cant find marriage

[carol8353]

added
Rosina PUTTNAN June 1880 Whitechapel 1c 361
William Jonathan PUTTMAN Dec 1877 Whitechapel 1c 369

Ahhhhhhhhhhhh I was looking for a WILLIE  not a William .

Carol

[carol8353]

1891 at 15 Brady Street,Whitechapel

John Puttman father marr 41 umbrella maker all b Bethnal Green
Marie H Puttman mother 37
Julie dau 17 book binder
Jane dau 15
William son 13
Rose dau 9
Esther dau 6 mths
Hannah Tulett grandmother widow 90 b Cork Ireland
Mary Puttman dau 3( I think?) b Cork Ireland

One things strikes me with this family- ages.
Hannah can't be Marie's mum surely- there's 57 years between them.
So either Marie's age is wrong,or she's her grandma.
Why is Rose now only 9 when she was 1 ten years ago.
Did they all pop over to Ireland and mum gave birth to Mary there?

Carol

[hiraeth]

Is Ireland the clue?

Maybe John/Jonathan married Mary Ann Tulett there - either c1873 or c1887 if Mary & Esther were a second family?

I've got to get to bed - its almost 2 am here!  Hope someone comes up with more answers overnight my time!

H

[lizdb]

Havnet studied this in great detail but my initial thoughts are:

1) It looks likely that Mary in 1891 (mum to Esther n Mary)could be a second marrriage, a different Mary to the one in 1881 (mum to Rose n Willie)
Not proven - birth cert of John in 1892 says Mums maiden name Tullett (was Mum a Mary Ann? or a Mary H?) but birth cet of Rose or Willie or Julie etc would confirm earlier wife's maiden name. Finding them in 1871 might get age of eldets child.

2) Hannah Tullet is clearly grandmother, as is stated. therefore John or Maries grandmother, not mother.

3) If Mary - who could be eldest child of second marriage was born in Ireland, it is posible that this mariage took place in Ireland - they obviously went there for a while.

I wonder where Julie(7) and Jane (5 ) are in 1881? Ireland?

[lizdb]

Just looking at 1891 census - not convinced MAry is age 3 at all - dont know what the figure is, but doesnt leap out as a 3!

[avm228]

I wonder if the Irish birthplace for the 3(?) year old Mary might be a "lazy ditto" (coming after Hannah's) and in fact she, like the others, was born in Bethnal Green/Whitechapel:

Mary Ann PUTTNAN Sep 1887 Whitechapel 1c 320a

also

Esther PUTTNAN Dec 1890 Whitechapel 1c 285


Anna

[lizdb]

Did you say you have the family in 1901? Do you have ref?
the only John Puttnam or similar of right age I can find is not with his family - there is an 8 yr old, bn London, a visitor with Charles and Ada Kirby in Suusex. Is that him?

The more I think about this, the more I think we need to start again with a clean sheet of paper and see what are the definites, and  work form there.

So - this 1892 born John, that you have the birth cert for. Are you 100% sure he is 'yours'?
Or is it best we take a further step back. Is it the next generation forwward that you are definite about? If so, let us have the detials - confirmed facts only, of them, and we will see if they lead to this John.


pS Anna just seen your post - yes I think that is a strong possibility too. Seeing that birth, makes me think that maybe she is 3 after all, that she was forgotten in the list of children, then added on "Oh yes, there our MAry too, she was born the same as the others" so it is writtten MAry, ditto.

[lizdb]

Of no help really, but out of interest Julia seems to marry Oct/Nov/Dec 1897 ref 1c 549, Whitchapel distr. Men on page are Ernest Upsher or Thomas Biggart

modified to add - it is Ernest Upsher, they are on 1901 with young dtr Winifred, living in Walthamstow. No other members of family with them to be of any help, though

[carol8353]

Didn't Newby say somewhere that dad John died in the late 1890's,but she hasn't found a death ref yet?

You may be right about the 'lazy ditto's ' Anna.

I wasn't convinced about the age(3) either Liz,and thought that because Mary was after grandma,perhaps she was a lot older and HER daughter and not John and Mary's.

Come on Newby where are you 

Carol