Marriage look up please

[Elaine]

When I looked at the census list for Joseph Henry Potts there are 3 together, 1901 and 1911 as you have

1891 has this chap from Durham in St Luke London

https://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=uki1891&indiv=try&h=9298325

George Potts 42
Elizabeth Potts 34
Joseph H Potts 13
Ada Potts 5
Hannah Potts 3
Thomas Potts 4/12

[Guest]

and thanks for the details for George , wouldn't have found that probably

[Guest]

Still not coming up with a POTTS BRANCH* marriage with Jane having either surname. Grr!!

ooh Galloway its Sarah Keen marrying a Potts I am looking for , sorry if I misled you.
Jane Nixon was her Mother and I never have found a marriage for either

[GallowayLass]

Have tried ancestry version of GRO for any Joseph Henry or Henry Joseph 1899 London but still no joy. Thought had found a mistranscription as KEAL but a check of actual GRO gives different mms.

[Elaine]

The way the removal order is worded seemed to indicate George is not Sarah's son I thought.

[GallowayLass]

ooh Galloway its Sarah Keen marrying a Potts I am looking for , sorry if I misled you.
Jane Nixon was her Mother and I never have found a marriage for either

Yep, I got that and had no joy so was trying to work out who the witness Jane Branchford was. Was she Sarah’s sister or sister in law. Going by not finding a Jane KEEN or similar with mms NIXON, I tried to see if she was Jane POTTS marrying a BRANCHFORD or Jane BRANCHFORD marrying a POTTS. No joy either way.

[GallowayLass]

Did you miss my post #17 ?

[Elaine]

I was thinking if he is not Sarah's son, would he have Keen in the surname?

[Guest]

I seem to have found Joseph Potts senior on 2 1901 census records?? going to have a little rest getting boggleyed

[Guest]

Yes thanks I did thank you for the record of George Thomas Potts Keen, on post 22 probably cross posted

Jane Branchflower is Sarah's Sister Jane Keen

[GallowayLass]

The image shows BRANCHFORD not BRANCHFLOWER. No wonder I came up with zilch. Time to rest the eyes methinks LOL

[cbcarolyn]

here is a marriage - Jane Keen to William Edward Blanchflower

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/interactive/1623/31280_197575-00385?pid=1353103619&

I think you have this though
5 Aug 1878

I think wrong also!

I am confused with flowers and fords too

[cbcarolyn]

Not really helping find the marriage, and think I am off on a tangent here!

Census for 1861 for Samuel Keen with Jane Nixon and daughter Jane Nixon lodging, is it even right for you?

[cbcarolyn]

Here is another Marriage

Alice Keen - daughter of Samuel, witness William Blanchflower

off to bed now...

[Guest]

yes that 1861 census is my Jane Nixon, I do have all the census records for her, its just the marriage to a Samuel Edward Keen I've not found.
I also have all the info I need on Sarah's siblings, its just her marriage to a Joseph Potts I am looking for.

Thanks everybody

[GallowayLass]

Nope. Have now trawled through everything I can think of on FMP and nothing for Sarah Keen or variant to Joseph Potts or variant. I think it’s highly likely they never actually married. Off the bed now before I end up comatose on the sofa LOL

[teasie]

I think is first child George from GRO as listed in the image in post#7

KEEN, GEORGE THOMAS POTTS -
GRO Reference: 1900 M Quarter in POPLAR Volume 01C Page 586

There is a baptism at St Mark, Bow:
10 Jan 1900 (born 26 Dec 1899) George Thomas s/o Sarah Keen, 736 Old Ford Road

ADDED: Reading the Removal Order, all of Sarah's children were illegitimate, as has been mentioned earlier, so Val, you wont find a marriage.

[Guest]

Thanks very much everybody for solving a long puzzle.
I hadn't realised all her children were illegitimate , thought it was just the first couple ,so thanks for that Teasie.
Wonder if Joseph helped her then, why have all those children with no support.

[teasie]

Joseph was the father, they just weren't married.

[Guest]

I thought I had found him with a wife?? will look into it more thanks again.