Given that their 1st child has been named George. I think it supports the notion that Henry’s father may have been George, but then why no Sarah?:
1891 census:
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:71CF-D3Z1901 census:
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XS3P-8FY1911 census:
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X7LD-3BFFRUDE, GEORGE mmn BRUNSDON
GRO Reference: 1888 S Quarter in WANTAGE Volume 02C Page 295
FRUDE, NELLIE mmn BRUNSDON
GRO Reference: 1889 D Quarter in WANTAGE Volume 02C Page 306
FRUDE, MARY ANN mmn BRUNSDON
GRO Reference: 1892 S Quarter in WANTAGE Volume 02C Page 291
FRUDE, RUTH mmn BRUNSDON
GRO Reference: 1894 J Quarter in BRADFIELD Volume 02C Page 313
FRUDE, KATE mmn BRUMDON
GRO Reference: 1896 D Quarter in BRADFIELD Volume 02C Page 337
FRUDE, ELSIE mmn BRUNSDON
GRO Reference: 1900 S Quarter in BRADFIELD Volume 02C Page 325
FRUDE, JESSIE EVA mmn BRUNSDON
GRO Reference: 1901 S Quarter in BRADFIELD Volume 02C Page 327
FRUDE, HENRY mmn BRUNSDON
GRO Reference: 1904 J Quarter in BRADFIELD Volume 02C Page 325
FRUDE, DANIEL mmn BRUNSDON
GRO Reference: 1905 D Quarter in BRADFIELD Volume 02C Page 321
Grandson:
FRUDE, ALBERT WILLIAM WELLS -
GRO Reference: 1911 J Quarter in BRADFIELD Volume 02C Page 312
It is a bit of a dilemma, isn’t it?
I can see why you thought his folks were Joseph and Mary.
Then they have a son George, no Joseph and daughter Mary, no Sarah. So, no help there.
Jamjar