Tracing correct relative

[Linda H]

1 hour ago, The Inspector said:

know it is confusing BUT Mary Jane Brown not Mary Ann.

You are quite right, I officially give up. My tree seems to be full of Mary Ann, Maria Mary and Mary Jane 🙄

 

Mary Jane Brown is on the tree as his mother, but apparently Mary Ann is on a military document as his mother, is that correct?  As I say, I struggle with words and with a ten day headache, right now I can barely cope. 
 

thank you

[The Inspector]

Hi Linda

The attestation papers show Mary Jane Thompson as his mother, also a very good copy of Frederick's signature is on the same page, only just realised that.

They are not on Ancestry but are on FMP.  Thanks to Peter ( PRC)  sent by PM 

 

Regards Barry

[Linda H]

5 minutes ago, The Inspector said:

The attestation papers show Mary Jane Thompson as his mother, also a very good copy of Frederick's signature is on the same page, only just realised that.

You are so right. I will forward to Andrew. I know he is ploughing through things. I see Fred was quite short at 5’4”. Gertrude was tiny. I was 12-13 when I last saw her and towered over her. 

[PRC]

8 hours ago, Linda H said:

1)  Andrew is working on Frederick's birth certificate now, using suggestions from this site.

2)  I have no doubt the Frederick who married Gertrude is the soldier.  We saw the pension record, and after what I assume is Frederick's death, the address for Gertrude was Sunderland, where she was from.

3)  I have sent for the death certificates (same man listed twice, possible inquest)

4)  I knew great aunt Gertrude.  I knew the address where she died.  The death certificate (notified by her niece) lists ....Thomson (soldier deceased). This indicates, to me, his last occupation was soldier.  Probably vague as the niece probably didn't know him, just of him from Gertrude.    I know the 1917 marriage is my great aunt Gertrude.  Not many Gertrude Harbottle marry a Thompson, who later turns out to be a soldier (as listed on her death certificate)

 

I feel sure all the things we have are accurate, except finding the correct birth certificate.  We already have Mary Ann (who people agree from the pension records is Frederick's mother)  married to Frederick's father, and have her married to Thomas.  I know Andrew has found all this on various ancestry sites.

 

We know that that the people at Bog Hall were Frederick's relatives, I seem to recall uncle and cousin there were the witnesses at Frederick's marriage to Gertrude.  

 

Linda,

 

To me there seems to be a lot of assumptions in there rather than definates. It doesn't mean it's wrong, and if I was researching it at this point I'd probably be about 95% certain that the right connections had been made - but I would still only be saying this is my best guess based on whats been uncovered so far. You don't have to do much family history research to know how quickly "certainties" will come back to bite you.

 

You and your researcher may also know stuff we don't, like how certain her pre-marriage name was Harbottle.

 

It wouldn't have taken much to get closer to the 100% and tie in the RAMC man - if his service records had shown the marriage details and a change of next of kin from his mother for example - but it doesn't.

 

The only reason we know that he was married is the details from the Pension Ledger Card - which has an address for his wife Gertrude that is a care off address, so doesn't mean Gertrude was necessarily living in Sunderland after her husbands death. So other than the wifes allowance being cancelled in the early 1920's that source doesn't help much with knowing when that Frederick married. The Pension card does not mention the mother.

 

Similarly if the death certificate for Gertrude had been a bit more definate about her late husband it would have removed some of the uncertainty. Giving his occupation as soldier when the identified candidate clearly wasn't tends to call into account the veracity of the rest of the information that has been given. Or it makes it look like we have the wrong man.

 

Unfortunately, as the admins are fond of telling us, this isn't a genealogy forum. I shall look forward to hearing how Andrew gets on with reviewing the suggestions made so far and whether the RAMC man gets a thumbs up or a thumbs down - either way there may yet be more to find out about the Great War period of his life.

 

Cheers,

Peter

[Linda H]

Understood.  You mentioned PM, if that is through the site, anybody feel free to message me.

Andrew has a military record for him from somewhere that shows he was single when he joined, married later on on a military record somewhere (same soldier number)

Gertrude Harbottle was most definitely her name when she married, I am very unsure what you mean by that.

 

Thank you all again.  Hopefully Andrew an make sense of things

 

[Linda H]

I understand and appreciate that this needs to end as it isn’t really the right forum, but this bit is I think.  Here is the record Andrew found that shows Frederick, same number, was married by 1919, but single and next of kin his mother when he entered the military.  This is from national archives.  Our record shows he married Gertrude in October 1917.  I only shows this as it was mentioned there was no record of Frederick marrying.

[Linda H]

Last one but this is military related.  The bottom line shows dates, which an ancestry forum tells me says “furlo”. (Furlough - meaning leave in military terms). This week of dates covers the date Frederick and Gertrude married, so I think with this, and the earlier record showing he was married by 1919 (single when he entered the army), I think covers the fact he did marry whilst in the army, and I have no doubt the marriage record we have is correct for 11th October to Gertrude Harbottle.

 

Again, thank you.  I won’t block the forum any more, but feel free to PM me,  Stay safe

 

[Madmeg]

First off- argh! scream- like some others on this page I just had a huge post disappear into the ether on me! curses!

so shall have to start again

 

I know this isnt a geneaology forum but I think we need some clarity so...

 

WWhat we know.

Linda had a great aunt named Gertrude Thom*son (married name) this lady had no children but she did have a sister Daisy and a niece F. Harris. Linda has also mentioneda Euphemia as a sister.

 

We also know that a Gertrude Harbottle married a Frederick Thompson in 1917.

We know there is a pension for a Gertrude wife/widow of Frederick Thompson.

 

I have done some checking.

Between 1870 and 1930 there are four births and five marriages for Gertrude Harbottles.

 

Births- 

1888 Ripon

1892- Sunderland

1893 - Tynemouth

1899- Tynemouth

 

Only one of the marriage is to a Thompson- the one in 1917.

There is only one other marriage that I have found for a Gertrude Harbottle to any Thom*son and that is to a John T. Thompson in the 1940's.- I have not checked this out any further and am going to rule this one out for now.

 

The census show the four Gertrudes.

1888 parents John and Amelia, John is a railway labourer. There are no siblings called Daisy or Euphemia.

1892 parents George and Maria. george is a gasworks labourer in 1901- very much not a butler. The 1891 shows George and maria with  an older daughter Daisy. In 1911 Gertrudes age is shown as 1888 (I struggled to find her !) the names of the siblings match the family in 1901 if you allow for ages being incorrect for Gertrude and older sibling Mary A, there is a Euphemia.

1893- parents John and Mary. John is a grocer draper and butcher in 1911- I note that "butcher" could look like "butler" when written down. There is no daisy or Euphemia shown in 1901 or 1911 I havent checked earlier census as yet.

1899- parents Tom and Annabella. Tom is a printer compositor. There is a sibling amed Margaret which is sometimes shortened to daisy.

 

There is a birth for Daisy Cuthberta P in Sunderland,1884. She is with George and Maria in 1891.

In 1908 Daisy CP married James Harris.

 

Personally I'm happy to lock Gertrude Harbottle bc 1892 in as the daughter of George and Maria . I had wondered if she was the 1899 gertrude (who would not have been old enough to marry without parents permission so would have had plenty of reason to lie about her father's name, state of existance and occupation. I suspect here that either a) her parents weren;t happy so she lied even though she was old enough to do as she blimmin' well pleased b) she never said her father was dead someone just got it wrong when they made out the certificate (it happens) c) she didn;t like his lowly occupation and chose to elevate him a bit. obviously c) could apply in any case.

 

I've checked for Gertrude Thom*sons in the 1939 (index only) the only likely one to my mind is in Friern Barnett Middlesex with Agnes Cunningham. I'm basing this on the fact that all the other NBL/DUR Gertrudes are listed with a male relative- either a husband or a son neither of which would seem to apply to Gertrude. In the south I have only checked the London Gertrudes not the ones in Hampshire or Lancashire etc.

 

Now for Frederick.

We know that a Frederick Thompson married Gertrude harbottle in 1917.

He states that he is 23 his father's name is Thomas and Thomas is a Rolleyman.

 

From census we can confirm that there was a Frederick bc1894 with father Thomas whose occupation is given as Rolleyman, I find this quite a coincidence- not sure if this is a job or phoenetic spelling. Mother is Mary Jane.

From census we can also confirm that Frederick's mother is the step daughter of William Watson and her maiden name was Brown.

 

So we can match the Frederick who married Gertrude Harbottle to Thomas and Mary Jane who brought him up as their son.

 

I'm personally happy to lock in Frederick as the supposed son of Thomas and Mary Jane Thompson b c 1894 Longhirst from census evidence- that doesn't mean that that is who is actually was but that is what he was brought up to believe and its good enough for our next stage.

 

The pension and army records.

We have a frederick Thompson joining the RAMC who gives his mother's name as Mary Jane.

We have a Frederick Thompson n the RAMC and has the man above's regimental number getting a pension. He has a wife Gertrude.

 

The only thing we cannot be sure of is whether somewhere out there is ANOTHER Frederick who had a mother Mary Jane and wife Gertrude- this man does not have to have been born in the north, the family could have moved there.

 

I have run a quick check on Frederick Thompsons marrying gertrude on FreeBMD and got a few hits- but the way the earlier ones are listed means that I don;t know whether the Fredericks married the gertrudes or the other lady on the same page. Some list no name at all.

A quick census check for Fredericks born anywhere in England (not wales or Scotland mind) with a mother Mary J pulls up quite a number of hopefuls just in the NBL/DUR area.

 

So in summary.

 

Linda has obviously done a lot of research on her family, lets stop gaslighting her and trying to pursuade her that she has her facts on Gertrude wrong ;-) 

 

I don't have any doubt that Gertrude Harbottle daughter of George and Maria married Frederick Thompson assumed son of Thomas and Mary J in 1917- BUT we need to work on whether the RAMC man with mother Mary J and wife Gertrude is the same man......

 

 

 

 

[Madmeg]

Well here's a spanner for Mr RAMC- I note from the short attestation form above that he was in Eastbourne on 28 sep 1917, I can;t properly make out the line dated 28 nov 1917- Gertrude harbottle married her frederick on 11 oct 1917 in NBL. Mr RAMC is shown as being on the sick list in Eastbourne SSX for the dates which appear to cover that time.... Could he have been sent home- or would that have been shown in his notes?

 

I also note that he appeas to be single on enlisting in 1915 but is married by discharge in 1919- it's very faint but I can just make out trans to res woods? [very faint] Newcastle on , on the left hand side of the page by the demob stamps.

 

28 11 17 [something] from {something] to 15 10 17.

that would potentially allow him to have been away getting married but someone with more familiarity of military records input appreciated!

Edited 14 June , 2020 by Madmeg

[Linda H]

16 minutes ago, Madmeg said:

28 11 17 [something] from {something] to 15 10 17.

that would potentially allow him to have been away getting married but someone with more familiarity of military records input appreciated!

I checked on an ancestry forum, it reads “furlo (furlough) 6-15 October.  This is the week Frederick and Gertrude married, on 11th October 1917.  There is no doubt in my mind this is the Frederick Gertrude married.  

[Madmeg]

2 minutes ago, Linda H said:

I checked on an ancestry forum, it reads “furlo (furlough) 6-15 October.  This is the week Frederick and Gertrude married, on 11th October 1917.  There is no doubt in my mind this is the Frederick Gertrude married.  

Ah yes it does look like that- well that would cover the marriage date nicely for them. mr RAMC is looking better again :-)

 

[Madmeg]

Deaths 

June 1928- Frederick Thompson 34 Bellingham 10b 440

September 1928- Frederick Thompson 34 Bellingham 10b 385

 

Did someone find these already?

 

BNA has a court case for the murder of a Frederick Thompson aged 38 at Middlesborough the article is dated in August 1928- there is no registration in middlesborough for a Frederick of that age in Middlesborough for 1928 that I can see- but the case might be quite some time after the death of course.

 

ROLLEYMAN- is actually a job title - quite a few accidents for them, rolleymen appear in pits, railways and trams from what i can see. Whcarts at they actually did is not spedified but it seems to be something to do with carts or dolleys of somesort from the context.

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

5 hours ago, Madmeg said:

Deaths 

June 1928- Frederick Thompson 34 Bellingham 10b 440

September 1928- Frederick Thompson 34 Bellingham 10b 385

 

Did someone find these already?

Yes,

In post #46.

I guessed  they were the same man and that an inquest was involved, but thanks for providing the information that he was murdered.

Rather a poignant ending.

Can you give more background?

[Linda H]

3 hours ago, Dai Bach y Sowldiwr said:

n post #46.

I guessed  they were the same man and that an inquest was involved, but thanks for providing the information that he was murdered.

Rather a poignant ending.

Oh my goodness I missed that.  Please don't let it be true.  Oh I noticed it says Middlesbrough, although many of my family are from near that area, I am not sure if they moved that far south.  I will try to follow this if my head can cope. Does the age fit our Frederick though?

 

Edited to add that I googled this, and it would appear it is Frederick William Thompson.  “My Frederick” had no middle name.  These are the two death certificates I had already ordered, so it looks like it’s not him.  I will see what Andrew makes of it.  Thank you

Edited 14 June , 2020 by Linda H

[PRC]

11 hours ago, Madmeg said:

BNA has a court case for the murder of a Frederick Thompson aged 38 at Middlesborough the article is dated in August 1928- there is no registration in middlesborough for a Frederick of that age in Middlesborough for 1928 that I can see- but the case might be quite some time after the death of course.

 

Frederick William Thompson was from Middlesbrough, a member of the crew of a pleasure steamer who died at Scarborough after being set upon by three fishermen. Two were charged with murder. The death of a 38 year old Frederick W. Thompson was registered in the Scarborough District in the October to December quarter, (Q4), of 1928. May be a co-incidence, but if not then probably reflects that the coroners inquest could be completed after the outcome of the trial.

 

Nothing at this stage to suggest anything more than complete co-incidence and that the death certificates on order for Frederick Thompson, (no middle name), relates to a completely different individual(s) !

 

I don't subscribe to BNA and would normally have to wait for the Library to open to get to see the articles, but I've taken a snapshot of the first three matches and they probably contain the salient details.

(Courtesy British Newspaper Archive)

 

Cheers,

Peter

Edited 14 June , 2020 by PRC
Typo

[tootrock]

According to at least one newspaper report the murdered Frederick Thompson was married and had two children - does this help the investigation?

The Yorkshire Post of 29 August 1928 has a photograph of him.

The charge was eventually altered to one of manslaughter, and the accused were bound over for 3 years on the undertaking that "they must be strictly temperate in the use of intoxicating liquor."

Martin

Edited 14 June , 2020 by tootrock

[Linda H]

44 minutes ago, tootrock said:

According to at least one newspaper report the murdered Frederick Thompson was married and had two children - does this help the investigation?

Definitely not my Frederick 😊. Wow, pathetic sentence they got, and we think we are lenient these days 😏  Thank you for that. 

Edited 14 June , 2020 by Linda H

[Madmeg]

12 hours ago, Dai Bach y Sowldiwr said:

Yes,

In post #46.

I guessed  they were the same man and that an inquest was involved, but thanks for providing the information that he was murdered.

Rather a poignant ending.

Can you give more background?

Sorry- it's difficult to keep track over 6 pages worth!

 

Glad that Frederick William was someone different, I was just trawling the BNA index for him in case of a death notice and came across one reference with no middle name  and then when I cross referenced couldn't find a matching death reg other than those.  The quick search I did only turned up one of those papers and the heading from the OCR was extremely garbled - wondering how PRC has managed to coax those much better and more informative index readings out of it!

 

The sentence certainly seems lenient- but then in those if they had been found guilty of murder they would have been unleniently hanged!

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

Ok.

So Frederick W. , Scarborough was a red herring.

Wait for the DCs on Frederick Thompson, Bellingham.