. They chose Hartlebury but it must have been an awful rush for him to get to and from Worcester Cathedral to Hartlebury arrange and hold  the wedding all before twelve
It looks like a child was expected but only just(the marriage was 26 Aug 1744 the baby was baptised 11 Mar 1744/45 in Holt