Confused! DIMMOCK/DYMOCK/DIMOCH

[sarcy]

no i mean his surname!!!!

[Keith Bateman]

Hi sarcy,

He was christened under his mother's name - without the father's name being put down on the marriage certificate, I bet - therefore George Dimmock.

Just watch out later when he gets married - bet he gets married under the Dimmock name - I have 2 relatives without father's names on certificates - both then were put down on the next 2 census records under their stepfather's surname. As soon as they left home they changed their surname back to their mother's surname.

Makes following them that bit more interesting 

Cheers

Keith

[C P Rayson]

Hi Sarcy

I just had a look at the 1881 census (just curious)

Sarah Waight 50 Widow Publican
Charlotte Dymack mother Widow 77 Preston Hitchin
Daniel Fitzjohn Nephew married 27 Kings Walden
Caraline Fitzjohn Niece Married 26 Kings Walden

Residence
Fogmore the Jolly Sailor
Census Place Kings Walden

RG11/ Piece 1420 Folio 98 Page 3

Hope it's new

Happy hunting

Chris

[sarcy]

thankyou but i had already found that information!  That was after her second husband James Waight died - that was actually how i discovored Sarah excisted in the first place because of her mother living with her! 

Thanks!!

[Pinetree]

Sarcy,

I know we should never speculate in this game but my money would be on Henry Hampton being George's father. 

It might be worth seeing if Henry left a Will that can sometimes hold some useful information.

Pinetree

[Valda]

You can and could be known under any surname you chose, but legally a child born before the marriage of his parents was not legitimised by their later marriage. The law on this did not change until 1926.

My reading of the 1851 census page image is Henry Hampton's occupation was 'Beer Shop' and his birthplace 'British subject not known'.
I think Sarah's surname was Dimmock (or Demmock, at worst, since the i wasn't dotted)

George's birth certificate may or may not name his father.

Dimock, George March Quarter 1850 Hitchin volume 6 page 573

After the 1861 census when George had left home it looks like he was known by the Hampton surname.

1871 census RG10 1369 folio 121
Kings Walden Bury Kings Walden  Hertfordshire 
Geo Hampton 21  Kings Walden, Hertfordshire, Footman 

Regards

Valda

[sarcy]

Thats interesting to see he was Hampton once he left home, it is easily possible that Henry was his father!  i was quite shocked to see that Sarah was 20 and Henry 49 :O an age gap that would be talked about even now.

I havent actually as yet found a death for Henry Hampton but Sarah remarried in 1856 and i would assume from his age that he died!

There also doesnt appear to be any record of George Hampton or Dimmock/Dymock in the 1881 census :S or a death!!

[Valda]

I haven't found George Dimmock/Hampton after 1871 which could mean either death, the military, or emigration at some point, but not necessarily between 1871 and 1881 as there is also the possibility of him being out of the country with the family he was working for when a census was taken.

Regards

Valda

[petercornish]

Hi Sarcy,

I searched the Kings Walden PRs and found three entries of interest.
(1)  07 Apr 1850  George  s/o Sarah Dimock of Fogmore, single woman.
(2) Henry Hampton, widower, carpenter of Kings Walden father John Hampton, carpenter  and  Sarah Dimmock, spinster of KW were married on 25 September 1851. Witnesses Charlotte Dimmock and Thomas Brown
(Sarah and Henry signed, whilst the witnesses made their mark.)
(3)   Burial  -  11 May 1853  Henry Hampton  age 48  Res.Fogmore.

I agree with the 1851 reading by Valda, particularly as the 1841 records Henry Hampton as a brewer, age 32, living with his wife Fanny, age 39, at Fogmore.   On the same page of the census is the Dimmock family, viz   ...
William Dimmock   45   Ag Lab
Charlotte Dimmock   40
Ann 15   -   Sarah 11   -   Charlotte 8   -   William 2.
All born in county.
(Adult  ages rounded down to the nearest 5)   

Hope this will help sort out  the confusion.

Regards   ...   Peter