• Welcome to this forum . We are a worldwide group with a common interest in Birmingham and its history. While here, please follow a few simple rules. We ask that you respect other members, thank those who have helped you and please keep your contributions on-topic with the thread.

    We do hope you enjoy your visit. BHF Admin Team

PTE JAS. (JAMES) JOSEPH BROWN, 7998, WORCESTERSHIRE REGIMENT

Thanks, I still think it may be a possibility. No registration for the elder child, nothing to stop him from assuming the name of his step father after his mother's marriage.

But no proof.
 
theodore said:
David,

It's proving to be a difficult one to get the answers we need. IF the 1911 census with James, Sarah etc is the Brown family we need then it's only Benjamin that we can find a fair amount of info on. The following link will show.


1901 census, 1911 census, marriage details and more. He enlisted twice and his service papers have survived (the 1940 bombing) but sadly his next of kin shown are for his wife and their children only and no mention of parent(s) or siblings. An address for him on marriage certificate (m. 1908) is 3 back 15 ?????? Row, not very clear

Peter
Click to expand...
The address is Jennens Row.
 
Don't know if this helps or not but James and Margaret (Maggie) had at least 2 children
Baptisms in 1917 at St Judes. Kate born 1915 but haven't found a reg - yet.
1674485780368.png
 
  • Appreciate
Reactions: MWS
I found a Margaret at the Henstead St address on the 1921 census but couldn't tie it in with the ERs posted or with the children with her, one is Kate b1915 and another is James b1909. James (husband) is not there but Margaret is lifted as a wife.
 
I can't access the 1921 but when I searched it gave -I thought the James was the Father.
1674488104331.png
I am puzzled by the 1911 census where both James and Benjamin are supposed to have living children but they don't seem to be with the parents.
 
This is a screenshot of the results when searching for Brown on Henstead St. Adding son to search criteria results in just James. If there is a transcription I don't know.

Screenshot (3317).jpg
 
That's what put me off. I hadn't heard of Henstead St but looking now, it runs off Bromsgrove St. Possibly some confusion with the address.

And looking further back it appears that Henstead St was built sometime between 1891 and 1901 and on one side is court 19 Bromsgrove St.
 
Last edited:
From 1902, pink dot is court 19...

0 - Bromsgrove St.jpg

...none of which really helps much with the original query.
 
He's definitely a tricky one - no birth reg, no marriage reg (to Margaret), no birth reg for children, no death reg for Margaret.

Think I've previously been a bit guilty of repeating things already said.
 
Something a bit odd:
1674494312941.png
Can there be 2 James Brown making packing case? Or should "Martha" read "Margaret"?
 
MWS said:
He's definitely a tricky one - no birth reg, no marriage reg (to Margaret), no birth reg for children, no death reg for Margaret.

Think I've previously been a bit guilty of repeating things already said.
Click to expand...
I think we all do that when a thread gets complicated.
 
  • Appreciate
Reactions: MWS
Gosh, I am totally confused. Too much information.

I am leaning towards MWS message 28, married Minnie Ewer, which takes me to the first 4 lines of my message 6.

As you ALL say some very interesting and linked information but little of it seems to actually tie together.

David
 
The biggest puzzle seems to be "Margaret and the children". If we have the right James in 1911 why can we not find a marriage or birth registration? The occupation links to the baptism entry but that is all.
 
I'd guess that for some reason James and Margaret never married and the children were not registered (unusual this late) or registered under another name (if Margaret was already married maybe) and the same for Margaret's death.

I think it would probably be possible to prove that the James who 'married' Margaret and the James that married Minnie was or was not the same person but even if they were I'm not sure if that then would prove that he was the James in the original query. I may be missing something though.
 
I guess there could be many reasons why the records aren't there, but I certainly appreciate all the hard research work that's gone into finding all this.
A big thank you to all of you.

David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top