What happened to my 2x Great grandmother after 4 marriages and bigamy acquittal?

[Duodecem]

Help from Rootschatters has shown my family story to be more complicated that I'd thought so now I'm trying to complete the picture.
Hannah Maria Futter was born in Costessey in 1822, the daughter of Edmund Futter and Elizabeth Frost. In 1840 she married John Tann, a wheelwright and carpenter. They lived in Bawburgh moving to Norwich St Julian on the 1851 and 61 census, Hannah was a shoe binder and John worked in his father's wheelwright business, they had 5 children.In 1863 John brutally attacked Hannah in an argument over money, also attacking their eldest child Clara/Clarissa who tried to defend her mother. John was imprisoned for 6 months and after this time, seems to have left the family. He married again, in Northamptonshire in 1868 to Lucy Brain (freeBMD has Baines). He was found guilty of bigamy in 1869 and imprisoned again, for 5 months.
In 1871 Hannah was living in Norwich with her younger daughter.By  1873 there is no record of her elder daughter, all 3 of her sons have died and her younger daughter, Sarah, has married.
Hannah then remarried, losing 10 years from her age in the process-in 1874 to Charles Warren Faux who died in 1879; in 1880 to Henry Howes a publican of the Wellington Inn in St Giles Norwich who died in 1881(FreeBMD gives her name as Anna Maria Faulks) and finally to Robert Eagleton a gardener in 1885.
Freereg have all but the 3rd marriage, her father's name Edmund Futter and occupation, brickmaker, is given in each case.
In 1889 she was charged with bigamy but acquitted. In 1891  Robert Eagleton is on the census living alone, as a widower, there is no sign of Hannah nor is she with her daughter.
John Tann lived in Lincolnshire and Norfolk finally dying in Norwich in 1901
There are some possible deaths for Hannah-with the surname Howes, Tann and Futter, but with 3 possible Christian names and 5 surnames, not to mention mispellings, she's proving elusive! Does anyone have any ideas?

[Milliepede]

That's quite a story isn't it.

Pretty narrow window for a death 1889-1891 if Robert really was a widower in 1891. 
She may have upped and married again!

[Duodecem]

Robert Eagleton was a widower when he married Hannah in 1885 as the Freereg entry shows.

Copyright information removed.  You must retype.  Cut and paste is not allowed.

I wondered if it was Robert who accused her of bigamy and then discarded her. it must have been a shock if he didn't know he was husband number 4, especially if there was any contact with the still- living husband number 1!
I couldn't find her when I searched  the 91 census for people born in Costessey on Freecen.
I must admit I hadn't thought of a 5th marriage!

[Milliepede]

Nope I can't find her in 1891 either.  Robert may well have said he was a widower to save face.

One likely death for Maria Tann right age and time period but when you look that was before the bigamy trial so can't be her.

No likely looking remarriages you'll be relieved to know but as you say with all those different names is difficult to be sure.

[Duodecem]

 I'm relieved there's no 5th marriage!
A Rootschatter who gave me the original information about John Tann has found this record: 
Marriage Robert Eagleton + possibly Mary Ann Poll  Dec qtr 1892 Norwich
 
I think this is them in 1901 Norwich
Robert       Eagleton    75     Trowse
Mary Ann wife              46
It seems highly likely, from the place and date of birth, that this is the remarriage of Hannah's 4th husband. Presumably Hannah had died by then, but not using the name Eagleton.
The following deaths are possibles:
Hannah Futter Mar 1890 Norwich but she's 78 -10 years too old
Hannah Futter  1910 Mitford age 89. The age is right but where has she been in 91 and 01? And it would make Robert Eagleton another bigamist!
June 1890 Norwich Maria Howes age 51 -possible but she would have been 67, though she did lop at least 10 years off her age.
June 1890 Smallburgh Hannah Howes 61. The age is closer but why would she be in Smallburgh? There's no family connection and she worked as a shoe binder and tailoress  in Norwich, so I don't imagine she would have gone there to work.
Finally June 1914  Maria Tann Mitford 81. The age fits with the lost 10 years but, again, where was she up to then?
I'm inclined to go for Maria Howes and presume that Robert Eagleton disowned her but i have no real evidence.

[Milliepede]

Maria Tann 81 could be the one with husband John and age 77 on the last census so not her.

[Duodecem]

Thank Millipede, that's one eliminated. I suspect that Hannah would not have used the name Tann willingly- not that you get a great deal of choice about the name used on your death record! Presumably the court case used the name because the allegation was that she was still legally married to John Tann.
I still think the Maria Howes death in June 1890 is the most likely. She was called Maria on the earlier censuses and seems to have used Hannah, Maria and Hannah Maria pretty much at random.
I've been through the Maria Howes in Norwich on the 1881 census and accounted for all of them -either marrying or being on the 1891 -ten of them in all. Of course that doesn't mean that the Maria Howes death wasn't that of a child less than 10 years old, or a woman that had married a Mr Howes in the past 9 years, not to mention someone who had moved to the city. Nine years is a long time. Not to mention someone who had Maria as a middle name used at random!
Hannah claimed to be 50, rather than her real age of  63, when she married Robert Eagleton in 1885. If she carried on lopping years off her age whoever registered her death may have thought she was only 51 rather than 67. Her surviving daughter was living in a village outside the city, would have had several small children, a baby  and been pregnant with the next at the time so I don't think she would have been particularly accurate if she had to register the death.

[avm228]

Hannah Futter  1910 Mitford age 89. The age is right but where has she been in 91 and 01? And it would make Robert Eagleton another bigamist!

It wouldn't make Robert a bigamist if he'd never been lawfully married to Hannah Maria (her husband John Tann still being alive). You say she was acquitted of bigamy - do you know any more details? Perhaps she was able to say she had not heard news of John Tann for the requisite 7 years?

[Duodecem]

I really only know what I've already said- that John Tann left his family by 1865. Transcript of the newspaper report is thus:
               Bury and Norwich Post Tuesday 3rd August 1869
Bigamy by a Norwich Man
 
At the Huntingdon Assizes on Tuesday, John Tann 51, carpenter, was indicted for bigamy at Stansground on 19th Feb.1868.
William Futter said he lived at Norwich and was present at the marriage of the prisoner to his first wife, Hannah Maria Futter,which took place at St Lawrence Norwich 15th Nov.1840.
          Witness Charles Tann son of prisoner, said his father left Norwich about three years ago and at that time asked the witness
how his mother was, and how all the children were. He told him his mother was quite well, that his brother was dead, and the others were middling. His father said he was happy and comfortable, had a good situation, and was in receipt of good wages.
        He remembered his father being committed to prison, to keep the peace towards his mother, by whom the present prosecution was instituted.
  The parish clerk of Stansground proved a second marriage between prisoner and Lucy Brain (widow) in Feb.1868, and the Jury,
having found the prisoner guilty was sentenced to five mths imprisonment.
The brother referred to died in 1865 so presumably John Tann had left the family by then. Charles himself died in 1871.

John Tann was still alive in 1889 when Hannah herself was charged with bigamy. He was living in Marlingford, apart from his second wife Lucy and children who were in Gateley. I only have a record of Hannah's acquittal, no details of who brought the prosecution. Either it was John Tann who fancied his chances a second time, or, more likely perhaps, it was Robert Eagleton who didn't know about her past.
Either way, since she was acquitted and since husbands 2 and 3 were dead, her marriage to Robert Eagleton was presumably lawful it being 20 years since John Tann had left her. (Marriage 2 was at least 9 years after he'd left. )