A surprise twin turns up?? Help please

[Val and George]

I was hoping for some help with this one please
My Samain/Semain/Smain/Swain family - and yes they do come under all these variations - and more!-
Joseph Samain and Elizabeth nee Paget/Pagett/Padgett living in Shoreditch

Joseph is a labourer in the early census, then becomes a hawker, then goes back to a dock labourer as the years progress. They have a large family, most of the children accounted for in the census, IGI and birth records. However, a twin has suddenly appeared which makes this their second set of twins - but with a confusing twist.

The first set of twins are Elizabeth and Caroline and their births are registered in Shoreditch Q2 1863 1c 114
I have no problem with these two, in the 1871 census @ Mail coach Yard they are 8 years old and Elizabeth is known as Betsey. In the 1881 census they are living at 18 Brittania Gardens and they are both 17 - again Betsey and Caroline

In 1865 the IGI has an entry for the birth of Charles Semaine, son of Joseph (hawker) and Elizabeth of Mail Coach Yard born 8th April 1865
Then in 1871 a burial for Charles Samain 3 Mail coach Yard Kingsland Road Bethnal Green age 6 Grave 12475 receipt 13 Victoria Park cemetery

Now comes the confusion - I have a certificate I sent for in 1997 - a birth cert for Elizabeth Semain born the same day as Charles - 8th April 1865 - father Joseph a hawker of Mail Coach Yard and mother Elizabeth formerly Pagett
I have just rechecked the BMD's and found no mention of Charles, which is why I hadn't made a note with the certificate saying it looked like twins.
Why would they call a daughter Elizabeth, born two years after another daughter still living, named Elizabeth. Neither Charles nor his twin Elizabeth show up in the following census, so she must have died too, but no record of death to be found either in BMD's or the IGI.
If I didn't have the certificate for Elizabeth's birth sitting in front of me I wouldn't have believed she existed.
Do any of you have any idea's about this sudden appearance of another twin, and also her disappearance. Why wasn't she buried with a grave number allotted as Charles did? Another daughter Lydia had died in march 1871, also buried at Victoria Park cemetery - of Mail Coach Yard aged 13months Grave 12473 receipt 4883months
It all seems very strange.
It has taken me years to track down this family in the census
In 1871/1881 they are transcribed as Swain
1891 Joseph is living on his own in Brittania Gardens, transcribed as Smain; and the rest of the family living not too far away in Lyndock Street transcribed under the name Lawrence!!! (son William (Bill) is transcribed as Bell Lawrence)
No wonder it has taken me so long to trace them, and now this twin conundrum! Any suggestions would be appreciated.

[Mary from Italy]

FreeBMD only has Elizabeth born in 1865.

I wonder if the LDS transcriber mistook Eliz for Chas?

[Olde Crone Holden]

I notice that, although the IGI call Charles' baptism entry an EXTRACTED record, it is in fact taken from a "computer print out" of the register and therefore there is room for error!

I think Mary may be right and the transcriber read Eliz as Chas. You would need to see the original pr.

OC

[Val and George]

Would this mean ordering the appropriate film from LDS?
We hadn't thought of of it being mistranscribed, thankyou for those thoughts OC and Mary

[Val and George]

Have just rethought and that means that not only was the baptism mistranscribed but also the 1871 burial information which doesn't make sense as it was 6 years later.
I also forgot to mention, just to make matters more confusing was that Joseph and Elizabeth had a son born in 1875 whom they also named Charles.

[JudithM]

Did Elizabeth's birth certificte show a time of birth, as this was supposed to be done for twins? Who registered the birth?
As there is evidence (albeit second hand) of both baptism and burial of Charles on the IGI AND a death registration for Charles aged 5 in Q2 1871, but only this birth reg for Elizabeth I wonder if the registrar just wrote the mother's name instead of the baby's name in errror and whoever was registering the birth didn't notice.

[Kit]

I agree with everyone above. I don't think you have another set of twins but you'll need to check the register to be sure.

[Merry Monty Montgomery]

Isn't it possible there was one child born in 1865 who was a boy. He was named Charles, baptised Charles and then, in 1871, registered for death and buried as Charles. Could it be it's the birth cert which is wrong!!

As you said, why would they have two living Elizabeths? (I know it did happen occasionally, but the likelyhood of this is slim)

Obviously, I can't explain why the birth reg says the child is Elizabeth (and presumably female), but I bet we can think of 101 reasons how the registration might have gone wrong! Where did you get the certificate from? Was the birth registered before the baptism or after?

[Uncle John]

As you said, why would they have two living Elizabeths? (I know it did happen occasionally, but the likelyhood of this is slim)

What seems to be more common (from a sample of one!!) is more than one Mary. My grandmother was one of 3 Marys in a RC family. They all had at least one other name, which is what they were known by.

[KiteRunner]

Yes, I think that is fairly common in RC families but I don't think Elizabeth would be used in that way.

[Olde Crone Holden]

thinking about this...I DO have one family who have two living daughters, both baptised Elizabeth. The older girl was always known as Betty or Betsy. Both grannies were called Elizabeth.

Also, if the burial information was transcribed by the same transcriber then they might make the same mistake twice over the name. However, if the burial says "son of" or "daughter of" then that should clinch it.

How lucky you are to find a BURIAL on the IGI, they are few and far between in my experience and there is no system in place for transcribing deaths and burials.

OC

[Kit]

How lucky you are to find a BURIAL on the IGI, they are few and far between in my experience and there is no system in place for transcribing deaths and burials.

OC

It is annoying isn't it OC? Sirely the whole idea of religion is dying and going to heaven? Why isn't this religion interested in that aspect of things? It would make our lives easier too.

[samesizedfeet]

You could try calling/emailing Bethnal Green registration and asking if they would mind checking if they have Charles as well. Explain the confusion and tell them you have Elizabeth's certificate and are trying to solve the mystery of who this Charles is.

There is always the possibility that Charles never made it onto the GRO indexes but is still on the books at Bethnal Green

[Olde Crone Holden]

I think Mormons do not record death because they do not think that they die, they merely pass into another life, where they will await possible resurrection, or admittance to heaven.

OC

[maudarby]

Hi
I have something similar in a branch of my family.
Edward & Amelia Limmer had 7 children born at Besthorpe, Norfolk between 1861 and 1872. All the children were registered. Their last child was Sam Kerr Limmer registered in the Sept qtr 1872. Amelia died on 22nd November 1872 and by 1881 Samuel Kerr Limmer is living with his father Edward in Bylaugh, Norfolk. Besthorpe baptisms are covered in the Norfolk Baptism project and I have found that children 1,2 & 3 were baptised on the same day in 1864 and children 4, 5 and 6 same day in 1869. There is no baptism for Samuel but there is one on 27th November 1872 for a Jane Rose Limmer (born 27th June 1872) parents Edward & Amelia. The sex of child box is empty. The exact same details appear on FreeREG. Without looking at the actual register I have no way of knowing if this is a transcription error. Amelia was also buried on the 27th November. I have come across this several times in my family; a child being baptised and the mother buried on the same day.
Moggie

[Richard]

Not sure it will be any help, but there are seven Semains listed on the Abney Park cemetery transcriptions, including a Charles born 1875 circa.

ABNEY PARK CEMETERY TRUST

Do no think that Victoria Park has a similar site up, (wish they did as sure I'd find many of mine there)

Tower Hamlets BMD only throws up 3 births in the 1860's under Semain

1861 Henry BGHR41/385//
1863 Charles BGHR46/220//
1870 James BGHR63/372//

Incidently I've done some look ups on this family, the Semains, in the Huguenot records on my thread over at GR, but further back.

Richard

[Val and George]

Have just got up and found all these great messages waiting for us, so will work our way through them during the day and get back to you all. Many many thanks.
Val and George

[KiteRunner]

Hi
I have something similar in a branch of my family.
Edward & Amelia Limmer had 7 children born at Besthorpe, Norfolk between 1861 and 1872. All the children were registered. Their last child was Sam Kerr Limmer registered in the Sept qtr 1872. Amelia died on 22nd November 1872 and by 1881 Samuel Kerr Limmer is living with his father Edward in Bylaugh, Norfolk. Besthorpe baptisms are covered in the Norfolk Baptism project and I have found that children 1,2 & 3 were baptised on the same day in 1864 and children 4, 5 and 6 same day in 1869. There is no baptism for Samuel but there is one on 27th November 1872 for a Jane Rose Limmer (born 27th June 1872) parents Edward & Amelia. The sex of child box is empty. The exact same details appear on FreeREG. Without looking at the actual register I have no way of knowing if this is a transcription error. Amelia was also buried on the 27th November. I have come across this several times in my family; a child being baptised and the mother buried on the same day.
Moggie

It is possible to imagine a badly written Sam Kerr being misread as Jane Rose, isn't it? I hope you get to look at the actual register one of these days!

[Val and George]

Thankyou for all the ideas, shall work through them one by one.
Judith - no time for the birth was given on the certificate
It does state that Elizabeth was a girl the birth was 8/4/1865 and was registered by the mother, Elizabeth, on 18/5/1865 - a good time after.
In answer to Merry's query, Charles was baptised at St Leonards 30/4/1865, so presumably you can be baptised without the birth having been registered with the appropriate authorities.
The certificate I purchased was through the GRO 10/10/1997

I think I might pursue Zoe's suggestion of asking the Bethnal Green registration office for help with this one. Would anyone have either an email or postal address for that.
Thankyou all - Val

[Val and George]

Gosh, what a day this is turning out to be!
First to add to my previous post - Elizabeth the mother registered the child's birth with an X, so wouldn't have been able to check that the registrar had the correct details if she was unable to read/write.

Richard, thankyou for the death of the 2nd Charles in the cemetery records. Amazingly today his marriage has come to light at St Andrew Hoxton 26/2/1893
Married Charles Samain X 20 a skindresser of 23 Lyndock St (this info ties in with his whereabouts in the 1891 census) son of Joseph- dec dock labourer - which shows us his father has died between the 1891 census and this wedding - married Matilda Woodward 20 a machinist of 75 Codmer Gardens.

More amazingly, this morning an email arrived from a very recent contact on GenesR with a photo attached of Charles and Matilda Samain walking along an esplanade somewhere. Possibly taken late 1930's early 40's. The sender had no other information, and couldn't remember who he had received it from, so I shall be able to write back straight away with the details of the marriage of this second Charles.

Charles' father Joseph was the son of James Samain and Mary Cracknell, Grandson of John Warden Samain and Amey Webb and G.Grandson of Abraham and Ann Warden and GG.grandson of Abraham and Rebecca - who are possibly part of the huguenot families you have discovered. Many thanks Richard for all your info. Val
Val