PDA

View Full Version : Help with handwriting please



JLB
01-10-19, 14:25
I've just found this new pension record on Ancestry--Fold3
I think I know but I'd love peoples' opinions on what the writing in red says .

Jan



20263

Olde Crone Holden
01-10-19, 14:48
Dependent Mrs M Spooner

Illegitimate child.

OC

JLB
01-10-19, 15:25
Thanks OC that's what I thought and it's thrown me completely.
This is my Grandfather. Some years ago I discovered that banns of marriage had been called between him and a lady called Spooner 3 times in 1914 but I couldn't find any evidence of a marriage. He married my Grandmother in 1916.
I found what I believed to be her on the 1911 census and she was working as a servant close to where he was.
I'm being a bit vague here because I suppose there's a slim chance that the child could still be alive.
The lady that I think is Miss Spooner was born in 1888.
I looked on the G R O index and nothing jumped out at me, and at the moment I can't think where else to look.

Jan

cbcarolyn
01-10-19, 16:55
I probably being a bit stupid here but I am confused by the documentation why is there a widow and a dependent? When the dependent is married.

JLB
01-10-19, 17:23
Join the club, I'm completely confused. I found what could be a tree for her on Ancestry and it looks as though she never married. Maybe she's just calling herself Mrs?

Jan

Olde Crone Holden
01-10-19, 18:23
Yes, I would think "Mrs" was just a courtesy title.

OC

Olde Crone Holden
01-10-19, 18:31
Where were the banns called, please?

OC

JLB
01-10-19, 18:37
Thanks
The banns were called in Hindringham Norfolk. I tried to put it on here but it didn't work. If you just google Hindringham Banns you should find it.

GallowayLass
01-10-19, 18:58
I thought it meant Mr Emery left a widow whose maiden name was Ellen Elizabeth Spooner and her mother Mrs M Spooner was dependent on her. I was struggling to figure out what the word before child was. All I could think of was “only” but Illgt. makes sense.

JLB
01-10-19, 19:11
Sorry folks
Ellen Elizabeth was his widow My Grandmother

Gwyn in Kent
01-10-19, 19:37
I would want to investigate the probable illegitimate births in Norfolk area for a child born to a female named SPOONER.

GRO index shows 2 in that area between 1913 and 1918, where mmn is also shown as SPOONER.

I haven't investigated what happened to these 2 children.

Olde Crone Holden
01-10-19, 19:44
Gwyn

If the birth was registered as illegitimate then there should be no mmn showing. Of course, she may have lied on registration and said she was Mrs Spooner, maiden name Spooner. But yes, they need investigating.

OC

Gwyn in Kent
01-10-19, 20:24
I'm puzzled O.C

I thought that illegitimate births after 1911, show mother's maiden name on the GRO index.
Certainly 2 births I know to be illegitimate are shown that way.

I thought we'd concluded that Mrs was probably not a fact.

cbcarolyn
01-10-19, 21:37
I've just found this new pension record on Ancestry--Fold3
I think I know but I'd love peoples' opinions on what the writing in red says .

Jan

20263


Thanks OC that's what I thought and it's thrown me completely.
This is my Grandfather. Some years ago I discovered that banns of marriage had been called between him and a lady called Spooner 3 times in 1914 but I couldn't find any evidence of a marriage. He married my Grandmother in 1916.
I found what I believed to be her on the 1911 census and she was working as a servant close to where he was.
I'm being a bit vague here because I suppose there's a slim chance that the child could still be alive.
The lady that I think is Miss Spooner was born in 1888.
I looked on the G R O index and nothing jumped out at me, and at the moment I can't think where else to look.

Jan


Sorry folks
Ellen Elizabeth was his widow My Grandmother

Have you traced all the records of your grandfather, the 'Spooner' may have a link to elsewhere to him, maybe a cousin? or living near on census? or a married sister?

Olde Crone Holden
01-10-19, 21:54
Gwyn

If you look at the new GRO indexes, births are shown with either a maiden name, or a blank for a maiden name. The blank indicates there is only one surname on the certificate which in turn indicates no father's name. The old GRO indexes were compiled in a different way.

OC

teasie
01-10-19, 22:01
The one in 1913 looks interesting. Over 100 years so should be OK to post

SPOONER, GERALD EDWARD (no mmn) GRO Reference: 1913 M Quarter in WALSINGHAM Volume 04B Page 451

Hindringham is in the Walsingham RD.

It looks like Gerald reversed his forenames by 1939

Gwyn in Kent
01-10-19, 22:23
Ah... I see what you are saying OC.... Thank you for the explanation.

Olde Crone Holden
01-10-19, 23:05
Teasie

Yes, I wondered about that one as well. Not familiar with the county - any baptisms on line?

OC

cbcarolyn
01-10-19, 23:16
Gwyn

If you look at the new GRO indexes, births are shown with either a maiden name, or a blank for a maiden name. The blank indicates there is only one surname on the certificate which in turn indicates no father's name. The old GRO indexes were compiled in a different way.

OC
if you use FMP it works slightly differently to GRO, you can put in the mothers name and the surname the same and it will return them, but in GRO it is harder, as you have to leave mothers name blank. All very confusing!

Not sure if the link will work:

https://www.findmypast.co.uk/search/results?collection=civil%20births&lastname=spooner&mothersmaidenname=spooner&sourcecategory=life%20events%20(bmds)&sourcecountry=great%20britain&yearofbirth=1913&yearofbirth_offset=2&keywordsplace=norfolk%2c%20england&keywordsplace_proximity=5

Olde Crone Holden
01-10-19, 23:45
Yes, not so easy on the GRO, but I just brought up a list of all Spooner births and skimmed through to look at the ones with no mmn.

OC

AntonyM
02-10-19, 08:28
Gwyn
If you look at the new GRO indexes, births are shown with either a maiden name, or a blank for a maiden name. The blank indicates there is only one surname on the certificate which in turn indicates no father's name. The old GRO indexes were compiled in a different way.


In many cases that would be the case, but it doesn't always apply and is a basis for making incorrect assumptions.

The blank on an entry in the GRO birth index does indicate that there is no maiden name (which GRO identify by the use of the word "formerly" before a surname) on the register entry, but it is quite possible for an entry with a blank maiden name to still have a father named on it - where unmarried parents register as joint informants for example.

Likewise, the appearance of a maiden name in the GRO index doesn't automatically mean the child is legitimate - a married woman can register an illegitimate child if her husband is not the father, with the father's name blank (or with a different man named jointly), and her maiden name will still be shown, as of course can a widow.

Caroline
02-10-19, 08:43
In many cases that would be the case, but it doesn't always apply and is a basis for making incorrect assumptions.

The blank on an entry in the GRO birth index does indicate that there is no maiden name (which GRO identify by the use of the word "formerly" before a surname) on the register entry, but it is quite possible for an entry with a blank maiden name to still have a father named on it - where unmarried parents register as joint informants for example.

Likewise, the appearance of a maiden name in the GRO index doesn't automatically mean the child is legitimate - a married woman can register an illegitimate child if her husband is not the father, with the father's name blank (or with a different man named jointly), and her maiden name will still be shown, as of course can a widow.

Might this also be true where the mother's maiden name is the same as the father's surname?

AntonyM
02-10-19, 08:58
Might this also be true where the mother's maiden name is the same as the father's surname?

All the above would till apply.

The main point is that building family trees from index entries (either the "new" GRO index, or the older printed indexes) is not an exact science and always involves making assumptions that (just occasionally) may be very wrong.

Olde Crone Holden
02-10-19, 09:03
AntonyM

Yes, I realise what you are saying, but if Miss Spooner went to register her child and the father did not wish his name to be on the certificate then surely that birth would appear in the new index under Spooner with the maiden name blank.

OC

AntonyM
02-10-19, 09:21
AntonyM

Yes, I realise what you are saying, but if Miss Spooner went to register her child and the father did not wish his name to be on the certificate then surely that birth would appear in the new index under Spooner with the maiden name blank.

OC

It could well do, which is exactly my point - but it is only one of a number of possibilities, and you can't know for certain which is the case without seeing a certificate. My post really was about the linking of a blank in the maiden name to there being no father named, which is not always the case.

On a birth registration the father's wishes never really come into it. If the mother claims to be married she can name her "husband" as the father on the entry without him being present to agree (but she commits perjury if she knows that to be a lie). If she isn't married to the father (but could be married to someone else) then the father's name can't be entered unless he is present to jointly sign the register.

JLB
02-10-19, 09:27
Many thanks for all the replies.I will digest them later as I have to go out this morning.I was reading about these records on the Western Front Association website and the records for each soldier are all very different apparently.
I'll be back later.
Jan

Caroline
02-10-19, 09:29
All the above would till apply.

The main point is that building family trees from index entries (either the "new" GRO index, or the older printed indexes) is not an exact science and always involves making assumptions that (just occasionally) may be very wrong.

That's what I thought. Not helped by the entry not actually being in the "new" index. I've sent for the certificate anyway. :)

AntonyM
02-10-19, 09:39
If an entry that appears in the printed index isn't to be found on the "new" GRO index, or appears differently, then that can indicate what is likely to be on the register, because the two use different indexing rules and such differences are very useful in helping to work things out.

What is the entry you have ordered ?

Olde Crone Holden
02-10-19, 09:58
I wasn't suggesting the poster construct a tree using assumptions, just looking for a place to start sending for certificates. If none of the obvious ones apply (no mother's maiden name) then the search widens outwards.

I have to say I am struggling to envisage a scenario where a man would attend to register the birth of his illegitimate child yet would not acknowledge paternity by having his name on the certificate. In my experience, which of course is not as great as yours, when unmarried parents register the birth of their child and tell the truth, the certificate results in two entries in the (old) indexes, one in father's surname, one in mother's surname.

OC

cbcarolyn
02-10-19, 10:00
The one in 1913 looks interesting. Over 100 years so should be OK to post

SPOONER, GERALD EDWARD (no mmn) GRO Reference: 1913 M Quarter in WALSINGHAM Volume 04B Page 451

Hindringham is in the Walsingham RD.

It looks like Gerald reversed his forenames by 1939
There is also a Dorothy May 2 years laster, less likely I guess.

I assume that the red writing means that is was a later addition, so probably not mentioned elsewhere on military records. A lot of the records have family information.

Can you post a link to the banns, maybe someone can find more on them. I assume that George stated he was a bachelor on his marriage?

AntonyM
02-10-19, 10:12
I have to say I am struggling to envisage a scenario where a man would attend to register the birth of his illegitimate child yet would not acknowledge paternity by having his name on the certificate.


So would I ...not sure I suggested that, although I did once have a father who attended with his partner and was very reluctant to sign (when the legal side of parental responsibility was explained to him) although he did in the end !


In my experience, which of course is not as great as yours, when unmarried parents register the birth of their child and tell the truth, the certificate results in two entries in the (old) indexes, one in father's surname, one in mother's surname.


It does - but not in the GRO on-line index, where it would only appear under the father's name. Or at least so it appears - I did ask GRO to supply a copy of the exact indexing and transcription rules that were followed when the digitisation work was done ( some years ago by a 3rd party external supplier), and they were unable to track a copy down.

teasie
02-10-19, 10:18
Dorothy May might actually be a better candidate, as she was born 1915 and the banns were called 1914 - perhaps she was the reason for the wedding that never was. Her DoB seems to be 13 Feb 1915.

cbcarolyn
02-10-19, 10:30
wrong!

Katarzyna
02-10-19, 11:18
Mary Ann Spooner b 1888 Hindringham was a servant in Wood Green in 1911

She is with her brother Samuel on 1939 Register Walsingham both single.

Hindringham Banns - only ref to them I can find:

http://www.oldshuck.info/pdf/HINDRINGHAM_Banns_1913-1959.pdf

Katarzyna
02-10-19, 11:30
Do you have George in East Barnet or near on any census? Where was he born?
I can see Wood Green is very close to East Barnet - about 4 miles

Olde Crone Holden
02-10-19, 12:12
Teasie - post #32. Did you notice there are two other births on the same page with mother's maiden name Spooner? Different surnames though - odd coincidence?

OC

Caroline
02-10-19, 12:21
If an entry that appears in the printed index isn't to be found on the "new" GRO index, or appears differently, then that can indicate what is likely to be on the register, because the two use different indexing rules and such differences are very useful in helping to work things out.

What is the entry you have ordered ?

Charles Mills Hart
Worthing
Q3
Volume 7
Page 552

https://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&dbid=8912&h=9329301&tid=162390529&pid=112117741690&usePUB=true&_phsrc=GJA4566&_phstart=successSource

His mother's maiden name is Hart. Parents, paternal first cousins, were married in Aldershot in 1831. He is the youngest of 5 and the only one who appears to have a birth registration - 2 too early baptised in Upper Beeding, 2 not registered, born Arundel according to census returns and one of those appears not to have been baptised either. Charles was baptised in Littlehampton. They're distant twigs but I was wondering why no maiden name was showing so wanted to find out!!

Katarzyna
02-10-19, 12:28
Dorothy May might actually be a better candidate, as she was born 1915 and the banns were called 1914 - perhaps she was the reason for the wedding that never was. Her DoB seems to be 13 Feb 1915.

Where did you find this DOB?
I can see 2 possible candidates on the 1939 Register for March qtr 1915:
Dorothy Spooner in Kent, single, Hospital Domestic duties 23 Jan 1915 later Hopson
Dorothy May Spooner in Birmingham, single, Domestic Servant 9 Jan 1915 later Merchel

cbcarolyn
02-10-19, 12:56
It was on the FMP link post 19, it seems easier to look on there not sure how reliable it is by putting in the mothers name and surname, but is quicker than trawling through GRO
here it is on GRO
SPOONER, DOROTHY MAY -
GRO Reference: 1915 M Quarter in WALSINGHAM Volume 04B Page 471

I have seen both those census, but wasn't sure if I was even on the right family :) Is Barnet close to Wood Green, couldn't decide.

cbcarolyn
02-10-19, 13:00
Mary Ann Spooner b 1888 Hindringham was a servant in Wood Green in 1911

She is with her brother Samuel on 1939 Register Walsingham both single.

Hindringham Banns - only ref to them I can find:

http://www.oldshuck.info/pdf/HINDRINGHAM_Banns_1913-1959.pdf

Kat - sorry ignore previous post - misread yours doh

I have this census
https://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&dbid=7814&h=7457365&ssrc=pt&tid=161314848&pid=222134006150&usePUB=true

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/interactive/2352/rg14_07153_0049_03/40040670?backurl=https://www.ancestry.co.uk/family-tree/person/tree/161314848/person/222134006150/facts/citation/742187422681/edit/record

not sure if they are the right ones

cbcarolyn
02-10-19, 13:03
1901
Registration district: Edmonton
Sub-registration district: Enfield
ED, institution, or vessel: 01
Neighbors: View others on page
Piece: 1270
Folio: 19
Page Number: 30
Household schedule number: 184
Household Members:
Name Age
George Emery 37
Charlotte Emery 35
George Emery 7
Sarah Emery 11
Gertrude Emery 10
Florence Emery 5

1911
County/Island: Middlesex
Country: England
Street address: 7 Laurel Cottages, Margaret Rd, New Barnet, Herts
Marital status: Single
Occupation: Railway Porter
Registration district: Barnet
Registration District Number: 131
Sub-registration district: Barnet
ED, institution, or vessel: 14
Household schedule number: 25
Piece: 7153
Household Members:
Name Age
George Emery 47
Charlotte Emery 45
Annie Emery 21
Gertrude Emery 20
George Emery 17
Florence Emery 15
William Emery 6

AntonyM
02-10-19, 13:15
Charles Mills Hart
Worthing
Q3
Volume 7
Page 552

https://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&dbid=8912&h=9329301&tid=162390529&pid=112117741690&usePUB=true&_phsrc=GJA4566&_phstart=successSource

His mother's maiden name is Hart. Parents, paternal first cousins, were married in Aldershot in 1831. He is the youngest of 5 and the only one who appears to have a birth registration - 2 too early baptised in Upper Beeding, 2 not registered, born Arundel according to census returns and one of those appears not to have been baptised either. Charles was baptised in Littlehampton. They're distant twigs but I was wondering why no maiden name was showing so wanted to find out!!

He's on the new index as HARL , but with a blank for the maiden name. Be interesting to hear what it reveals.

It may be that the registrar didn't follow the convention and used a different wording instead of "formerly", and so the transcribers didn't record a maiden name. I have seen a district where for a period all the mothers are shown as "x late y" and so all have a blank as maiden name on the new index.

Caroline
02-10-19, 14:27
He's on the new index as HARL , but with a blank for the maiden name. Be interesting to hear what it reveals.

It may be that the registrar didn't follow the convention and used a different wording instead of "formerly", and so the transcribers didn't record a maiden name. I have seen a district where for a period all the mothers are shown as "x late y" and so all have a blank as maiden name on the new index.

Thank you - I can see it there now but it is clearly a t on the page! I'll let you know what arrives. :)

P.S. Sorry JLB (https://www.familytreeforum.com/member.php/11138-JLB), I highjacked your thread.

JLB
02-10-19, 15:25
Thank you. you all have been busy!
I didn't know any of the family but have done a lot of research on them and there is no sign of a Spooner there.His parents and siblings were all alive when he died so I can't imagine that anyone other than his wife and child would be dependent on him other than an illegitimate child providing that I'm reading the Pension Card correctly.George also appears under "Soldiers' Effects" on Ancestry and just his wife and child are mentioned.
I wonder if my Nan knew.
I think it was 1913-14 that George was working in Wood Green Station as a railway porter, and I worked out that he was probably called up at the end of 1915.He enlisted in Mansfield. He married my just turned 16 year old Nan soon after,but on the South Coast.
Just to throw a spanner in the works --If Miss Spooner discovered that she was pregnant when they were still in London would she necessarily have gone home? It might have depended on her family.

Jan

teasie
02-10-19, 15:30
Where did you find this DOB?
I can see 2 possible candidates on the 1939 Register for March qtr 1915:
Dorothy Spooner in Kent, single, Hospital Domestic duties 23 Jan 1915 later Hopson
Dorothy May Spooner in Birmingham, single, Domestic Servant 9 Jan 1915 later Merchel



She is married by the time of the 1939 register. Try Collins (assuming I have the right Dorothy M Spooner).

Katarzyna
02-10-19, 15:32
I suspect they are correct censuses Caroline as I said before Wood Green and New Barnet are only 4 miles away from each other.
Where did you find Dorothy's DoB Teasie ....Post #32... you were most specific about it.... Her DoB seems to be 13 Feb 1915.

Edit: Thanks Teasie missed that post.You maybe should have said where you found it???

teasie
02-10-19, 15:35
I suspect they are correct censuses Caroline as I said before Wood Green and New Barnet are only 4 miles away from each other.
Where did you find Dorothy's DoB ....Post #32... you were most specific about it.... Her DoB seems to be 13 Feb 1915.

As above, try Collins.

Katarzyna
02-10-19, 15:49
Got the message first time!!!
As Teasie posted before- post#32 - I too suspect George probably chickened out of marriage as the banns were read in September 1914 and Dorothy was born 4 months later. Poor Mary Ann. Sad she never married after that.

teasie
02-10-19, 16:04
Sorry, but you asked twice so I answered twice!

Apologies too if you feel I should have been more specific about how/where I found her, but with a 1915 birth the first thing I looked for was a marriage pre-1939.

JLB
02-10-19, 16:06
the censuses are correct

cbcarolyn
02-10-19, 17:10
Thank you. you all have been busy!
I didn't know any of the family but have done a lot of research on them and there is no sign of a Spooner there.His parents and siblings were all alive when he died so I can't imagine that anyone other than his wife and child would be dependent on him other than an illegitimate child providing that I'm reading the Pension Card correctly.George also appears under "Soldiers' Effects" on Ancestry and just his wife and child are mentioned.
I wonder if my Nan knew.
I think it was 1913-14 that George was working in Wood Green Station as a railway porter, and I worked out that he was probably called up at the end of 1915.He enlisted in Mansfield. He married my just turned 16 year old Nan soon after,but on the South Coast.
Just to throw a spanner in the works --If Miss Spooner discovered that she was pregnant when they were still in London would she necessarily have gone home? It might have depended on her family.

Jan
It all makes sense, not sure how you can actually prove it.

Not sure if the birth certificate will tell you more, probably worth ordering it?

Olde Crone Holden
02-10-19, 17:58
Very small point. Call up didn't start till 1916, it was voluntary before that, so if he went before 1916 it was because he wanted to. Not sure if he would get leave to marry so soon after joining up but anything is possible.

Not many households would allow a pregnant servant to stay, so it would either be go home or go into a refuge of some sort.

OC

JLB
02-10-19, 18:07
In the Rank or Profession box on his marriage cert the box is split and at the top it says Signaller R F A and at the bottom Railway Signalman.

Jan

cbcarolyn
02-10-19, 18:18
Are there any wills about, am thinking the family may have known if it had gone as far as banns? And maybe a mention on one might be there.

Olde Crone Holden
02-10-19, 18:31
Miss Spooner obviously took him to court for maintenance. Local papers always printed maintenance orders, might be worth a look in the papers.

OC

JLB
03-10-19, 17:01
I've just realized that on the back of the card it says 16th May 192520267So frustrating that there is no more information as to whether she actually got a pension.
I've been trying to follow up on all the leads that you all so kindly helped with and discovered that Samuel Spooner the brother that she was living with in 1939 left a will in 1955 in which the probate went to Mary Ann, so I've ordered it but who knows when that might arrive!
I'm still debating whether to order any birth certs.

Jan

Olde Crone Holden
03-10-19, 18:43
JLB

Wait till you've seen the will, it will surely name her child. We hope!

ETA - a friend was in a similar position and we know that the legal widow got the pension, the dependent got maintenance until the age of 14.

OC

cbcarolyn
03-10-19, 19:20
I've just realized that on the back of the card it says 16th May 192520267So frustrating that there is no more information as to whether she actually got a pension.
I've been trying to follow up on all the leads that you all so kindly helped with and discovered that Samuel Spooner the brother that she was living with in 1939 left a will in 1955 in which the probate went to Mary Ann, so I've ordered it but who knows when that might arrive!
I'm still debating whether to order any birth certs.

Jan

That is good news, it might tell you something. Should tell you who her child is for definite, and then maybe worth getting the certificate?

Olde Crone Holden
03-10-19, 19:47
Oh duhr! Samuel's will won't necessarily name his niece! Fingers crossed though.

OC

JLB
03-10-19, 20:07
Well I thought it was worth a try. Just dont' know how many months I'll have to wait for it

Jan

cbcarolyn
03-10-19, 20:51
Well I thought it was worth a try. Just dont' know how many months I'll have to wait for it

Jan
the newer requests seem to be turning up, so you might be OK.

Olde Crone Holden
03-10-19, 21:31
Oh, definitely worth a try, you never know what information a will can give you.


OC

Caroline
07-10-19, 12:43
He's on the new index as HARL , but with a blank for the maiden name. Be interesting to hear what it reveals.

It may be that the registrar didn't follow the convention and used a different wording instead of "formerly", and so the transcribers didn't record a maiden name. I have seen a district where for a period all the mothers are shown as "x late y" and so all have a blank as maiden name on the new index.

The maiden name is given as Hart late Hart. Says Charlotte and not Caroline but that's a different issue! She's Caroline on every census and the baptisms.

https://i.ibb.co/3RvMfYt/Charles-Mills-Hart.jpg (https://ibb.co/3RvMfYt)

So, as I thought, we mustn't assume that the child is always illegitimate if the maiden name is blank.

JLB
20-11-19, 12:27
Dorothy May might actually be a better candidate, as she was born 1915 and the banns were called 1914 - perhaps she was the reason for the wedding that never was. Her DoB seems to be 13 Feb 1915.
Well I finally got the will of Samuel Spooner Mary ann's brother and it does indeed name Dorothy May as her daughter. I believe Dorothy May Collins died in 2000.
I can only find two possible children from her marriage to Frederick Robert J Collins so I'm now debating which certs to get.

teasie
20-11-19, 12:49
Great news that the mystery has been solved, and a good spot by Carolyn with the birth.

It might be interesting to see who Dorothy named as her father at marriage, but it might be asking too much that she confirmed it was George.

GallowayLass
20-11-19, 14:16
Now I’m really confused. That cert is the birth of a boy :question:

Olde Crone Holden
20-11-19, 14:24
GL, it is indeed, but we are now talking about a will, not a birth certificate.

OC

JLB
20-11-19, 15:26
I have ordered Dorothy May's birth and marriage certs to see if they give me any more info, as of course the will still doesn't prove that she's George's child so we will see.

GallowayLass
20-11-19, 17:02
Oh, ‘eco! LOL Am just not with it today.

cbcarolyn
20-11-19, 17:48
Great news that the mystery has been solved, and a good spot by Carolyn with the birth.

It might be interesting to see who Dorothy named as her father at marriage, but it might be asking too much that she confirmed it was George.
Pleased that the will gave something useful, I agree that I would get Dorothy's cert and see if father on there, it is likely if the army pension was paid on the strength of it?

The children of Dorothy is not that contentious, so unless you like to have all the certs I wouldn't bother.

teasie
20-11-19, 19:00
I very much doubt that the father will be named as the birth is registered only under the surname Spooner, with the mmn also Spooner. In order for a father to be named - if he is not married to the mother - then he must be present at the registration.

It may be that she obtained some form of maintenance from him, which may be recorded in local court records.

JLB
06-12-19, 12:15
Well,there is definitely no father named on the birth cert. I had wondered if any notes might have been added in order for Mary Ann to prove paternity to the Army.
No father listed on Dorothy May's marriage cert either, but then she may just not have known.
I have looked in the papers on FMP But couldn't find anything so how could she have convinced the Army that George was the father?

teasie
06-12-19, 12:51
Maintenance orders were not routinely in the newspapers, so I would suggest you contact the records office to see if they can suggest which court may have had jurisdiction and whether any records are available.

JLB
06-12-19, 14:44
I have a chap who was sued? by a lady for Breach of Promise which was reported in the newspapers although there isn't much for Norfolk papers around this period yet.

Olde Crone Holden
06-12-19, 15:58
She may not have convinced the army, he may have simply owned up when questioned. Not every nztural father was a heartless bounder, lol and he did save her from the humiliation of goi g to court for maintenance. Maintenance orders were ALWAYS published in my small town.

OC

cbcarolyn
06-12-19, 17:02
You don't need any more proof as such? now that you have proved that she is her child.

like OC says he could have just said that he was the father.