Jane KILVERT and stolen identity

[Racheal Kibble]

Well, ive posted quite a few times, and on various sites, about my 4th gg Jane Kilvert. Im beginning to think I have a Victorian case of identity theft as nobody can solve the mystery of MY Jane Kilvert.
 
Here's what I know for sure,
My Jane Kilvert had two illegitimate children,
Edward Kilvert Chinn 1854 Bishops Ryder, Birmingham. Son of Joseph and Jane
Alice Ann Kilvert Chinn 1856, Bishops Ryder, B'ham. Daughter- same

7 August 1859 marriage to Henry Richards @ Bishops Ryder, B'ham. (Jane is 34, spinster, father is Thomas, farmer) (ancestry record)

1861 census, (Bishops ryder, b'ham)
Jane Richard age 34, b1827  born Shropshire.

1871 c. (Bishops ryder, b'ham)
Jane richards, age 44, b 1827- born Birmingham

1881 c. (Handsworth, Staffs)
Jane richards, age 54, b1827 born shrewsbury, shrops.

Jane and Henry richards had three legitimate children, william 1860, Mary ann 1862. elizabeth 1865, all have MMN as Kilvert.

The ONLY Jane Kilvert i can find in shropshire (or anywhere) is here,

1841 Eyton Village, ellesmere, shropshire
Jane kilvert, 20, servant, (all the household are family members, the WESTON's are uncles)

1851, Eyton Village, Baschurch,
Jane kilvert, age 30, servant. (again all household are family members)

5 April 1856, register office at shrewsbury (gro marriage cert)
Jane Kilvert age 37, spinster, daughter of thomas kilvert, farmer, married richard scott, aged 59.

1871 census, baschurch
richard scott, 70
jane , 48
edward scott 20
sarah j scott, 15
Thomas Kilvert 70 (father in law)
samuel humphreys, serv

Where the hell is my jane kilvert in 1841 and 1851?

[Pheno]

1871 census is Baschurch Eyton, Ellesmere, Salop

Of the two children Sarah J is registered Dec 1856 Ellesmere mmn Kilvert
I cannot find a corresponding reg for Edward with mmn Kilvert which leads me to believe that Jane Kilvert was Richard Scott's second wife, especially given the age difference.

Therefore the 1856 marriage is probably correct.

This cannot be the same person as having Alice Ann Kilvert Chinn in Birmingham in 1856.

Pheno

[Racheal Kibble]

Hi, yes the 1856 marriage cert for Jane kilvert and Richard Scott is correct. This arrived today from the gro.
The witnesses are a john kilvert and a Richard Clarke.
I think I've had a previous reply on one site that gave Edward Scott as Jane's illegitimate child born Edward kilvert.

[osprey]

he would appear to the Edward Kilvert baptised 5 Jan 1851 in Baschurch son of Jane Kilvert of Eyton, single woman. His birth was registered march qtr 1851 Ellesmere vol 18 pg 59 mmn -.
Also a daughter Harriet baptised to Jane, 8 March 1845 and buried 27 March


Possible marriage in Baschurch 10 May 1819 of her father Thomas & Elizabeth Gaustles, widow.

[Pheno]

Based on the info above, if you are sure it was your Jane Kilvert who had two illegitimate children
Edward in 1854 and Alice in 1856 in Birmingham then it is unlikely to be your Jane Kilvert who married Richard Scott in Baschurch in 1859 as Jane had a daughter Alice in Birmingham in 1856 and another daughter Sarah in Ellesmere in 1856.

Unless, of course you have Alice's birth/baptism in the first quarter of 1856 and Sarah's is in the last quarter so theoretically possible I suppose.  What is your source for the Chinn children?

Pheno

[Racheal Kibble]

hi, yes im definitely sure that the Birmingham Jane is mine.
I have both Alice and Edwards birth certificates (1856 and 1854) both in Birmingham.
They are the children of Joseph Chinn, walking stick maker,  and Jane formerly Kilvert.

Jane wasn't married to Joseph Chinn. He died 1860, in the workhouse, of paralysis.
Jane had already married Henry Richards in 1859, b'ham, as a spinster as well.


It just seems strange to me that both Jane's name a Thomas as their father. He is also a farmer on both their marriage certs.
There are no Jane Kilverts baptised to a Thomas. Only one illegitimate Jane daughter of Margeret, bap 1822 Meole Brace, shrops.
It almost seems like my Jane stole the identity of the other, real, Jane who stayed in Shropshire!

[osprey]

or invented a father on her marriage and chose a common first name which just happened to match someone else's details. Or it could be she was the daughter of Margaret Kilvert and her father was Thomas, a farmer, but his surname wasn't Kilvert.

Have you found Margaret after the baptism?

[Racheal Kibble]

Haha, yes, that's obviously more likely. And it's probably coincidence. I just wish I could find her in 1841/51.
The only Margaret Kilvert I can find in the 41 census, was a widow of William and would have been nearly 50 when that Jane was baptised in 1822.
I'm obviously missing something- perhaps some non-conformist records.

[Racheal Kibble]

Oh, and my Jane never says she's born as early as 1822 either. She mainly sticks with 1825, with just one 1827.