View Full Version : Death recorded under maiden name
25-10-2005, 7:08 PM
I'm a little confused as to why a death would be recorded under a maiden name.
What I have is Caroline Bremont born about 1831, supposedly in Liverpool, who married Thomas Bradford about 1848. I have yet to find the marriage record but suspect they married in or near Bethnal Green.
They had 8 children that I know of, all born in Middlesex. On the birth certificates of the children and in census records the parents are listed as Thomas and Caroline Bradford.
Thomas died between 1875 and 1878.
Caroline died in the St. George in the East Workhouse Infirmary on Princes Street on 11 February 1885. The cause of death is Phthisis. On her death certificate she is listed as Caroline Bremont. Although the certificate is not witnessed by a family member, I'm reasonabily sure that this is my Caroline. Her occupation is listed as a hawker of 55 Sheridan Street. Her age at death is listed as 50 years old which is 4 years off from her reported date of birth.
The 1851 census has her birth at about 1831 which would make her about 18 when her first child is born in 1849. The 1881 census has her birth at about 1835 which would make her about 14 when her first child is born and the correct reported age when she died.
Does anyone have an idea as to why she is listed under her maiden name on the death certificate?
25-10-2005, 7:21 PM
My first thought.
Perhaps Caroline Bremont & Thomas Bradford didn't get round to getting married?
I have a Cunningham couple listed as man and wife on census, and on their childrens' birth certificates mother is 'Mrs'. They didn't actually get around to 'tying the knot' officially until hubby was practically on his death bed.
25-10-2005, 7:39 PM
Ed, as Lynda has said, quite often the couple never got around to marrying until later, or not at all.
I also have the same thing happening with my gt.grandfather and gt. grandmother, who produced several children and didn't tie the knot until nearly 20 years later! They still called themselves husband and wife and were shown as such on the Censuses.
If this IS the correct person, then quite possibly they never married.
25-10-2005, 8:06 PM
I think there may be more than one Caroline & Thomas involved here. In the 1871 census RG10 536 page 11, folio 33, 58 Devonshire St, St George in the East, London (Tower Hamlets):
Caroline Bremont 40 wid, hawker, Kent Maidstone
Thomas Bremont son 22 U railway porter, Surrey Mitcham
Caroline Bremont dau 12 Middlesex, London
John Bremont son 10 porter, Middlesex London
James Bremont son 8 Middlesex London
William Bremont son 5 Middlesex London
Jane Bremont dau 1 Middlesex London
25-10-2005, 10:26 PM
And the plot thickens!!! Wirral, this is a great find!!! I never thought to look under Bremont in the 1871 census for this family. No wonder I couldn't find them.
The ages of the children listed in the 1871 census align with the birth certificates that I have. Each certificate lists the last name as Bradford and their father as Thomas. Also, I have this family on the 1851 and 1881 census and the last name is listed as Bradford as well.
The fact that Caroline is a widow in 1871, I find very interesting. The 1881 census lists 2 children born after that date, both with the last name of Bradford. Because of that I drew the conclusion that the father, Thomas, didn't die until the same year or after the last child was born. It now appears that Thomas wasn't the father of those two children so I need to rethink that conclusion.
The 1881 census also has Caroline Bremont born in Maidstone, Kent. In the 1851 census it's L'pool (Liverpool I assume). It looks like I should rethink that as well.
Wirral, you've opened a big door for me with your 1871 census find. Thanks very much.
25-10-2005, 11:03 PM
If the 1871 census Caroline is yours, maybe she'd just fallen out with her husband. He'd left, and she'd called herself a widow.
They were reconciled, and she had the other children??? Maybe it's worth looking in 1871 to see if he is still alive.
Just a though :)
25-10-2005, 11:27 PM
Lynda and Glenys, I agree that it's quite possible they weren't married. Wirral's 1871 census find adds a little more support to that assumption. Thanks for your input.
Susan, you bring to light another possibility about the last name that needs to be explored. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
It looks like I'll be spending tomorrow at the research center. Again, thanks one and all.
26-10-2005, 12:12 AM
Hello again Ed
Isn't this good fun?
If only our ancestors knew that we would be delving, would they have done things differently?
I doubt it :D
I wish you every success in your searches
Following on from all the information you have been given there is a probable death registration for Thomas Bradford:-
Thomas Bradford age 43 Bethnal Green March quarter 1871 Vol 1c Page 202
This would make Caroline a 'widow' by 1871 census.
26-10-2005, 3:36 AM
Jeremy, many thanks for the heads up concerning the death record. I went to the GRO web site and ordered a copy. It will take about 2 weeks to get here. Again, thanks much. ..............Ed
29-10-2005, 3:37 AM
I just wanted to update everyone that has responded to my inquiry on the progress I've made from your suggestions.
I looked at a copy of the 1871 census page and confirmed that the Bremont family that is listed is actually my Bradford family.
I do believe that Thomas Bradford has passed away by the census. I have ordered a death certificate which hopefully will confirm that fact. It will be here in a week or so.
As suggested, I looked for a reference concerning Thomas after 1871 but couldn't find one.
I do suspect that Thomas and Caroline weren't married.
Once again, I'd like to thank everyone that responded to my inquiry. You've been a big help.
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.1.3 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.