Suttons in kent

[Pam Downes]

When Peter said he thought you had your generations confused I thought he was going to say that your grandfather couldn't possibly have been born in 1871 at which stage I was going to rapidly inform him that such a thing was possible because my grandfather was born in 1867. And, yes, Thomases can be confusing - I have two who I automatically call Thomas 1875 and Thomas 1900 to avoid any misunderstanding.

The marriage certificate for Thomas the elder and Catherine Young can be found on Findmypast in the Kent Marriages and Banns dataset. If you search for Thomas Sutton marrying a Catherine (allowing variant spellings of her name, but no surname) you'll find that there's quite a few of them around, but logically the marriage that you're looking for is the one in 1825. Which actually took place in Hythe.
If you don't have a subscription to FMP then you can either take out a free 14-day trial (though make sure you untick the auto-renew box else your bank account will get a severe shock), or your local library may have free access. In the latter case, often you can access FMP while at home though you have to be a library member to do so. If the library isn't yet open you should still be able to join.
Amongst other Kent records, FMP also have baptisms and burials.

Talking of burials and tramping round churchyards, remember rule number one - not everyone has a gravestone. You need to look at the burial register for the church to get the full picture.
Rule number two - people move away, people move into the district, people get married. So in the case of the latter, Sutton women will lose their maiden name, while women marrying Sutton men will gain the Sutton surname.

Rule number two is easily proved by Thomas-who-married-Catherine-in-1825.
Baptising childen in Brabourne, and living there in 1841. Census reference HO107/477/11 folio 30 page 12.
By 1851 he and some of the family are living in the parish of St George the Martyr, Canterbury. Reference HO107/1624 folio 396 page 14.
I can't easily find Thomas in 1861, just Catherine who is still in Canterbury. RG9/521 folio 44 page 12.
In 1871 thomas and Catherine are together in St Nicholas Hospital. RG10/964 folio 121 page 33
Still together in St Nicholas Hospital in 1881. RG11/953 folio 93 page 36.

Probably more to follow after I've done some more checking.

Pam
who types a lot s-l-o-w-e-r than Peter does.
I wasn't copying. Honest.

[Peter Goodey]

In 1871 thomas and Catherine are together in St Nicholas Hospital.

That's interesting. I'd never come across that place before. It appears to have been an extra-parochial area originally a leper colony but later given over to alms houses.

[Pam Downes]

I know - I'm like a dog with a bone.
So just to be absolutely certain about the generations

My earliest definite ancestor would be my grandfather, also called Thomas Sutton born in Whitstable Kent in 1871

your father's or mother's birth certificate says that his/her parents were Thomas Sutton and Charlotte Huntley.
If it doesn't says Thomas and Charlotte, then either you have got your generations confused, or else you're following the wrong line.

Thomas and Charlotte's marriage certificate can also be found in the Kent Marriages and banns dataset on FMP.

Back-tracking slightly, I was going to post this a couple of days ago, but got distracted.

I am assuming that you are fairly new to this family history thing.

I'M serching for my Great Great Grandfather, Thomas Sutton and seem to have hit a brick wall and needing some help, I have gone as far as his place and date of birth which is 1835 in Brabourne Kent England. His wife is Ann Easter born 1837 in Sandwich kent.

You will think me horribly pedantic when I say, no you haven't. What you have found, so far, is a census entry (possibly 1881) which gives Thomas' age as 46 (i.e. birth year of 1835) and his birthplace as Brabourne.
Never ever rely on one census. Lots of forum members can tell tales along the lines of great-granny being 21 in 1881, 27 in 1891, and 38 in 1901, and being born in three different places.
With Thomas, if you look at the 1871 census you'll find that his age is given as 39, though his birthplace is still Brabourne. In 1861 his age appears to be a badly-written 26, while the enumerator seems to have mangled the birthplace into something that looks like Braven.
And therein lies one of the problems with the censuses from 1841-1901. What you see are transcriptions made by the enumerators from the original household schedules. So a combination of people who were barely literate filling in forms, coupled with that writing then being transcribed into a further document is a recipe for errors. (I suspect that the Braven birthplace came about because someone wrote down what they thought Thomas said was his birthplace, but he was misheard.)
Apart from people who told outright lies about their age, in those days there wasn't usually the need to be precise, hence the possible variation from census to census.
Census references for Thomas and Ann.
1861 - living Whitstable, RG9/524 folio 81 penumage 21
1871 - living Whitstable, RG10/974 folio 33 page 21. I think the enumerator mistranscribed Thomas' occupation as cordwainer to cord winder.
1881 - living Alkham, RG11/1005 folio 9 page 12
1891 - living Alkham, RG12/745 folio 5 page 4

Pam