Genealogy Chat

Good Morning, I have a marriage certificate for a William Poole and Emma Ransom from 1871 It states William was 24 but I was told a wrong name was first added for the groom and crossed out.----------------------------------------------------------So I got a copy of the original and indeed the wrong name had been put and William Poole put in underneath------------------------------My queston is do you think the age for the other person was added and not changed as nothing fits with William being 24 when he married. Margaret

It sounds like a possibility. Have you found the couple on any census to see what his age is on there? Kath. x

Hi Kathleen I have only ever found William in the 1881 census age 44 so if he was 24 when he married should be 34 in the 1881 census. He had died by the 1891 census and that is no help because I can't find a death certiciate for him. Margaret

The details on the certificate will be from the copy the vicar sent up to GRO. The church in question could have it's own records of the marriage and it may be possible to locate these and check the details that way.

Margaret if you post the 1881 census with Emma & William on maybe we can help find him on earlier census's. Georgina.

What was the other name? Was it for the groom on the previous or succeeding entry? Can you find him in a census? What was his age? I have seen registers where the fathers' names have been swapped. At least the surnames have been. I have no idea whether the Christian names or occupations are correct. The ages could have been swapped, or a poorly written three copied as a two. Unless you can find some other records with his age on, it is going to be difficult to decide when he was actually born.

From BMD ther don't seem to be any William Pool(e)s born in Risbridge district in the 1830s. There are a couple in the 1840s though so maybe the 1881 is incorrect. for reference 1881 in Edmonton William Poole 44 born Haverhill, Suffolk Emma 31 Haverhill Emma 8 Haverhill Kate 6 Haverhill Pool(e) is quite a common name in Haverhill

Possible deaths? William Brooks Pool Birth Date: abt 1833 Year of Registration: 1888 Quarter of Registration: Jan-Feb-Mar Age at death: 55 District: Edmonton County: Essex, Hertfordshire, Middlesex Volume: 3a Page: 207 William George Pooles Birth Date: abt 1832 Year of Registration: 1887 Quarter of Registration: Apr-May-Jun Age at death: 55 District: Edmonton County: Essex, Hertfordshire, Middlesex Volume: 3a Page: 147

Helen that is the right family you found on the 1881 census Also the 2 deaths you found I have the death certificate for William Brook Poole but it is not the right one and also for the William George Pooles I found him on the 1881 census This is a mystery I am never going to get to the bottom of I fear thank you---------------------------------------------I have their childrens birth certificates last one being born 1889 in Edmonton Albert Poole born in the jan. Margaret

Margaret, your threads about Pool(e) should have a health warning! LOL!! I know I must be stark raving bonkers to venture here (have already been in a few times over the last few hours and quickly tiptoed out again!).......But I can't bear these unsolved mysteries....so keep getting drawn back! Can you remind me what William's father's name was entered as on the marriage cert? Also, what was the name originally written in the groom's place? Merry x

Hi Merry, thanks for your input Williams fathers name was George the wrong grooms name first put on the marriage certificate was Eliott Cracknel. If you look on the 1841 census for Haverhill you will see this family George Pool Maria wife children William George Harriet Hannah and James in the next census they are all there except Maria who had died and William the son. After William died his wife remarried in 1893 to a Thomas Williams and the witnesses to that marriage were James and Susan Poole and I think James was his brother. If you can understand all this. 4 years now I have been looking Margaret

Hmmmm.....well, if this is Elliot Cracknell, he is shown as 29 six months before he didn't get married :o(( 1871 Elliot Cracknell abt 1842 Haverhill, Suffolk, England Son Haverhill Suffolk and 38 on the next census........ 1881 Elliot Cracknell abt 1843 Haverhill, Suffolk, England Head Haverhill Suffolk Oh, he did get married! Probably just after William as Elliott has the following page number: Elliot Cracknell Year of Registration: 1871 Quarter of Registration: Oct-Nov-Dec District: Risbridge County: Cambridgeshire, Essex, Suffolk Volume: 4a Page: 842 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Merry

On the original cert. that i have got the only name that looks faint is William Poole and he must have signed it himself as it does not say the mark of although it does for everyone else. See Merry I beleive he was 39-40 when he got married as I have found a chistening record for him in 1831 his parents being George and Maria of course if it is the same William but being as I can't find anyone else who would fit the Bill excuse the pun. Margaret

So he knowcked off a few years because Emma was younger??......seems reasonable! Merry

Hi Merry if that is him he knocked more than a few years off but what amazes me is I can't find a death for him. not to worry lol Margaret x

LOL!! Believe me, under 10 years isn't a lot! (so should be 50ish not 44 in 1881??) My gg-granddad was 55 on the 1841 census but 80 when he died 5 years later.....LOL.....suppose the enumerator didn't believe he was 30+ years older than his wife! I like to think he didn't look his age! Hubby's gg-grandfather is on the census 1841-1891 and only once comes within five years of his correct age (in 1841) Maybe if William Pool died away from home, his death might have been registered as one of the unknowns - there are lots of those :o(( Merry