Advice Needed

[lposhea83]

Presumably this is his marriage
Marriage Jun qtr 1887 
Edgeller    Sarah Elizabeth       
Johnson    William Albert       
Medway    2a   896

1901 Strood, Kent
RG13/Piece 717 f66 p2
William A Johnson - Private Royal Marines age 37 bn Manchester

Hi yes that's his marriage. Manchester again but his military record says born in Beverley, Yorkshire

[rosie99]

Do his service records mention his wife and children.  Do they give any clue as to where he was serving at the time of the 1891 census.  Did you download them from an online site that we could see them on

[MaxD]

Odd.  In both the 1901 and the 1911 the places of birth of some of the children do seem to tally with the RM record and the entries including the 1939 do appear to be the same man. For what it is worth, FreeBMD has no William Johnson birth registered in Beverley in 1866 or indeed in the East Riding whereas there is a Q2 1864 birth in the Manchester district.

Of all the entries, the one that we know was written by him was the 1911 so I'd be tempted to accept the 1864 Manchester details.  You pays your money......

MaxD

[Rena]

I often passed the barracks on a weekend.  The Barracks were surrounded by a high red brick wall in the countryside and housed the East Yorkshire Regiment.  I'm surprised a Lancastrian knew where the place was.

Thanks are you suggesting his father might have been based in the barracks in Beverley but came from Manchester?

Hi, I'm not suggesting he was based in the barracks.  My suggestion was that it was UNLIKELY that a man born across the Pennine Mountain Range would know how to find the barracks.   Your initial post pointed out important differences such as birthplace and age, which I think adds to my feeling that there were two men with the same name.,

"I have found what I believe is his military record, I have no reason to doubt this. The questions arise as it has a different birthdate and birthplace on it to other sources.

The birthplace is a different county the military record says Beverley, Yorkshire whereas on every census he seems to say Manchester, Lancashire".

The birthdate is a couple of years different on the military record to what was given on the 39 register.

[lposhea83]

I often passed the barracks on a weekend.  The Barracks were surrounded by a high red brick wall in the countryside and housed the East Yorkshire Regiment.  I'm surprised a Lancastrian knew where the place was.

Thanks are you suggesting his father might have been based in the barracks in Beverley but came from Manchester?

Ho, I'm not suggesting he was based in the barracks.  My suggestion was that it was UNLIKELY that a man born across the Pennine Mountain Range would know how to find the barracks.   Your initial post pointed out important differences such as birthplace and age, which I think adds to my feeling that there were two men with the same name.,

"I have found what I believe is his military record, I have no reason to doubt this. The questions arise as it has a different birthdate and birthplace on it to other sources.

The birthplace is a different county the military record says Beverley, Yorkshire whereas on every census he seems to say Manchester, Lancashire".

The birthdate is a couple of years different on the military record to what was given on the 39 register.

Thanks but that is where the confusion comes from. It doesn't appear to be two men as the marriage date on the service record that says Beverley tallies with the marriage of the William Albert Johnson I am looking for. And I doubt they would have both got married on the same day.

[lposhea83]

Odd.  In both the 1901 and the 1911 the places of birth of some of the children do seem to tally with the RM record and the entries including the 1939 do appear to be the same man. For what it is worth, FreeBMD has no William Johnson birth registered in Beverley in 1866 or indeed in the East Riding whereas there is a Q2 1864 birth in the Manchester district.

Of all the entries, the one that we know was written by him was the 1911 so I'd be tempted to accept the 1864 Manchester details.  You pays your money......

MaxD

Thanks Max yes I have been leaning towards Manchester as being more likely. Are there any tricks I am missing? Any other sources that I should look at?

[lposhea83]

Do his service records mention his wife and children.  Do they give any clue as to where he was serving at the time of the 1891 census.  Did you download them from an online site that we could see them on

There is a record of his marriage and children on the army and navy birth and marriage records, but his service record just appears to have the marriage date (which tallies) and for 91 it seems to say Chatham for most of it, probably the barracks apart from Sans Pareil for July and August.

I have downloaded it from the national archives but it's too big to upload here? Any suggestions to how I can upload?

[Rena]

The only other answer is somebody has made an error when transcribing details from documents, or another document.  Possibly the writer was using a ruler - there was a distraction - the ruler slipped to the below line and a transcribing error appeared.

This century, I had occasion to phone Beverly records office to say I couldn't find my gt. grandfather's death record for the month he died in 1942 aged 86 and was told it was quite normal for names sent to them by town registrars to be left off the monthly list sent to London.   I then pursued the matter by saying his name didn't appear in the months afterwards either.  The registrar kindly offered to double check receipts to see if he had indeed been omitted and the record been mid-filed.   She duly contacted me to say she was as puzzled as I was.  Many moons later the 1911 census was published and luckily for me my gt. grandfather was  living at an address with several offspring that I personally knew - and there he was with the right age but a different name to the name he had used on all previous 1871; 1881; 1891; 1901 census. 

I wonder if the army transferred him to the other unit because the other unit was short of men, or the place they were going to meant the other army unit need skills he had ?   

Best of luck

[ShaunJ]

I've seen the record (FoC from TNA) and it shows that his occupation was originally recorded as "collier" and subsequently corrected to "fitter's mate". It could well be that "Beverley" was wrong too.