Finding the bride without a surname

[Lisajb]

I am trying to discover the name of the second wife of Francis Phipps Targett. They appear together on the 1901 and 1911 census, her first name is Sarah.

They marry in July 1895 in Brighton. Other names listed on the registration are Lucy Bisshopp and Porter Williams, who are together in the 1901 census.

Everywhere I have looked - Freebmd, Familysearch, Findmypast and Ancestry -  the registration has just the three names - Lucy, Porter and Francis, but there's no mention of Sarah.  Francis and Sarah don't seem to have had any children so that is another closed route.

Would Brighton marriages be online anywhere?  Other than buying the certificate, I have drawn a complete blank with this one.

Thanks
Lisa

[cockney rebel]

Hi
After juggling with the entries at BMD, I think she is Sarah Harman, her marriage listed
Brighton 2b 412..........Francis at
Brighton 2b 422.
Probably an indexing mistake.

If you compare Sarah Harman in the 1891 cansus(Brighton) to the later censuses, it looks more than likely. Something to go on, anyway.

Rebel

[Lisajb]

Hi
After juggling with the entries at BMD, I think she is Sarah Harman, her marriage listed
Brighton 2b 412..........Francis at
Brighton 2b 422.
Probably an indexing mistake.

If you compare Sarah Harman in the 1891 cansus(Brighton) to the later censuses, it looks more than likely. Something to go on, anyway.

Rebel

Thanks Rebel, I will take a look

[coombs]

I have looked on Ancestry and despite lost of Brighton marriages going online due to East Sussex Marriages and Banns, cannot find the marriage other than what is said in the GRO index which seems to not list Sarah. Maybe they wed at a registry office or NC chapel etc.

[StevieSteve]

Hi
After juggling with the entries at BMD, I think she is Sarah Harman, her marriage listed
Brighton 2b 412..........Francis at
Brighton 2b 422.
Probably an indexing mistake.

If you compare Sarah Harman in the 1891 cansus(Brighton) to the later censuses, it looks more than likely. Something to go on, anyway.

Rebel

The Marriage Locator site has the 422 entry as Brighton St Peter

[rosie99]

Francis Phipps Targett is 442 on the index

ADDED at 16.54 - His entry on the typed GRO page could be either 412 or 442, the entry on the line above also has a doubtful 1 or 4 as the middle number

[california dreamin]

Hi
After juggling with the entries at BMD, I think she is Sarah Harman, her marriage listed
Brighton 2b 412..........Francis at
Brighton 2b 422.
Probably an indexing mistake.

If you compare Sarah Harman in the 1891 cansus(Brighton) to the later censuses, it looks more than likely. Something to go on, anyway.

Rebel

I would agree with Sarah Harman - a bad index copy.  If 'Harman' is correct don't forget to add a postem

CD

[BumbleB]

Well done, rosie99. 

As a freeBMD transcriber it is the bane of my life when trying to differentiate between 4 and 1 from the printed GRO images.  442 is SO clear for Francis' entry, but for Sarah it is down to interpretation - the gap between the "4" and "1" is quite large and there is a hint of the cross-stroke on the "1"

[softly softly]

They had been married 16 years in 1911 census =c1895, so a strong possibility
John