Zeppelin raid on Lowestoft - one fatality

[CGM]

A further article from the EDP24. which tells the story of Kate CRAWFORD. (published after the link above).

Helen Grace COOK may have died on the same date as the raid but, sadly, she died of Diphtheria in the local Sanatorium.

CGM

[Bob Collis]

Hi all:

Yes, it looks like I have screwed up on this. A memorial at a local museum (LWMM, Sparrows Nest, LT) features the names of civilians killed in the town 1914-18, and Hellen Grace Cook's name appears on this. Having established her age and date of death along with the fact she is buried in LT, I made the mistake of assuming she was the victim of the HE bomb in Lovewell Rd. Local researcher Ivan bunn at the SRO in LT picked up on the error when he viewed Ms Cook's death certificate. Katy Crawford was indeed the woman killed in this raid. In mitigation, there is NO MENTION whatsoever in the local press of the 9 Aug 1915 Zeppelin raid or the death of Ms Crawford, and it was only a piece of prose and a message from her parents in the Memorial Notice column of the paper in Aug 1918 that made a ref to her death "in an air raid".

Apolos to those who went out of their way to add to this thread and ended up unraveling my cock-up.

Embarrassed of LT!

BC

[ss002d6252]

Yes, it looks like I have screwed up on this. A memorial at a local museum (LWMM, Sparrows Nest, LT) features the names of civilians killed in the town 1914-18, and Hellen Grace Cook's name appears on this. Having established her age and date of death along with the fact she is buried in LT, I made the mistake of assuming she was the victim of the HE bomb in Lovewell Rd. Local researcher Ivan bunn at the SRO in LT picked up on the error when he viewed Ms Cook's death certificate. Katy Crawford was indeed the woman killed in this raid. In mitigation, there is NO MENTION whatsoever in the local press of the 9 Aug 1915 Zeppelin raid or the death of Ms Crawford, and it was only a piece of prose and a message from her parents in the Memorial Notice column of the paper in Aug 1918 that made a ref to her death "in an air raid".

From looking around you're far from the first to make the same mistake.

Craig

[CGM]

This seems to be an example of one of those occasions when someone makes a basic error which is picked up and reproduced over time, and it becomes the perceived truth.

In the report of the funeral of Miss Helen Grace COOK, in the Lowestoft Weekly Standard of Friday August 20th 1915, there is no hint of anything out of the ordinary concerning her death so the error cannot have been prompted by this.

I could find no reports of the Sanatorium where she died having being damaged during the attack, which could have led to the error.

I suspect it is not not going to be possible to track down the origin of the error - it could have arisen decades after her death and decades ago.

CGM

[Mark in Staffs]

I'm puzzled over the third victim of the 25 April bombardment - the infant Robert Mumford. His name does not appear in the index of deaths for 1916 on FreeBMD, neither does his birth the previous year. Is FreeBMD totally accurate, if so where is Robert Mumford? I'm beginning to think that the name is entirely wrong and the third victim has yet to be named.  

[Kath]

https://www.freebmd.org.uk/

" The recording of births, marriages and deaths was started in 1837 and is one of the most significant resources for genealogical research. The transcribing of the records is carried out by teams of dedicated volunteers and contains index information for the period 1837-1997,BUT WE HAVE NOT YET TRANSCRIBED THE WHOLE PERIOD."

http://apps.eastsuffolk.gov.uk/pages/cemeteries/Lowestoft/meades_nutt.aspx

Mumford    Robert Vernon    29/04/1916    8 Months    20 Sandringham Road, Lowestoft    Child of Singlewoman    L/13/418E

Edited 14 January , 2023 by Kath
added

[Mark in Staffs]

There was undoubtedly an infant Robert Mumford of that fatal address buried on the same day as the two confirmed victims. They appear in the Deaths Index, but not the infant Mumford. That is troubling me, as is the lack of his birth registration. As it appears that he was illegitimate it may be that he was registered under a different name on both occasions, but buried under Mumford. 

[knittinganddeath]

Just throwing this out here, although as I have no idea about how to interpret British records, it may be a complete red herring: there is a Robert V Brunton birth registered in Norwich in September 1915. Mother's maiden name was also Brunton. Robert V's death was registered in June 1916 in Mutford.

[PRC]

8 hours ago, knittinganddeath said:

Just throwing this out here, although as I have no idea about how to interpret British records, it may be a complete red herring: there is a Robert V Brunton birth registered in Norwich in September 1915. Mother's maiden name was also Brunton. Robert V's death was registered in June 1916 in Mutford.

The birth registered with the civil authorities in the Norwich Civil Registration was for a Robert Vernon Brunton and appears to be the child of a single parent.
The death registered in the Mutford Civil Registration District, which included the Civil Parish of Lowestoft was for Robert Vernon Brunton, (Volume 4a page 1314) - still plenty of scope for it to be a red herring.
The General Registrars Office doesn't have any death for a Mumford recorded in the Mutford Civil Registration District in 1916.
The Davey family were living at 20 Sandringham Road. Lowestoft on the 1911 Census of England & Wales. The 11 year old Sidney was listed, but not his older sister.

I believe @Jim Strawbridge has been searching for a picture of any grave marker for Annie Elizabeth Davey. I don't remember finding one when I've been to Lowestoft Cemetery, but I am getting senile

What I have come across recently is an article in the edition of the Eastern Evening News dated Monday, May 1st, 1916.

LOWESTOFT RAID VICTIMS

IMPRESSIVE FUNERAL SCENES

There was an impressive scene at the Lowestoft Cemetery on Saturday afternoon, when, in the presence of many townspeople, the remains of three of the victims of the recent raid were laid to rest, at the north-west end of the Cemetery. There were two graves, and these were roped in for a considerable distance. The Rev. H.B.J. Armstrong of St Margaret’s performed the last sad rites, and as the three coffins were lowered to the graves most of those present were in tears. The three coffins, covered in choice floral tokens, were first conveyed to the Cemetery Chapel and then to the graveside. The victims were Annie Elizabeth Davey, aged 21, Sidney Herbert Davey, aged 16, and Robert Vernon Mumford, aged eight months. The principal mourners were Mr. W. R. Davey, the father of the two first named, his two sons in khaki, Gunner Davey, R.F.A., and Private Davey (Suffolks). Mr. and Mrs. Davey, Mrs. Gallant, and Mrs. Clarke. The father, who was suffering from extreme shock and injuries, presented a pathetic figure, and owing to his condition he had to be supported to the graveside by the elder of his sons. Mr. E.J. Latten and Mr. L.W.P. Abbott were amongst those present representing Messrs. Latten Limited, in whose employ the deceased youth was for some time. The first coffin placed in the grave was that of the infant. The brother and sister were interred in one grave. As already mentioned, there were several floral tributes in addition to those from the matron, nurses, and maids at the Isolation Hospital, and one from Mr. C. H Jones, the deceased young woman’s employer. At the close of the burial service the large crowd present were permitted to inspect the graves.

The 1911 Census return had a 17 year old Charles Davey and a 14 year old John Davey who are potential candidates for the two soldiers listed.

Peter

[Mark in Staffs]

So I think we can be sure the infant was Mumford, but the lack of his name in the Indexes for Births in 1915 and Deaths in 1916 is odd. It's making my head hurt.  

[PRC]

1 hour ago, Mark in Staffs said:

So I think we can be sure the infant was Mumford, but the lack of his name in the Indexes for Births in 1915 and Deaths in 1916 is odd. It's making my head hurt. 

Think about it by the standards of the time. Very little paperwork, spelling of names was very flexible and no-one was asking for your date of birth, let alone asking you to verify who you were. Most births were not attended by a conventionally qualified medical professional and most statements made to a Registrar were taken at face value - you were signing a declaration, (or making your mark on one), that said if you knowingly made a false declaration you could be fined or face imprisonment. There was also no formal adoption process in the UK until 1927 - most agreements were done verbally and children just acquired a new name. We will never know the scale of this because it wasn't documented. The likelihood is that most children were adopted within the extended family.

And of course it could be that the birth of Robert Vernon Mumford wasn't registered - the system isn't perfect. If no doctor attended, no medical attention was sought and no priest baptised then it's going to be up to the mother how far she will go to avoid alerting the authorities to the birth.

If you wanted to take a punt on Robert Vernon Brunton and Robert Vernon Mumford being one and the same, then a birth certificate for the former would give you the mothers name and probably address - if it wasn't the location where the child was born it's likely to be the address of the person who registered the birth, and from that it may be possible to place the mother in a family tree that makes sense of why the baby ended in Lowestoft and being babysat by Annie and Sidney Davey.

The nature of the childs death would have necessitated a coroners inquest, and so the childs' true name may have come out there. The coroner would have then produced a statement of the cause of death as agreed by the inquest, but in the childs' true name. The actual death certificate may even include a known as statement.

Or accept that the baby was born out of wedlock in Norwich, had been sent away to another town to remove the stigma from the mother, and a name change was introduced to cover it all up.

Cheers,
Peter

[GreyC]

3 hours ago, PRC said:

let alone asking you to verify who you were

Interesting. In Germany all people reporting a birth or death to the registrar at least since 1874 had to identify themselves by an official document, often a birth certificate, a passport, a military id or the like.

GreyC

[Jim Strawbridge]

16 hours ago, PRC said:

I believe @Jim Strawbridge has been searching for a picture of any grave marker for Annie Elizabeth Davey. I don't remember finding one when I've been to Lowestoft Cemetery, b

 

Someone kindly searched for the grave without success. The conclusion was that it is unmarked. I have a note at the time :- "A search for her grave was unproductive and is almost certainly amongst a large area of other unmarked graves". I concur, through elimination, that the infant must be Robert V. Brunton.

Edited 16 January , 2023 by Jim Strawbridge

[Mark in Staffs]

It seems so. Rather touching that we have spent so much time and thought on a tiny child who died over a century ago and perhaps certified his identity.