Where did Sarah go?! Can find parents, but not her...

[Rachandgarry]

Hi all,

Wonder if some fresh eyes looking at this might be able to help?

In 1851, my husband's family are living at Dorking Farm, Smarden, Kent (copyright TNA):

HO107 / 1621 / 20 / 5
Thomas GILBERT, b 1800 in Pluckley Kent. Farmer.
Sarah GILBERT, b 1807 in Cranbrook, Kent.
<several children>
Sarah GILBERT, b 1844 in Smarden, Kent - hubby's great-great-grandmother
<2 more children>

I can see that in the 1861 census, Thomas, Sarah and two children, Phobe (presumably should have been Phoebe?) and Calvenda (odd name?). They are now living at Biddendan Green Farm, near Beddendan Green, Smarden. TNA copyright. RG09 / 511 / 113 / 7

I can't find g-g-grandmother Sarah anywhere in 1861. I have found plenty of other Sarah Gilberts but none match the place of birth, year or parents names.

She marries in 1868 to Samuel Checksfield and in the 1871 - 1911 census' she is still consistent with her place of birth as Smarden, so I doubt that she would have given a mistaken place of birth in just the one census (1861), but anything is possible I guess!

Any ideas or is this just one of those things where she was out somewhere the night the census was taken and no-one mentioned it to the enumerator :(?

Thanks in advance
Rachel (on behalf of Garry!)

[Mary from Italy]

This is probably the birth of "Calvinda":

Births Mar 1852
GILBERT Priscilla Clarinda W Ashford 2a 457

Smarden is in the W. Ashford reg. district.

Can't see Sarah yet, but some parts of the 1861 census are missing. Scroll down to the bottom of this page to see which:

http://search.ancestry.co.uk/search/db.aspx?dbid=8767&enc=1

[Mary from Italy]

There's an unmarried female SG from Smarden in the workhouse in 1861; might be her, but the age is a bit out:

http://search.ancestry.co.uk/iexec?htx=view&r=5538&dbid=8767&iid=KENRG9_510_513-0521&fn=S&ln=G&st=d&ssrc=&pid=7267261

[Darksecretz]

there is another Sarah Gilbert from Smarden... 1851 census

William Brungar 44
Lydia Brungar 62
Esther Taylor 29
Ann Brungar 15
Sarah Ann Gilbert 3

Source Citation: Class: HO107; Piece: 1621; Folio: 21; Page: 6; GSU roll: 193522.

http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin...ki1851&indiv=1

[Little Nell]

Can't help but used to drive through Biddenden (with its sign about the Siamese twins born there) on the way to visit my grandmother in Kent. We also once had a pub lunch at the Bell in Smarden.

[Chrissie Smiff]

Have you found her birth reference Rachel? I can't find a birth ref for a Sarah Gilbert in West Ashford at all. The nearest in Kent are one in Maidstone in 1843 and one in Tonbridge in 1845.

[Rachandgarry]

Hi all

Thanks for the ideas folks.

Mary - thats an interesting spot on the census, wow! How on earth did you find that? I guess there is no way I can elaborate on the "S.G." is there. Did the workhouses keep any records of their own?

Julie - will have a look in to that census entry and see if I can trace her forward, perhaps discount her.

Nell - thats so cool! I have hardly ever been to Kent I can't wait to go there and visit all these places with hubby.

Chrissie - No, not definitively :-( Geographically, and chronologically, we are thinking it will be the Maidstone 1843 one but I haven't added it to my tree yet. We're working backwards from guaranteed info and the further back we go, the more options we're hitting. What I know for absolute certain is:

Samuel Checksfield, b 1847 Tenterden Kent and Sarah Gilbert, b approx 1843/1844 Smarden, Kent. They were married on 15th August, 1868 in Tenterden. This certificate is on order, so that will give us her father's details hopefully.

I've been looking for more info on her, based on the 1871 - 1911 census' where she was reasonably consistent with her age and place of birth. In the census' after her marriage, she gives the following details:

1911 census: 69 born in Smarden, Kent
1901 census: 58 born in Smarden, Kent
1891 census: 49 born in Smarden, Kent
1881 census: 38 born in Smarden, Kent
1871 census: 27 born in Smarden, Kent

I'm thinking that the most likely birth is the Maidstone Dec 1843 one. Trying to find her on the 1851 and 1861 census - the only one I could see that fitted completely was the 1851 that I mentioned in the first post, but then can't see her in the 1861.

Oh, grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr lol!

Will update when certificate arrives and hopefully can confirm her father was Thomas.

Thanks again
Rachel

[Darksecretz]

maybe her birth wasnt registered? I have found a bapt on www.familysearch.org

she is 1st one down the list:

https://www.familysearch.org/s/searc...filtered=false

record title: England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975
name: Sarah Gilbert
gender: Female
baptism/christening date: 16 Jul 1843
baptism/christening place: Smarden, Kent, England
father's name: Thomas Gilbert
mother's name: Sarah Gilbert
indexing project (batch) number: I01293-6

[Inahaystack]

there is another Sarah Gilbert from Smarden... 1851 census

William Brungar 44
Lydia Brungar 62
Esther Taylor 29
Ann Brungar 15
Sarah Ann Gilbert 3

Source Citation: Class: HO107; Piece: 1621; Folio: 21; Page: 6; GSU roll: 193522.

http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin...ki1851&indiv=1

The address here - Maltman's Hill, is less than two miles from Smarden .

[Inahaystack]

Have you found her birth reference Rachel? I can't find a birth ref for a Sarah Gilbert in West Ashford at all. The nearest in Kent are one in Maidstone in 1843 and one in Tonbridge in 1845.

There is one in 1842 . Cranbrook. Dec Qtr. Vol 5 Page 74
~~~~~~

WEST ASHFORD REGISTRATION DISTRICT

Registration County : Kent.
Created : 1.7.1837.
Abolished : 1.4.1941 (succeeded by Ashford and Sittingbourne districts).
Sub-districts : Ashford; Calehill.
GRO volumes : V (1837-51); 2a (1852-1941).
Registers now in Kent district.

Smarden
KEN
1837
1941

[Mary from Italy]

Mary - thats an interesting spot on the census, wow! How on earth did you find that?

If I get stuck with someone I usually try searching for just their initials, because in some censuses people in prisons, hospitals, asylums and workhouses were only shown by their initials.

I guess there is no way I can elaborate on the "S.G." is there.

Not from the census records, no.

Did the workhouses keep any records of their own?

They did, although they haven't all survived.

The Westwell workhouse where SG was seems to have have been the West Ashford Union Workhouse (or part of it) at the time. You can find details of the surviving records here:

http://users.ox.ac.uk/~peter/workhouse/WestAshford/WestAshford.shtml

[Inahaystack]

maybe her birth wasnt registered? I have found a bapt on www.familysearch.org

she is 1st one down the list:

https://www.familysearch.org/s/search/index/record-search-advanced#searchType=records&fed=true&collectionId=1473014&advanced=true&givenName=sarah&surname=gilbert&eventType=any&eventLocation=kent%2C+england&eventYearFrom=&eventYearTo=&relationship=parents&exact-fatherFirst=on&fatherFirst=thomas&fatherLast=&exact-motherFirst=on&motherFirst=sarah&motherLast=&filtered=false

record title: England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975
name: Sarah Gilbert
gender: Female
baptism/christening date: 16 Jul 1843
baptism/christening place: Smarden, Kent, England
father's name: Thomas Gilbert
mother's name: Sarah Gilbert
indexing project (batch) number: I01293-6

That's an interesting christening Julie..... on FreeBMD there is a registration in Dec Qtr 1842 at Cranbrook(about 8 miles from Smarden) Vol 5 Page 74

Nina

[Rachandgarry]

Hi all,

Back from holiday and Sarah's marriage certificate has arrived. Details:

15th August 1868. Marriage solemnized at the Parish Church in the Parish of Tenterden in the County of Kent.

Samuel Cheksfield - full age - bachelor - labourer - residence Tenterden - father Edward Cheksfield, Policeman. (there is definitely no second c in checksfield, on this certificate)

Sarah Gilbert - full age - spinster - father Thomas Gilbert, labourer.

Witnesses: James Fuggle and Jane Checksfield

So, I think the christening Julie found is correct, and they are the family I suspected in the 1851 census. So where the heck is she by 1861. There have been some interesting suggestions on this thread, thank you. I don't know any way I can verify any of the possibilities though. It doesn't matter per se, because I can still go back further but I hate having holes, and not being able to track her life.

If anyone has any ideas given the new certificate, I'd be really grateful :-)

Thanks again
Rachel x