Thomas Fry - bn abt 1801 - baptism?

Post by **dickiesam** » 25 May 2011 16:39

Hi people,
Can anyone see a Liverpool baptism for Thomas Fry. His given age in the 1841 census is 40 so his birth could be between abt 1795 and abt 1802/3. From his 1843 marriage cert his father's name is John Fry, wheelwright.

The 1843 marriage was to the mother of his 4 children, the first of whom was born in 1834. Thomas died in 1844. So, if he knew his time was up he may have married to make an honest woman out of his 'wife' or there may have been a prior marriage and a recently deceased legal spouse.

DS

Post by **simone** » 25 May 2011 17:49

Hi Brian

was the marriage to Ellen Clarke?

cert says he was a widower... take it you have the cert already.. or do you need it?

can't see a baptism yet

Simone x

Post by **dickiesam** » 25 May 2011 17:54

Hello Simone,
Yes, the marriage was to Ellen Clarke. One of her children with Thomas, John Fry bn 1841, was a paternal g.g.father. And yes, I have the marriage cert. Thanks for asking.

DS

Post by **dickiesam** » 25 May 2011 18:09

Just a thought!
Wonder if there's a Liverpool marriage for Thomas Fry from around 1813, when he could have been 18, up to the early 1830s after which he was with Ellen Clarke. His trade was plasterer and his YoB is questionable because his only census is in 1841 where he is listed as 40.

DS

Post by **simone** » 25 May 2011 19:46

can't see anything on Liverpool records on Anc*

Post by **Hilary** » 25 May 2011 19:49

What age for him is given on his death certificate? Does it give a Y for the question born in the county on the 1841 census? If yes he could have been born anywhere in Lancashire so you may need to widen your search for a baptism and for a first marriage.

Post by **dickiesam** » 25 May 2011 19:50

Thanks Simone, appreciated.
Oh well, it looks like a case of back to the grinding board!

DS

Post by **simone** » 25 May 2011 19:55

there's a marriage on familysearch Thomas Fry to Catherine Rimmer in 1811 at St John's Old Haymarket, Liverpool.

I can't find her in 1841

Post by **dickiesam** » 25 May 2011 20:00

I initially thought that my Thomas would be a bit too young to be marrying in 1811 if he was bn abt 1795, although do I recall there was no minimum age back then?

So maybe my 'thought' is out of order? That find is interesting and I'll put it in the possibles.

DS