William Peters marriage/census Louisa / Harriet (derby)

[captainjackdi]

Hi  I am very confused and hoping someone can help.

Jane Peters born 1864 married Leonard Walker born 1859 married each other in 1883. (of this I am definite. I have the marriage certificate which shows Jane was living at 2 Canal Street, Derby in 1883 and her father was William Peters and his profession was engine driver.

I found her on the 1881 census living at Canal Street but her parents are shown as William and Harriet. And same parents again for 1871albeit at diff address.  Initially I checked for a birth cert for Jane which i have now got shows dob 21 Aug 1864,  Louisa Peters formally Clark as mother, occ of father engine teder and address 6 stockbrook street.

When I look for a marriage for William and Louisa there is one comes up in 1863 in Derby.

My confusion is if Louisa is Jane's mother as per birth cerificate  then i cannot find any census records showing this? I did check to see if there was a marriage for Harriet and William but found nothing?

Any help gratefully received

[lizdb]

Death

Jan/Feb/Mar 1866
Derby
7b 307
Louisa Peters age 25

Where does Harriet come from?  If she wasn't local than they could have married in her parish rather than Derby

[captainjackdi]

Hi, on the census it states Harriet is from Derby.

Jane was born 1864, Louisa is her mother re birth certificate.  The census details occupation of father on 1871 and 1881 agree with details on birth certificate so don't understand why Harriet is shown as wife. On the 1861 census there are details of a William and Harriet which ties in but has diff occupations? 

[lizdb]

Louisa has died.
 William has either married Harriet (but not in Derby registration district, e.g Jan/Fb/Mar 1867 Birmingham has a William Peters and  Harriet on the same page, but I am sure there are others,)   or he is living with her as his wife.

[spendlove]

Hi,

It gets more complicated if you look st the 1861 census Derby RG9/2403

Peters. William  head married 28 silk thrower.   Derby
".     Harriet.     Wife.   ".        27 silk winder.      "
".     Jane.       Mother.  Widow 60. Formerly net runner.  Derby
Clark George.  Father in Law.   55. Elastic bandage maker. Derby
".     Louisa.    Sister in Law.    21. Silk winder.                Derby

So it looks as if Louisa an unmarried sister in Law is the mother of Jane.
The change of trade for William would not be unusual silk was on the decline in Derby.

Spendlove

[captainjackdi]

Hi

I thought that was prob the same family on1861 census but still doesn't make sense.

Louisa & William are named as the parents of Jane & there is a marriage for Louisa & William in 1863 which I have ordered the certificate for. As Lizdb commented earlier it would make sense if Louisa had died then William married Harriet but if the family on 1861 census is the one then it doesn't make sense.

[spendlove]

Hi ,

I agree so perhaps another thought about the marriages

Agree that William marries Louisa Walker and they have a dau Jane, named after his mother.

So William never married Harriet, I cannot find a marriage for them, which is why he was free to marry Louisa after she died Jane still lived with her Father and his common law wife Harriet.

So had Harriet married prior to 1861 and husband still alive so not free to marry William Peters?

They don't make it easy do our ancestors!

Spendlove

[captainjackdi]

So I received the marriage certificate for Louisa Clark and William Peters.
Still doesn't really shed any light on why Harriet is shown as William's wife on 1851census onwards.
I think William is poss shown as 'widower' on certificate but not clear and not been able to find earlier marriage.

Have found the Clark family on 1841 and 1851 census with both Harriet and Louisa showing as children of George.
On the 1861 census Harriet is shown as married to William with George(father in law)  and Louisa(sister in law) also listed.

I have noticed on some on the census details there is a transcription change against Harriet to Louisa which would probably be the best explanation to the puzzle...