Mary Lowman, marriage licence, 1790; Esher

[gazania]

Hi,
Mary Lowman b ca1767; married by licence, William Warham on 17 Dec 1790: at Esher.  Their children were baptised at the same church.  Mary died there 28 April 1833 aged 66,

She has been my brick wall for many years. Now with my fading eyesight, I would like some help with her parents’ names and origins. A starting point, I think, is the marriage licence of 1790.  Are there any available licence records for this period?

I do know that the Esher parish records I read on film were difficult to read because of damage. I have searched wills but found no links..

Through wills, I have linked William Wareham, Warham back to Yorkshire. Although at marriage he was a grocer, living at Hamptonwick, Richmond.  Two of their grandaughters worked for the Royal household.

Later Warehams were non-conformists. Thank you.

[goldie61]

You can see it for free on familysearch.org.

It is on the film for the Diocese of Winchester licences. Images 282 and 284. Film number 007729255.

Unfortunately it doesn't tell you much about Mary Lowman.
She is of the parish of Esher, a spinster, and aged 'above 21'.
She is over 21 so doesn't need the permission of her father or mother.
There is no information given about them.

William is classed as a 'Gentleman'. of Richmond, and a bachelor, aged 'above 21 years'. He signs his name.

If you do a normal search for their the marriage of William Warham. spouse Lowman, on the search page, it is the first item in the list of information found.
It says "Principal England Surrey Parish Registers 1536 - 1992" under William's name, but it takes you directly to the licence entry.
Let me know how you get on. I can send you the images.

[gazania]

Thank you so much, Goldie61. Your information is very helpful.  While the licence did not reveal all about Mary, I know a little more in that she was of the parish of Esher and over 21. There is possible more about her or her family on the damaged parts of the Esher parish Register. I may never know more but I shall keep looking.
Familysearch has much more information since last I used it.

Thank you again. Gazania.

[goldie61]

Did you get the images from familysearch?

Although it says she is of the parish of Esher, one of the pages says it has been her 'usual place of abode' 'for the Space of four weeks last past'.

This is part of a printed form which is then filled in for each licence application.

In other words we can only know for certain that she had been in Esher for the last four weeks.
She may well have been born and bred there, but also she may have just been living there for a few weeks  to qualify for the residency part of the licence, and have come from somewhere else.

You can see the Esher parish registers on familysearch, but they are locked from being able to view them at home, (which you can do for many films), and you have to visit a Latter Day Saints centre to be able to view the actual film. You can make a search on the films though (there is a little magnifying glass next to the film number).
However, if you look at the listing for Esher parish records, they have Baptisms, marriages and burials, 1678 - 1697 (film no 0043547) - this sounds like an old register. When they started keeping records, many parishes just kept everything in one book.
Then there is a big gap until 1755 for marriages, and 1813 for baptisms and burials.
Mary Lowman's marriage in 1790 is the only Lowman entry that comes up in this film (post 1755).
As you say, it may well be that the missing registers are in such a poor condition that they couldn't even film them.
There is a film of the Bishop's Transcripts, but again they're not of much help as they don't start until 1803.

I can see why it's been a stumbling block for you!

[gazania]

Thank you for your explanation. I was able to view the images.

 I agree that Mary may have been born outside Surrey.  In fact, there are only a few people by the name of Lowman  recorded in Surrey in the 1841 census, and then some not born in the County. 
I am now taking the long shot that George, her second son, could be named after her father. George  is also my gggrandfather.  The majority of this family migrated to Australia in the 1850s.

Thank you again.