I have a birth for Jane Hague June Q 1884 Wortley mother Glossop. She is not with parents Walter & Sarah Jane (Glossop) Hague on the 1891 and not able to locate her after. But there is a death for a Jane Hague Wortley June Q 1884 aged 2. Could this be her and is there possibly a error on the records.
I've looked on FMP and Freebmd, and they both come up with the same anomaly showing Jane being born in 1884 and then dying in 1884 aged two. I'm wondering if her age should have been recorded as two months because both the birth and the death were registered in quarter 2.
I have returned to Jane Hague to try to find her after her birth….. The 1884 Wortley birth record for her is correct (certificate confirms) The 1884 Wortley death record aged 2 which I thought was possibly her is not (certificate confirms) Have still not been able to find anything on her after birth. Is it possible her death was not recorded even though her birth was, or has it been miss-transcribed . Any help appreciated. Regards
Birth was May 1884 (day not shown on certificate) but shown as registered 14 May 1884. Walter Hague was shown as father. Walter and Sarah Jane Glossop were married 12 May 1884…..
Looks like she might have been born before they married and then registered just after still think let's look for a jane glossop in 1891. Have you found her on the census returns before she married
I have returned to Jane Hague to try to find her after her birth….. The 1884 Wortley birth record for her is correct (certificate confirms) The 1884 Wortley death record aged 2 which I thought was possibly her is not (certificate confirms) Have still not been able to find anything on her after birth. Is it possible her death was not recorded even though her birth was, or has it been miss-transcribed . Any help appreciated. Regards
David
On the 1911 census it says Walter and Sarah Jane had had 10 children at that point. 5 were living and 5 were deceased. There are 3 on that census.
Have you traced all the 10 children? Just a thought to try and help identify if Jane was counted as one of the 10 and was one who had died?
Obviously doesn't find an actual death but at least it might rule it in/out!
Hi John
I have copies of the 1891/1901/1911 but Jane is not shown with the family on any. There were 10 children, 5 died early and I can confirm 4 were registered….I will check out your Jane Glossop theory. Regards
Who registered Jane's birth? Could jane be much older then we think. If we take 42 days from may 14th then that puts us in the march quarter. Could she have been registered as a jane glossop in 1q 1884 and then we married re registered in those days would anyone be suspicious?
when was the second child born to Walter and Sarah and how old were they when married? Could Jane have been taken in by a family member and have been indexed with that surname by the enumerator assuming it was their daughter?
The second was my Grandmother Julia Hague 11 September 1885 ( certificate surnames reads Haigh ) and was registered by the mark of her mother. Walter would have been 27 & Sarah Jane 22.