Missing marriage
 

I have the family of John Williams and his wife Margaret, who on Ancestry trees had the surname of Samuel before marriage.

This is corroborated by the birth of their son Matthew Simon and subsequent children:

WILLIAMS, MATTHEW SIMON SAMUEL
GRO Reference: 1853 M Quarter in SWANSEA UNION Volume 11A Page 392

WILLIAMS, SIMON SAMUEL
GRO Reference: 1854 D Quarter in SWANSEA UNION Volume 11A Page 392

WILLIAMS, ELIZABETH SAMUEL
GRO Reference: 1859 M Quarter in SWANSEA Volume 11A Page 511


However, I can't find registrations for John (born c. 1849) and Margaret (born c. 1850) with the mother's maiden name of Samuel.


I haven't found a marriage for John Williams and Margaret Samuel.

In the Swansea Registration District there are two marriages for a Margaret Samuel in the correct time frame:

First name(s) MARGARET
Last name SAMUEL
Marriage quarter 2
Marriage year 1843
Registration month -
MarriageFinder ™
MARGARET SAMUEL married one of these people
John Stephen, John Smith, John Stephens, James Rees
District Swansea


First name(s) MARGARET
Last name SAMUEL
Marriage quarter 4
Marriage year 1844
Registration month -
MarriageFinder ™
MARGARET SAMUEL married one of these people
Lott Mathews, John Rees, William Williams, David Jones
District Swansea


I'm wondering whether she married, was widowed, then married John Williams and that the first children had her previous married name as the mmn.

One online tree has the specific marriage as here:
8 Apr 1843
Bethesda Chapel, Swansea, Glamorgan, Wales, United Kingdom

So another possibility is that Margaret had already married and been widowed. However, no marriages for a Margaret Samuel to anyone in the Swansea district before that. She was born c. 1821.

I have numerous cases of women on my tree who gave the wrong mmn when registering their children (I'm only speaking of definite proven cases here) right up to the 1950s. In most cases they did everything right in the first marriage, but in the second marriage they gave their previous married name as their maiden name. So, could she have been Miss X who married a Mr Samuel and then moved on to Mr Williams? You would obviously expect to see those first two children registered under Samuel with mmn X in that case. No doubt you have already looked at this, but I'm just adding it here because I'm putting of having a third stab at my DNA matches!!

How glad I am that my probable Welsh ancestors are way too far back to bother about!

I have found C20th examples of mother giving previously married, rather than maiden name on a birth certificate, so I see no reason why it should not have happened in the past.

I have found - same period as you- James Cotmore unable to marry Mary Ann Clapham because his first wife was still living. Their child, Emma, has mmn Clapham. But Mary Ann Clapham is subsequently described as a widow. Either the birth certificate was wrong, or she was actually a spinster.

Thanks, Merry. I have looked at so many permutations! Someone else has Margaret marrying John Williams in 1847 but that was a Margaret John and I can't get any further.

This tree is for a friend.

I have now found John's birth registration:

WILLIAMS, JOHN SAMUEL
GRO Reference: 1848 D Quarter in SWANSEA UNION Volume 26 Page 498


Odd, because it has only just appeared!

There is a possible John William / Margaret Samuel marriage Apr-Jun 1843 Swansea on FreeBMD (which fits with that online tree), but the page number for John seems to be wrong on the actual image - given as 783 but that is out of range for that district in that quarter - and the page number for Margaret has a smudge over the middle digit, but it does start with a 7 and end with a 3!

Thanks, Kate. I've been using FreeBMD but that hasn't come up for me! It's very odd. But now I have viewed the image for Margaret and the smudge is obviously causing the difficulty.

FMP have a typed entry:

https://search.findmypast.co.uk/reco...2F000508%2F016

Vol 26 page 753

John Williams is for the only time in his life entered as John William, without the s.

I assume if someone ordered this marriage certificate that it would be wise to enter just Margaret's details.

Both the typed entry and the hand-written entry for John Williams appear to be wrong.

I should think so.