Author Topic: George Thomas Franklin  (Read 5823 times)

Offline bedfordshire boy

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,243
    • View Profile
Re: George Thomas Franklin - possible bigamist
« Reply #18 on: Friday 26 August 05 09:39 BST (UK) »
Karen has showed me a scan of the 1915 notarised document drawn up by Alexander Franklin, which basically sets out his son Stanley’s tree up to Stanley’s grandparents. There is no doubt that Geo Thomas Franklin was stated by his son to be “a native of Stotfold, Beds.”

This is too precise to be something he is likely to have fabricated.  Karen, do all the other details in the document stand scrutiny?

There are no Franklins in Stotfold in 1841 and no references to Franklin in Stotfold parish register earlier than this date, so if Alexander’s statement is correct his father must have arrived in Stotfold shortly after this. Even if the whole family were Baptists/non-conformists which is what Thomas professed to be in Canada in 1881, and were missing altogether from the parish register they would still have been included in the 1841 census in Stotfold.

The 1851 census in Stotfold shows numerous Franklins, with John and Sarah the oldest, with a number of their children, some married with their own families, others living with them:
- Henry Franklin b Langford 1816, son of John & Sarah married in Biggleswade in 1841 and settled in Stotfold by 1842/3 where he had his first child (1861 census)
- Joseph Franklin, chr 1825 Langford, son of John Franklin married in Stotfold in 1846

It looks as though John and Sarah Franklin and their family moved to Stotfold from nearby Langford around 1842.
John Franklin married Sarah Pear on 14 Jun 1815 at Langford (IGI) which was not long after his discharge age 35 (??) from the 40th Foot Regiment in 1814 with which he had served since 1805 (http://www.catalogue.nationalarchives.gov.uk )
He was described on the 1851 census as a Chelsea Pensioner ie ex regular soldier.

This extended family were the only Franklins in Stotfold in the period 1842-1861, so if Alexander’s sworn statement is to be believed it must be from this family that his father came.

There is only one Thomas in the family, whose age is only a year or so adrift from his age in the 1881 Canadian census. However this Thomas married Phillis Underlin in Stotfold on 4 Feb 1849, and they had four children, in 1850, 1851, 1855 and 1858.
Thomas does not appear on the 1861 census with his family, although Phillis is described as married and head of the family. By inference Thomas was not living with Phillis, if the married description is accurate (as opposed to widow).

It might be useful to see if there are any Stotfold parish chest references to this family, which might explain Thomas’ non appearance in 1861, if these records have survived.

I have tried to find out who was living at the two addresses shown on Thomas’s marriage cert in 1861, but so far without success. However in 1851 6 Robert St appears to have been the Caledonian Hotel (numbers stop at 5 which is then followed by the hotel) so it doesn’t seem as though Pimlico was his normal abode.

If Thomas hadn’t been married I don’t think we would have had many doubts about picking him on the evidence to hand. Just about everything fits, or thereabouts.  Apart from the minor detail of his wife Phillis!

The other problem is that I can’t find him or his father in 1841. They weren’t in Biggleswade workhouse or in Langford or Stotfold. His mother Sarah 45, Henry 25, James 11 and Sarah 8 were living in Langford, along with a Lucy Franklin 20 living elsewhere in the village. Could Thomas, as Cathy has suggested, have been a soldier like his father? Was he old enough at 13/14 to have enlisted by 1841? I can’t find out the minimum enlistment age at that period.

It may be a case of waiting for Ancestry.com to index the 1841 and 1851 censuses to look for the missing people – finding Alice Healy/Cousins in 1851 might be helpful. 1851 may be indexed as early as the end of this year.

But I doubt if you can ever prove categorically that Thomas who married Alice was the same Thomas born in Langford who lived and married in Stotfold. But there’s a fair amount of circumstantial evidence.

Regards

David
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
Beds:   Cople: Luke/Spencer
            Everton: Hale
            Henlow: Cooper/Watts/Sabey/Rook
            Potton:  Merrill
            Southill: Faulkner/Litchfield/Sabey/Rook
            Woburn/Husborne Crawley: Surkitt
Hunts:   Gt Gransden: Merrill/Chandler/Medlock
            Toseland: Surkitt/Hedge/Corn         
Cambs: Bourn: Bowd
            Eltisley: Medlock
            Graveley: Ford/Revell

Offline k.bart

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
Re: George Thomas Franklin
« Reply #19 on: Saturday 27 August 05 02:49 BST (UK) »
Many thanks David ... you have done an incredible amount of research to help me sort my way through the Franklin maze.  As you say, we may never have the information to categorically prove that Thomas who married Alice Cousins (Healy) is the same Thomas who married Phillis Underlin at an earlier date but so much circumstantial evidence certainly does point that way.
Regarding your question about the other individuals named on the 1915 letter - everyone mentioned there checks out completely.  I have all of the data on each and everyone that Alexander listed.  I think we can view Alex as a creditable source for information.

An interesting aside re Phillis Underlin - my neighbour who is an extremely experienced researcher went online and found a huge file on the Underlin line.  It dates back to the mid 1600s and Phillis is shown to have married Thomas Franklin at approximately the same time as we thought ... give or take a year.  I wish it was just that easy to track down my direct blood lines but - hey! - the thrill of the hunt and all that goes with it.

Again, David ... many, many, many thanks.  Thanks also to Cathy and Jan for their input as well.

Best regards,
Karen

Offline G N Asher

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: George Thomas Franklin
« Reply #20 on: Sunday 13 December 15 13:13 GMT (UK) »
John Franklin ,1785,and Sarah nee Pier were my GGG Grandparents on my mothers side.
Their son John,1821,married Lucy Rutt,1821,in 1839.In the 1851 census they where living at Main Road Langford with 4 children,Ann,Sarah,Jesse and James.1861 just Landford but now with 7 kids.Alfred,Eliza,Louisa and Jane being the new ones.1871 has them at Normans Cottages,Langford. Rd with only James,Alferd,Lucy/Louisa and Jane at home.Jane married Fredrick Rutt,cousin ?
John and Lucy daughter Eliza,1854, came to Liverpool and married Thomas Henderson 15 feb 1874.He was a coal dealer/carter.Did he meet Elisa when buying coal in the Langford area ?
One of their daughters Florence,1888, was my mums mother.
The Langford area is a bit of a minefield for Franklins and Rutts. There are a lot of them.And they used the same names for their kids.
The Langford & District History Society have some interesting publications.Also on their site you can download a list of people that lived there.


Offline bedfordshire boy

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,243
    • View Profile
Re: George Thomas Franklin
« Reply #21 on: Sunday 13 December 15 14:43 GMT (UK) »
Hi Gnasher, this was one of the most interesting queries on which I've worked. If you need any help with your Franklins or Rutts just ask

David
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
Beds:   Cople: Luke/Spencer
            Everton: Hale
            Henlow: Cooper/Watts/Sabey/Rook
            Potton:  Merrill
            Southill: Faulkner/Litchfield/Sabey/Rook
            Woburn/Husborne Crawley: Surkitt
Hunts:   Gt Gransden: Merrill/Chandler/Medlock
            Toseland: Surkitt/Hedge/Corn         
Cambs: Bourn: Bowd
            Eltisley: Medlock
            Graveley: Ford/Revell

Offline G N Asher

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: George Thomas Franklin
« Reply #22 on: Sunday 13 December 15 15:12 GMT (UK) »
Thanks David,a good name bye the way, your early post had some interesting info.
Sorting out the who's who between them all has been good but now the Bryant family have come into the story.
I would really like to know about how Thomas and Eliza got together but I don't hold out much hope.
I am planning on going down to Langford next year for a visit,to have a look around,go to the cemetery,History Society meeting etc.
Dave.