GRAVE INSCRIPTIONS-ST JOHN At HACKNEY CHURCH

[Greenland]

He was one of six children born to Thomas James and Mary Heitman.  Thomas was the fourth child and first born son.  All were baptised within the City of London, some at St Olave, Hart Street, or Limehouse, St Giles Cripplegate.  He was born in February 1795 and baptaised in early March.

Thanks for your interest.

[Bookbox]

The baptism register shows his date of birth as 2 February 1795, so he would have been 64 at burial in March 1859, as stated in the burial register. If the London City death is his, his age in the index (67) is three years adrift, probably an acceptable margin of error.

The burial register shows his abode as West Ham, which is also adjacent to Hackney. I can see no death registration for him in the expected quarter (or the following one) in West Ham registration district. The only other Thomas James death in a ‘London’ district in the expected quarter was in Lambeth, aged 51, which is 13 years adrift. So, again, the London City registration seems feasible.

As regards death registrations in general, whilst some are known to be missing, it is more likely that an age is wrongly reported than that a registration is missing (as suggested earlier).

[jonw65]

Barts Hospital was in West London RD in 1859 (rather than London City RD)
Another problem might be that page reference (1c) 77, is possibly the first page of deaths of a particular sub district. And so might be too early on in the quarter for it to be the right Thomas James.
There is also a burial of a Thomas James, age 67, at the City of London & Tower Hamlets Cemetery, 23 January 1859.

[jonw65]

There is this death registration, if there was some kind of mix up with the name.
March 1859 West Ham 4a 3
Tame, Thomas
age 65

[Bookbox]

All good points, jonw65.

[Greenland]

Thank you Bookbox and jonw65.  The City of London entry (when age was 67) interested me too, however, jonw65 confirms the death as being in January whereas the family vault states 28 February 1859 so Thomas was just into his 65th year and the City of London registry entry can be excluded.

I am not very familiar with London and am not sure what the significance of the reference is to Barts Hospital?  Please would you mind explaining this aspect (if you have the time).  Of interest is the possibility of incorrect naming so perhaps I should investigate Thomas Tame next and see if he was around in censuses.  What a pity the certificates are so expensive but I must not complain, we are a little better off now that indexes are being published by the GRO.

Thank you both for your suggestions and guidance.

[Bookbox]

I am not very familiar with London and am not sure what the significance of the reference is to Barts Hospital?  Please would you mind explaining this aspect (if you have the time).

Some deaths in unexpected registration districts are the result of people dying in hospital, rather than at home. I suggested that the City of London death might have been at Barts Hospital, which is in the City. But jonw65 reminded me that before 1870 Barts was not in that district but was in West London district. So my suggestion can safely be ignored, and my apologies for any confusion.

[Greenland]

Please don't apologise, I am just happy that you were able to respond and understand now.  Thanks so much.  I am going to investigate Thomas Tame just in case there is anything of significance here.

Thank you again for help given.