Author Topic: Edith Mary Howell  (Read 312 times)

Offline Pelican

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Edith Mary Howell
« on: Saturday 01 August 20 07:17 BST (UK) »
This query could be on about three boards so I have posted it here.

Edith Mary Howell was born the daughter of William and Betsy Howell in Netheravon, Wiltshire in the March quarter of 1892. Pewsey Registration District.
Unlike her brothers and sisters I cannot find her baptism in Netheravon or anywhere else.

c1893 the family moved to Kings Somborne in Hampshire where the rest of the family were born. This is the Stockbridge Registration District. The first to be registered there was her brother George in 1894.

She can be found in the 1901 census with the family in Kings Somborne.

In the 1911 census she was working as a parlour maid in Hampstead in London

Now it gets unclear. I went looking for a marriage for Edith Mary Howell. There were quite a few Edith M Howell’s all over the country.

In 1919 I found a marriage for Edith M Howell in the Edmonton Registration District in the March quarter which includes Hampstead. Of course in the eight intervening years she could have got another job and been working elsewhere. I cannot find her. This marriage was according to Free BMD to William S Holland.

However family search gives another story.
They have a civil marriage of Edith E Howell in the March quarter of 1919 to a William S Holland in the Edmonton Registration District.

Free BMD gives a marriage of an Edith E Howell to Walter Tucker in the September quarter of 1919 in Paddington.

I found William Sydney Holland’s Army papers saying he married an Edith Emma Howell. So it would seem that family search is correct in the name of Edith E.

There does not seem to be a parish marriage record to help out giving Edith Mary's father’s name. Or which marriage, The 1939 register does not seem to help.

There is an Edith and William Holland in 1925 Electoral Rolls at 10 Crowndale Road, St Pancras.  Does not say M or E.
An Edith and Walter Tucker did not appear in the 1925 Electoral Rolls anywhere as I can see.

I could not find anything different in the other rolls.

Of course I could equally be barking up the wrong tree and she stayed single or married someone else I have not managed to find!!

Can anyone help pinpoint Edith Mary Howell’s marriage please. This is not a direct line so as a pensioner I do not send for certificates on spec as it were. Edith M Howell is a very popular name.

Wish she had got married in her parent’s parish of Kings Somborne, they were still alive. Oh well!!


Offline rosie99

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 34,240
    • View Profile
Re: Edith Mary Howell
« Reply #1 on: Saturday 01 August 20 08:17 BST (UK) »

In 1919 I found a marriage for Edith M Howell in the Edmonton Registration District in the March quarter which includes Hampstead. Of course in the eight intervening years she could have got another job and been working elsewhere. I cannot find her. This marriage was according to Free BMD to William S Holland.

However family search gives another story.
They have a civil marriage of Edith E Howell in the March quarter of 1919 to a William S Holland in the Edmonton Registration District.


If you look at the GRO index image on freebmd for this marriage for Edith you will see that the copy is blurry but it is not an M and probably an E so it has been wrongly transcribed
https://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/information.pl?scan=1&r=141390632:8011&d=bmd_1595843552
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline CaroleW

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 61,295
  • Barney 1993-2004
    • View Profile
Re: Edith Mary Howell
« Reply #2 on: Saturday 01 August 20 10:44 BST (UK) »
Just something to bear in mind.  If her birth was registered in the March qtr of 1892 there is always the possibility she was actually born in late 1891

If you were able to establish her exact birthdate you may be able to find her using the 1939 register

EDIT

An Edith Howell aged 22 last address London departed Southampton for Quebec 30.10.1913

Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Offline Pelican

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: Edith Mary Howell
« Reply #3 on: Yesterday at 04:21 »
Thank you both, your help is very much appreciated.

Yes I see that is blurred, hard to read so the transcriber had a problem, thank you.

Yes she could have been born the year before and even baptised with her younger brother if her parents were rushing around trying to move. There were seven older children, although the older ones could have helped. I could not find her in either place.

I tried the 1939 register but it was very inconclusive. Thought I had her, but investigations proved otherwise. The trouble is there are so many Edith Mary or Edith M Howell's in the country! Was a popular name.

Emigration I thought of and actually I did find that one, although it did not feel right. Since you found it too I now am still wondering. There were a lot of domestic servants emigrating at that time. I wonder if I can find her in Quebec.

Offline Pelican

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: Edith Mary Howell
« Reply #4 on: Yesterday at 07:22 »
No I did not find her there. However I will take this further. She had an older sister also working in London I can find little about. Now I am wondering if they emigrated together.

The older sister was Ethel Sarah Howell, born in 1888 in Netheravon in Wiltshire. She was baptised there on 21 Mar 1888. Another one perhaps born the year before, but that did not help. In 1911 she was a cook in Gloucester Gardens in Paddington West. Then the trail runs cold there too.

Online Kay99

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,025
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Edith Mary Howell
« Reply #5 on: Yesterday at 07:30 »
A family tree on Anc suggests Ethel marries William Anthony Vyse in Lowestoft on 18 Apr 1915 

The marriage cert is online and lists her age as 27 and father as William Howell Dairyman?

Kay

Added - The 1939 Register looks hopeful re her birth date

Offline Pelican

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: Edith Mary Howell
« Reply #6 on: Yesterday at 10:42 »
As far as I can see there is no record of either Edith or Ethel on passenger lists. Unless of course they got married before they went. There is an Edith Howell travelling backwards and forwards to America but she is a Lancashire lass.

Yes I saw the Vyse marriage and it all seemed right until you realise that the marriage was in Lowestoft in Suffolk, Ethel was born in Wiltshire, lived in Hampshire and worked in London. Yes Dad was a dairyman and that would be correct and his name was William, but the place bothered me. In 1930 she is a widow living in Norwich and yes dates fit.

Have just been back to the records ie 1911 census, Google and a Heritage Family tree which gives Ethel's employer's tree. Now that was interesting, there is a connection with North Runcton in Norfolk. It seems to be part of a famous naval family. So they may have had or inherited a property in Norfolk and moved back there taking Ethel with them. That makes more sense. Thank you.

I decided to look at the trees for Edith, but no one has the answer either - all unknown spouse.


Offline rosie99

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 34,240
    • View Profile
Re: Edith Mary Howell
« Reply #7 on: Yesterday at 14:00 »

Edith Mary Howell was born the daughter of William and Betsy Howell in Netheravon, Wiltshire in the March quarter of 1892. Pewsey Registration District.
Unlike her brothers and sisters I cannot find her baptism in Netheravon or anywhere else.


She was baptised at Netheravon 29 May 1892 surname on register 'Hall'
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Pelican

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: Edith Mary Howell
« Reply #8 on: Today at 02:03 »
Thank you, Rosie99, that was a brilliant find. Yes, that is the one. Hall, Howell, they can sound the same if the Minister did not know them. Must have been a new Minister, or once again a transcriber error. Those transcribers have done such brilliant work, some handwriting is impossible!!