"Complete"Married or not ?

[mumbles]

This Henry Aston and Tryphena Stamp
http://www.bcconnections.tribalpages.co ... =630949919

Appear to marry 1871 St. Thomas Dudley ( posted look-up)

1891 Census 50 Pike Helve Street West Bromwich Staffs.
Henry Aston Head 40 Labourer Iron Works
Tryphena Aston wife 39 born Dudley Worcs.
Sarah Aston dau 17
C. Hy. Aston son 14 Labourer Iron Works
Martha Aston dau 14 born Tipton Staffs.
Emmanuel Aston son 12 ( probably 12mths.)
Rest born West Bromwich Staffs.

1901 Census 79 Bagnall Street West Bromwich Staffs.
Henry Aston Head 50 Canal Dredger
Tryphena Aston wife 49
Emmanuel Aston son 13 Canal Dredger (probably 12mths.)
All born West Bromwich Staffs.

but in 1881 Tryphena is shown as unmarried and living with parents and some of children :-

1881 Census Old Crown Inn 1 Sheepwash Lane West Bromwich Staffs.
Charles Stamps Head 58 Broker
Sarah Stamps wife 58 born Tipton Staffs.
Typhena Stamps dau 28 (u)
George Stamps son 21 Broker
Mary Ann Hall niece 22 Servant
Elizabeth Aston grd.dau 9 Scholar born West Bromwich Staffs.
Charles Aston grd.son 4 born West Bromwich Staffs.
Martha Aston grd.dau 2 born West Bromwichb Staffs.
Rest born Dudley Worcs.

and Henry is with his parents unmarried :-
1881 Census 5 Great Bridge West Bromwich Staffs.
Benjamin Aston Head 60 Boat Builder born Coseley Staffs.
Martha Aston wife 61 born Bilston Staffs.
Joseph Aston son 26 Boat Builder born West Bromwich Staffs.
Martha Oliver relative 19 born Tipton Staffs.
Benjamin Aston grd. son 5 Scholar born Tipton Staffs.
Henry Aston son 30 (u) Labourer born West Bromwich Staffs.

[grangers14]

May be just an error on census Mummbles?
Jo

[gardener]

May be just an error on census Mummbles?
Jo

It would have to be a mistake on both wouldn't it? Tryphena home with her parents, unmarried but with Aston kids; and Henry home with his parents, unmarried.

[grangers14]

Yep it would mean 2 mistakes... But you dont get Tryphena Aston/Stamps commonly, children with her and marriage says 1871?
Marriage look up will say.
Jo

[gardener]

Yep it would mean 2 mistakes... But you dont get Tryphena Aston/Stamps commonly, children with her and marriage says 1871?
Marriage look up will say.
Jo

I didn't mean that it wasn't the same couple, just that it is unlikely to be a "mistake" if it occurs in two independent records. It looks more like marital disharmony to me. Unless the marriage was invalid for some reason.

[grangers14]

May be? I thought a mistake. Yep odd in two. But...
May be they were waiting for a house or had a big fall out?
Jo

[gardener]

First ever documented benefit fraud

[mumbles]

Looked up by RF
31 Jul 1871 St Thomas Dudley
Henry ASTON 21 B Boat Builder Dudley Father Benjamin Aston Boat Builder
Triphena STAMPS 21 S Dudley Father Charles Stamps Broker
After Banns The X Of Both
Wit; Samuel Parkes / Sarah Stamp

So they were married and Census wrong on two counts

[rockyfowler]

Re: "Complete"Marriage St.Thomas Dudley for Mumbles

Postby rockyfowler » Mon Sep 15, 2014 9:44 am
The actual Census may have them married?? We will never know they were destroyed after it was taken and all we have is what the enumerator copied