Missing marriage record 1843, advice please

[Glen in Tinsel Kni]

I have a couple of newspaper articles noting a marriage in 1843 but haven't been able to find a GRO ref for it. I've tried the usual sites, tried forenames only, surnames only, full names and every combination of bride and groom separately and together I can think of.

Short of some real mishap between the local registrar and creating the GRO index I'm stumped. I think the local registrars are probably my best bet  but it's not an area I do a lot of research in.  I'm floundering a bit with the churches that might be relevant before trying the local reg office.

Copy of the article attached, marriage date would be 8th Oct 1843.

The couple had a son the following year with a Middlesex birth reg and are in Middlesex in 1851.  Martha is a widow in Lincoln in 1861,  living with her sister and brother in law and dies at their Lincoln address in 1864

[jonw65]

Hi
The notice implies the marriage was at the parish church of St George Hanover Square. But no such marriage took place there on that date.
The two that did were Thomas Bird + Ann Monday, and Thomas Brown + Rachel Laidler.

Had it happened, your marriage would have been indexed vol 1 page 4 or 5.

[CaroleW]

Son Charles was b 1844 - mmn Bemrose

Any possibility Martha was previously married?  Could she have been Sheerin previously Bemrose?

[Glen in Tinsel Kni]

I did go through page by page and checked postems on freebmd that gave dates for some marriages on later pages. The 8th of October 1843 was a Sunday if my google brain still works.

There's some very odd transcriptions of Bemrose around in census and baptisms including 'Bim' and B um' variations. There is one for a Martha Burlace on pg 35 of the Dec qtr marrriages and the handwritten entry could be a badly mauled version but the marriages on that page are Dec 6th or 7th and no sign of a groom remotely close to a Baker name on the page.

I've looked further afield and different years but still nothing, Martha is in the 1841 in Lincs and unmarried. I honestly can't see the newspapers reporting it if it didn't happen but I haven't found proof that it did.

[jonw65]

Isn't Martha a miss in the marriage announcement?
It's not unknown for this to happen (or not happen!), if they sent in an announcement in advance, then didn't go through with the marriage.
Or perhaps they wanted people to believe they had?

[Glen in Tinsel Kni]

If they didn't actually marry but went on to have a son I wonder how the Lord Bishop took it with his name associated with the announcement? 

I don't have the 1844 cert for the birth of the son so can only guess that Charles was still a coachman but he could have been working for anybody by then.

Martha and her sister Mary (both unmarried) at Newton, Sleaford, Lincs in 1841 in the household of Catharine Hodson. Martha a family servant, not sure about Mary as the occupation is lined through on the image. FindMyPast has them transcribed as Bemrod.

[cockney rebel]

Hi Glen
I spotted your parallel post at FTF and just wanted to add that I think the place of birth given on the 1851 Census for Charles Baker (the child) reads :
Middx. Clarges St

From Lockie's Topography of London:

Clarges-Street, Piccadilly, — is about ½ a mile on the R. from the Haymarket, between Bolton-st. and Half-Moon-st. leading into Curzon-st.

Rebel

[Glen in Tinsel Kni]

Thanks Rebel

The list of certs I could buy thanks to the Bakers is crazy, they actually bridge two of my main lines which makes it really frustrating, most wouldn't look at them as they are so far off centre from my tree but they are like vines wrapped through the branches and now I want to know everything I can.
Now you've pinpointed a place that is almost on the doorstep of one of my direct ancestors who married a sister in law of the Bemrose girls. I can't make excuses not to buy some of the certs now, a witness or informant is going the entry that slots everything together, I'll kick myself if I don't try.