one Blackabey and too many coincidences?

[alunno-a]

Hello,
Can anyone help on a mystery I've found in my tree?? There's probably a simple explanation but ..
 
  WILLIAM DANIEL BLACKABEY married JANE SHEPHERD in 1861, Old Church St Pancras. Their only child born 1862, Flamstead. He was son of Thomas Blackabey, victualler,of Studham, she dau of Joseph Shepherd, Blacksmith, Water End, Gaddesden. Jane and William are in 1841,1851,1861 census. But in 1871 census Jane Blackabey is a "widow" with child, at home of her mother. In 1875 she married a second time to (unhelpfully ) a William Shephard. But--I cannot find a death for William Blackabey, but I can find a William Blackaby/Blackabey continuing in the 1871-1901 censuses, with at first a wife called Jane (wrong birthdate and place) then called Harrriet J Blackabey. This William has correct birthdate-c 1838- and place- Markyate St- and occupation-bootmaker/shoemaker! I have managed to get a birth cert of one of this man's children, which gives mothers name as Harriet Blackaby formerly Hills. I cannot find this marriage. Nor can I find 2 Williams in birth records or on 1841-1861 census! Am I being really stupid here?? or was Jane an unwitting, or knowing bigamist??
any hints or solutions gratefully received.

[bedfordshire boy]

Welcome to Rootschat

Can you post full census details - we're going to have to look them up anyway to try to understand what was going on.

David

[janan]

Hi
Welcome to Rootschat
As David said post full details of what you already know and we'll see what we can puzzle out. I have had a quick squint at the censuses and it would seem likely you are on the right lines with your thoughts on Jane's bigamy.
Jan

[alunno-a]

Thank-you both for offer of help!

The details of census for William d(aniel) Blackabey-
1841- HO 107 5 30 f6 p6
1851-HO 107/1745
1861- RG 9/838 f47 p40
1871- RG 10/1374
1881- RG11/1327 f 98 p13
1891- RG 12 /617 f 91 p 30
1901-Rg 13/1183/f 13 p 18

and for his wife Jane Shepherd-Blackabey-Shephard
1861- RG 9/840 f11 p16
1871- RG10/1388
1881 RG11/1366
1891- RG12/1369 f46 p16

Thank-you again, look forward to your thoughts!!

[janan]

Hi
Some of your refs are missing folio and page numbers but no matter I've found them On another occasion it would be better to type out the actual details you have eg
1871
Essenden Village
William Blackerby Boarder Mar 33 Bootmaker Beds Market St

and so on for other censuses. It makes it easier as we then have everything clearly on one page to peruse.

I don't really have any doubts that both he and Jane end up with other partners on later censuses and one or both of them married bigamously - divorce really wasn't an option unless you were rich and it would have been quite easy to marry again saying you were a widow (no proof was needed) as long as you were in a different area than the original marriege. Interesting they are both in Middlesex by 81. Also interesting William still considers himself married in 71 whereas Jane says she is a widow - suggesting she left William? or maybe she genuinely thought him dead?

Hope this is of some help

Jan

[alunno-a]

Hi, Thank-you for tips-will do better next time!!
I am pleased you have come to the same conclusion as me. I think William did not marry his Harriet as he knew he wasnt dead!! I give Jane the benefit of the doubt and assume she thought she was a widow! Maybe she pretended for so long that she couldnt get out of it. I doubt I will ever know.
thanks again- Sally