Fanny J/Harriett Dudley - Epsom Workhouse

[morrwilcox]

This is not so much a brickwall, but more something I'm getting increasingly confused over!

I have an admissions/discharges list from Epsom Workhouse. Really interesting information but I can't get my head around something!

I have:

Fanny Jane Dudley - b.1853 - Admitted by Harriet Dudley - Stayed from 16/03/1855 to 28/08/1855
Harriet Dudley - b.1835 - Admitted by own request - Stayed from 12/03/1855 to 28/08/1855

But there is also:

Fanny Jane Dudley - b.1855 - Admitted by BLANK - Stayed from 03/05/1855 - 05/05/1855
Harriet Dudley - b.1835 - Admitted by BLANK - Stayed from 03/05/1855 - 05/03/1855

Now I can pair the mother's and daughter's off quite easily based up when they stayed. But I cannot figure out which pair I'm related too!

I also have a baptism record:

Fanny Jane Dudley
Born 16/03/1855
Baptised 15/04/1855
Residence: Epsom Workhouse
Mother: Harriett Dudley

This can also be seen on a list of Epsom Workhouse births, which states that she is illegitimate.

Now I thought that this baptism belonged to the first mother and daughter above, as the days/months match up. However, the first Fanny Jane is said to have been born 1853, which makes me think that it may belong to the second Fanny Jane, who is said to have been 1855.

But then that doesn't match up for the second Fanny Jane is only said to have stayed between 03/05/1855 and the 05/05/1855!

I also have a 1861 census:
Harriett Dudley - 29 - b. Ewell, Surrey
Henry J Dudley - 6 - b. Epsom, Surrey

They are living with Harriett's parents, John and Jane Dudley.
I think a transcribing error listed Fanny J as Henry J, as she is listed as granddaughter.

I hope this makes sense to someone!

Any ideas would be so helpful!!
Thank you!

[Allan F Sparrow]

I also have access to the Epsom workhouse lists; because, having lived in Epsom for a time, I took an interest in what they could tell me about the local Sparrows.

[Quote:] Fanny Jane Dudley - b.1855 - Admitted by BLANK - Stayed from 03/05/1855 - 05/05/1855
Harriet Dudley - b.1835 - Admitted by BLANK - Stayed from 03/05/1855 - 05/03/1855 [end of quote]

You have a typo, there in the second line: the last date should read 05/05/1855 – but that is a minor point.

It seems to me that the lists support the idea that there were two different Harriets involved, and two different offspring; but as both are said to be from Cuddington, a particular area of Ewell, just north (roughly) of Epsom, they would seem likely to be related – cousins perhaps? How far have you researched the Dudleys in that area in the censuses? I know nothing of them.

[morrwilcox]

I also have access to the Epsom workhouse lists; because, having lived in Epsom for a time, I took an interest in what they could tell me about the local Sparrows.

[Quote:] Fanny Jane Dudley - b.1855 - Admitted by BLANK - Stayed from 03/05/1855 - 05/05/1855
Harriet Dudley - b.1835 - Admitted by BLANK - Stayed from 03/05/1855 - 05/03/1855 [end of quote]

You have a typo, there in the second line: the last date should read 05/05/1855 – but that is a minor point.

It seems to me that the lists support the idea that there were two different Harriets involved, and two different offspring; but as both are said to be from Cuddington, a particular area of Ewell, just north (roughly) of Epsom, they would seem likely to be related – cousins perhaps? How far have you researched the Dudleys in that area in the censuses? I know nothing of them.

Ah, didn't see the typo there! Thank you for pointing that out!
Also spotted another typo in birth date of the 2nd Harriet, it should say b.1853, not b.1855!

I think it's highly likely that they are related too. I've barely researched the family so far, but perhaps working upwards and branching out would help.

The only thing that seems odd to me is that I can't seem to find a baptism for a Fanny Jane Dudley in 1853, to a Harriett Dudley. The only baptism that I can find it the one I've listed from 1855 in Epsom Workhouse.

[Allan F Sparrow]

I've just been looking at the list of births in Epsom Workhouse, and the only Fanny Jane Dudley actually born there was the 1855 daughter of Harriet. One or possibly two women called Fanny Dudley bore children there in 1876 and 1878 respectively, the first child unnamed in the list, the second named as Jessie May. No baptism is mentioned for either, but Jessie May is the only Dudley on the list of Epsom workhouse deaths; she died in the same year as she was born, on 15th September.

All of which means that much more research is needed!

[Allan F Sparrow]

A trawl at one of the pay-sites gives this:

Harriet daughter of John and Jane was baptised on 23rd December 1832 in Ewell.
Fanny Jane Dudley, illegitimate daughter of Harriet, was baptised on 15th April 1855 at St Martin’s, the parish church of Epsom.

Harriet (29) and Fanny Jane (6) were with Harriet’s parents (John 53 & Jane 51) in 1861, in Ewell: the address was just “Marsh”, which means West Ewell, the area being known for many years as Lower Marsh and Upper Marsh, around the Hogsmill valley. There were gunpowder mills there: but that is another story! John Dudley said he was born in Cuddington.

Harriet, daughter of John Dudley a spinster aged 37, married widower William Wetten, aged 39, in Ewell on 23rd January 1870.

In 1881 Fanny (25, born Ewell) was a visitor to the Pullen family in Mitcham.
Fanny Jane Dudley married James Pullen in Croydon on 8th October 1881. She was said to be 26, and her father’s name was given as William Dudley, which may have been a pious fiction.

There was another Fanny Dudley who lived in Dorking, but she seems to have been legitimately born in 1851/2. and I see no Harriet in connection with her.

All of which makes me wonder whether there were two Harriets and two Fanny Janes, after all. It could be a matter of errors in the workhouse records, or in the transcriptions, whixh are all that I have seen.

[morrwilcox]

A trawl at one of the pay-sites gives this:

Harriet daughter of John and Jane was baptised on 23rd December 1832 in Ewell.
Fanny Jane Dudley, illegitimate daughter of Harriet, was baptised on 15th April 1855 at St Martin’s, the parish church of Epsom.

Harriet (29) and Fanny Jane (6) were with Harriet’s parents (John 53 & Jane 51) in 1861, in Ewell: the address was just “Marsh”, which means West Ewell, the area being known for many years as Lower Marsh and Upper Marsh, around the Hogsmill valley. There were gunpowder mills there: but that is another story! John Dudley said he was born in Cuddington.

Harriet, daughter of John Dudley a spinster aged 37, married widower William Wetten, aged 39, in Ewell on 23rd January 1870.

In 1881 Fanny (25, born Ewell) was a visitor to the Pullen family in Mitcham.
Fanny Jane Dudley married James Pullen in Croydon on 8th October 1881. She was said to be 26, and her father’s name was given as William Dudley, which may have been a pious fiction.

There was another Fanny Dudley who lived in Dorking, but she seems to have been legitimately born in 1851/2. and I see no Harriet in connection with her.

All of which makes me wonder whether there were two Harriets and two Fanny Janes, after all. It could be a matter of errors in the workhouse records, or in the transcriptions, whixh are all that I have seen.

Wow, thank you Allan!

I came across the Fanny Dudley from Dorking also, but it seems very unlikely that the two are linked.

I have the 1861 census, and looked briefly at the 1881 census, in which Fanny is listed as a visitor. This is how I am directly related, James and Fanny Jane are by 3x great grandparents. Thank you so much for the marriage info! I wonder where Fanny came up with the name William Dudley. A mixture of her surname and her stepfather's name, perhaps?

Now, I've been speculating whether there were two Harriets and two Fanny Janes all day. It seems that there are too many coincidences, and a lack of records. I've only looked at transcriptions, so I can't substantiate anything, but I would not be surprised if there were a transcription or workhouse record error.

Thank you for all your help! You've definitely helped to clear some things up!

And for the record, I would love to here some more info on Ewell, Epsom and the surrounding areas! I have several branches of my family tree based in the area, so it'd be really interesting for the 'bigger picture'.

[Allan F Sparrow]

https://www.epsomandewellhistoryexplorer.org.uk/
is a good starting point for Epsom and Ewell history
but perhaps you know it already, as it is where the workhouse records are available.

I haven't been back to Epsom since my father died there in 1999 (mother having gone before)...

[Allan F Sparrow]

To satisfy my own curiosity, as well as in the hope of being useful, I have dug a little deeper and found the following additional information:

William Wetten (son of Thomas) aged 34, married Salome Chantler (a spinster aged 39, daughter of Ephraim) at St Mary, Ewell, in 1865. William Witten, son of Thomas and Ann, had been baptised at St Martin, Epsom, on 30th January 1831. Salome Witten died in 1869 [Q1 Epsom] aged 42.

William Wetten died in 1898 [Q1 Epsom] aged 68. A Harriet Wetten, of the right age and born in Ewell, figures as a widow with a son in the 1901 and 1911 censuses, in Ewell. She died in 1917 [Q1 Epsom] aged 84. The son was William Wetten, born 1874 [Q4 Epsom] and baptised at St Mary, Ewell, on 1st November 1874, son of William and Harriet; he died in 1912 [Q1 Epsom] aged 37.

Harriet, parents and siblings can also be seen in 1841 and 1851 censuses: at Marsh, Ewell, in 1841 and “near the Church” Ewell in 1851. In 1861 one site has Fanny wrongly transcribed as Henry, but another correctly has Fanny: the image clearly says Fanny, and she was born in Epsom, unlike the rest of the family.

Strangely, I see no census entries for William Witten; also none for Harriet Witten between her marriage and 1901; and none for her son William except 1901 and 1911. So unless there is some quirk of the search engines at both Anc and FMP, the family managed to avoid being recorded!

[morrwilcox]

To satisfy my own curiosity, as well as in the hope of being useful, I have dug a little deeper and found the following additional information:

William Wetten (son of Thomas) aged 34, married Salome Chantler (a spinster aged 39, daughter of Ephraim) at St Mary, Ewell, in 1865. William Witten, son of Thomas and Ann, had been baptised at St Martin, Epsom, on 30th January 1831. Salome Witten died in 1869 [Q1 Epsom] aged 42.

William Wetten died in 1898 [Q1 Epsom] aged 68. A Harriet Wetten, of the right age and born in Ewell, figures as a widow with a son in the 1901 and 1911 censuses, in Ewell. She died in 1917 [Q1 Epsom] aged 84. The son was William Wetten, born 1874 [Q4 Epsom] and baptised at St Mary, Ewell, on 1st November 1874, son of William and Harriet; he died in 1912 [Q1 Epsom] aged 37.

Harriet, parents and siblings can also be seen in 1841 and 1851 censuses: at Marsh, Ewell, in 1841 and “near the Church” Ewell in 1851. In 1861 one site has Fanny wrongly transcribed as Henry, but another correctly has Fanny: the image clearly says Fanny, and she was born in Epsom, unlike the rest of the family.

Strangely, I see no census entries for William Witten; also none for Harriet Witten between her marriage and 1901; and none for her son William except 1901 and 1911. So unless there is some quirk of the search engines at both Anc and FMP, the family managed to avoid being recorded!

Oh wow! I didn't expect you to go to so much trouble! Thank you!!

I've searched for Harriet/William Wetton too, and can't seem to find any census', aside from the 1901 and 1911 as you said.

On the 1911 census, Harriet noted that she'd had two children born alive, although she is a widow. I can't seem to find any other children, aside from William Wetton (1874-1912). William is also listed as a cripple in the 1911 census too, possibly linked to his death? Although he is said to be working as a good carrier on the census.

Again, thank you ever so much for doing so much digging for me! I do know the site that you linked to in your last reply, but I will definitely do some more looking around!

[Allan F Sparrow]

You are welcome! It made a change from pursuing legions of Sparrows and their connections.