Harriett Lane really stuck!

[heywood]

Harriet Lane is with Royston and Gladys Knight at the same address in 1955.

[heywood]

In 1901 William and Harriet Lane are at the same address 5 Swan Road. Perhaps she adopted Royston   

[groom]

In 1945 Harriett Lane is living at 5 Swan Road with a Gladys Knight. Wonder if she's a sister?

JJ

According to a tree on Ancestry, she's Royston's wife, Gladys Baxendale married 1942.

[JJen]

In 1945 Harriett Lane is living at 5 Swan Road with a Gladys Knight. Wonder if she's a sister?

JJ

According to a tree on Ancestry, she's Royston's wife, Gladys Baxendale married 1942.

Well that seems to solve the query as to who the Gladys was. 

Really need the birth cert to help any further.

JJ

[JJen]

Marriage -

William Thomas Lane, bachelor age 22, Swan Road, Coach Painter
26 Aug 1899, St Mark, Gloucester
Spouse - Harriet George, spinster 22
Father - James Lane
Spouses father - Raymond George, Carriage Cleaner for Midland Railway
Wits - Charles William George and Estella Lane

No connection yet to Knight 

JJ

[groom]

The tree on Ancestry doesn't have any parents for Royston.

It's not fitting, is it? If Royston Knight was Harriet's son why was his mother's maiden name Knight? I think as already said the only way to solve it is to get his birth certificate.

[heywood]

From what the granddaughter says, perhaps mum is Harriet E Knight who married Mr Ritchie but Harriet Lane, being childless, raised him.
Agree re birth certificate definitely.

[Mabel Bagshawe]

As someone says, maybe he was adopted.

There is a Knight family in the Swan Lane area - may be a coincidence. Elizabeth Knight, a widow with two young children, is living at 6 Swan Lane in 1881 and they can be found in a yard off Swan Lane in 1891. After that I lose Elizabeth, and her daughter (also Elizabeth b 1872), but son Thomas is still in the Swan Lane area in later years. His oldest daughter appears to be a little on the young side to have a child in 1918 (she'd have been 15)

[groom]

His oldest daughter appears to be a little on the young side to have a child in 1918 (she'd have been 15)

Or maybe that's why Harriet took him in? Remember there was no formal adoption until 1927, so it could just be a case of helping out a neighbour and friend.