Notes and Arguments

Index

Index
Family notes	1
R1   Samuels  b.1844 – 1847	1
R2   John   b. 1782 – 1787	2
R3   Second Marriages	3
R4   Death of wife and child of Richard	4
R5   Jame	5
R6   Marcus/Marquis	6
R7   Charles Walter	7
R8   Albert Stooks	8
R9   William John 1852-1853	9
R10  Elizabeth/Sarah c.1850	10
R11  Agnes	10
R12  Grace = Dark, Gibbons, Lang , Gerrish	10
R13  William John married .c.1910	12
R14  The Guernsey connection	12
R15  Surmised children	15
R16  Inferred  families	15
R17  Illegitimate children	15
R18  Sarah Jane Andrews GIMPTON	16
R19  Betsy	16
R20  Anomalies	16
R21 John, wife of Mary, married 1749	16
R22 Thomas Samuel Gempton	17

Family notes

There are several relationships that must be supported by argument.  These arguments are of particular use in assigning extras to families

For some of them, there is a speculative element.  For this reason these should be taken as suggestions and not proven genealogy.  In several cases the conclusions could be proved or disproved by obtaining the relevant certificates.

Below are some of the arguments used.

R1   Samuels  b.1844 – 1847

Certain extras census records refer to Samuel (b.1844-1847) but do not give his parents. 

    Extra Record 	C0127/1	
				C0085/1
				C0115/1

The following records of Samuel born 1844-1847 are also given:

A.	B0004			Samuel 	son of Thomas and Elizabeth		b.Totnes    1844
B	C0082/4/51		Samuel 	son of  Thomas and Elizabeth 		b.Brixham   1845		U					fl. Hull 1851
C    C0082/1/51		Thomas, 	head 			               	b.Dover     1922		M Tailor			fl. Hull 1851
	
Clearly the subjects A and B are the same Samuel (same parents, birth year and place).   Call him #161. His parents are Thomas and Elizabeth
We also have:

D	B0012			Samuel 	son of William and Susan			b.Totnes  1846
E 	C0078/2/51		Samuel 	son of   ?     and Susan			b.Brixham 1846		   U  scholar			fl.Brixham 1881
       C0078/1/51		Susan, 	head						       b.Brixham 1824		   M fisherman’s wife (not a basket maker)

Likewise the subjects D and E are the same Samuel (same birthyear, place, different parents).   Call him  #154. His parents are William and Susan
Since B and E are both from the 1851 census; #161 is not the same person as #154.
We have further:

F.	C0127/1/01		Samuel, husband of Sarah					b.Brixham 1846		   M basket maker	fl.Sculcoates 1901
G.	C0115/1/81		Samuel, husband of Sarah					b.Brixham 1847		   M basket maker	fl.Sculcoates 1881
H	C0115//10/.81	Thomas, father of Samuel (G )      			b.Dover   1823		   W tailor 		       fl.Sculcoates 1881

Likewise the subjects of F & G are the same Samuel (same birth year, place, profession and wife) 

I   	C0135/01		Thomas									b.Dover 1820		   W Pauper			fl.Hull 1901 

Thomas (C) is the father of B  (and A) and Thomas H is the father of G (and F)
 C and H are most likely the same Thomas (same birth year, birth place, occupation)
It then follows that A, B, F, G are all the same Samuel. #161
 
By 1901, Thomas (I) was a pauper in the workhouse 

It is likely that the subjects of I is the same Thomas as C & H (same birth year, place) 
Thus Thomas (C, H, I) is the father of both A & B and of F and G

We now have the following marriages:

J	M0019				Samuel, 			groom of Sarah Jane SMITH					m.1865 Hull

It is likely that the groom of J is #161. The bride is Sarah, the wife of Samuel in F and G whom he married at the age of 21 (Sculcoates is near Hull)
Samuel and Sarah can only be the parents of family 50

M	M0001				William Boon, 	groom of Susan TENNANT					m.1846 Hull			

William and Susan are the parents of family 46.  It would seem that they are the parents of Samuel in D & C, #154

K	M0043		Samuel, 	groom of Ellen CLAYBURN									m.1869 Caistor

It seems likely that the groom of this marriage is #154. Samuel and Ellen were the parents of family 52

L	C0085/1/81	Samuel		 								b.1846		        M Master of Ship		fl.Grimsby

Since #161 was a basket maker, this Samuel is most likely #154.  
Note that F and L cannot be same (both in 1881 census), neither can B and E (both in 1851 census)

M	D0048		Samuel										b.1844					d.Hull 1906

The Samuel of M could be either #154 or #161. No decision is possible
Summary of Samuels:
i.e. #161   =   A   =  B    =   F  =   G  =   I		Child of     44       Parents of family 49	Husband of Sarah SMITH
     #154   =   C   =   D   =   J  =   H		              Child of	    46       Parents of family 52  Husband of Ellen CLAYBURN

Note that both were born in Devon (Brixham, Totnes) and both went to the Humber Estuary 

R2   John   b. 1782 – 1787

Certain records refer to John (b.1782-1787) but do not give his parents. 
This is an ‘Extras’:	C0076/4	

The following records of John born 1782 – 1787 are given:

A	X0079	   		John son of John and Sarah		b.Dittisham    1782

John and Sarah ANDRESS were the parents of family 26; thus A is a child of family 26; call this John #79

B	X0082	   		John, son of John and Agnes		b.Churston F.  1784

John and Agnes BOONE were the parents of family 29; thus B is a child of family 29; call him #82 

C	C0076/4/51  	`John, father of Joseph		b.Churston F.  1787			W Ropemaker			fl.Brixham 1851

	C0076/1/51  	oseph						b.Brixham     1826			M Schoolmaster			fl.Brixham 1951
       C0076/2/51    Sarah, wife of Joseph

Joseph and Sarah BLACKMORE were the parents of family 47  
Joseph was a child of family 35; the parents of family 35 were John and Mary CROSS

It seems likely that B and C are the same person (both born in Churston Ferrers), #82
Thus, John  (wife of Mary CROSS) must be B

Thus:
	A = #79  
    	B = C = #82			Extra 1

D.	D0025	   		John							b 1784					d.Totnes 1868

The range of family 29 was 1784-1798 and that of family 26 was 1779-1784
Thus, D is not excluded from being #79 or #82

The balance of probabilities (birth year, birthplace) is that D is #82

R3   Second Marriages

Several people appear to have contracted second marriages after the death of their first spouse:
See also  RECONSTRUCTION.DOC. The method described there was used to identify the following possible second marriages
These remain uncorroborated and there may be others not discovered

	    R3.1  Second marriages of fathers

1  Richard

Family A, F6       Richard = ?							Unrecorded marriage surmised
1 child 	b.1669
Only the name of the father is listed; there is no marriage or death listed in 1669; this first family is speculative

Family B, F8 Richard      	Richard = Edeth CHURCHWARD		m.1678	W0011	Brixham
   				3 children 1679-1685 					Various	
It seems likely that F6 and F8 are different (families: there is a ten-year gap in births of children) but the father is Richard.

2  Thomas:   

Family A, F14	Thomas = Jane ELLIOT								m.1715	W0017	Brixham
		Wife 	Jane									d.1717  	F0038	Brixham		Wife of Thomas
				1 child	 Jane		b.1717	X0037		d.1717	F0045	Brixham		Daughter of Thomas
It would appear that Jane died in childbirth with her daughter Jane.

Family B, F16	Thomas = Mary SPRISSON							m.1720	W0022	Brixham
  				7 children	1721-1730				Brixham
There is no other Thomas as contender for the groom of this marriage

3.  William

Family A, F15    William = Elizabeth BECKHAM						m.1717  W0020  Churston Ferrers
				2 children 1717-1720
Elizabeth died in 1725

Family B,  17	William = Margaret  GREEP							m.1729  W0024 Brixham
There is no other William as contender for the groom of this marriage

4  William Henry:

Family A F48	William Henry = Elizabeth HEATH					m.1860	W0063	Lambeth
									              M0015
				9 children 1862 – 1873 				 Plain City, Utah

Family B, F59	William Henry – Lemira Grey							m.1893	W0064	Plain City, Utah
				2 children 1894 – 1904 				 Plain City Utah
The second marriage of William Henry is well attested by living descendants

5  John

See 	R21

	    R3.2    Second marriages of mothers

Mothers of families who remarry after the death of their husband cease to be clan members and their families and later history are not recorded

1.  Amey

Family A, F11	? = Amey GAMTON									No marriage; this is a single parent family of Amey and her illegitimate son
				1 child  1709

Family B		Thomas LAWARANCE = Amey GAMTON			m.1712 W0014 Churston Ferrers  
Amy appears to have got married after the death of her son in 1712

2.  Sarah

Family A, F18	? = Sarah GEMPTON									No marriage; this is a single parent family of Sarah  and her illegitimate son
				1 child  1739

Family B		William Burnman = Sarah GEMPON				m.1740  W0025 Brixham  
Sarah appears to have got married shortly after the birth of her son in 1739

3.  Grace

Family A, F34	William GEMPTON = Grace						Unrecorded marriage surmised 
				4 children (1808-1815   Dittisham					One birth is recorded to William and Grace; others are surmised

Family B             Samuel LANG = Grace GEMPTON				m.1819 W0050 Dittisham
These marriages are discussed in section R12 

R4   Death of wife and child of Richard

The third child, Ann, of Richard died in childbirth; Richard’s wife died as well

Family F23	Richard = Joan SMITH				m.W0032 	1756

		Wife						d.F0001 	1761		Kingswear

		2 children 1758 – 1759								Brixham
      		1 child, Ann					d.F0002   	 1761		Kingswear

	
R5   Jame

C0071/1/41 lists ‘Jame’  (b.1811) but does not give his parents  
or place of birth (not given in 1841 census).	This record is an extra  	C0071/1:

A	C0071/1/41		Jame                  							b.1807-1811            	Grocer 
B	C0071/2/41		Ann, wife of Jame   						b.1807-1811

C	C0072/2/51/ 	Ann, Head									b.Winkley 1807		Grocer. chandler  
D	C0110/1/81)	Ann, Head									b.Winkleigh 1805	Haberdasher

E	M0071			James = Ann DOWN							m.Winkleigh1832

C & D are the same person and most likely to be B. In that case Ann (B,C,D) is the wife of Jame (A), but from E, she was the wife of James
Thus Jame (A) and James, the groom on E are the same person, #304 (Jame is thus a shortened form of James)

F	C0080/3/51 	Rhoda, granddaughter of Joanna				b,Torrington  1843
G	B0009		Rhoda daughter of James & Ann DOWN		b.Torrington  1843
H	I0005/7		Rhoda daughter of James & Ann					b.1843

F, G & H are the same person (same birth year ); Rhoda is a very unusual name

I	I0005/5			Millicent, daughter of James and Ann		b.1842
J     B0006			Millicent								b.Torrington1843

I and J are the same person (same birthyear ); Millicent  is a very unusual name

Memorial I0005/5 list Millicent (I) and Rhoda (H) to be sisters.

Ann (DOWN), wife of James was born in Winkley (C0072//2/51 (C), C0110/1/81 (D)) 
                  and in these censuses, she is listed with a daughter Millicent.

Thus, Millicent and Rhoda are sisters and daughters of Jame and Ann

Since Rhoda GEMPTON is a granddaughter of Joanna (see F) , Joanna must be the mother of Jame GEMPTON

James and Joanna GOODMAN are the parents of family  32 (There is no other family whose mother is a Joanna)
Thus, Jame (#304) is a child of family 32 

James (#304)and Ann Down are the parents of family 43
Rhoda and Millicent are children of family 43

R6   Marcus/Marquis

	The unusual name Marquis (taken to be the same as Marcus, Marquies) is mentioned in  three records:

A 	C0108/1/81		Marquies		U Boarder				b.Brixham 1859	Fisherman		fl 1881
B	C0137/1/01		Marcus			U Boarder				b.Brixham 1858	Fisherman		fl 1901
C	I0002/5			Marquis, Son of Samuel & Sarah			b.1856					d.1936

	We also have
:
D	I0002/1			Samuel
E	I0002/3			Sarah, wife of Samuel

	These, D & E, are the parents of family 45

	This memorial  also records the burial of two of their children:
F	I0002/4			Sarah SHERRIF 							b.1843					d.1903
G	I0002/5			Marquis 								b.1856					d.1936

	Thus, Marquis is a child of family 45 

     	The memorial also lists:
H	I0002.2	 		Samuel GEMPTON  
			grandson of Samuel and Sara						b.1876					d.1877
I	D0013			Joseph Piller														d.1854	

 	 Samuel and Sarah are believed to have had 3 sons in family 45:

a.      Joseph  Piller											b.1852	d.1854
b.	 Marquis												b.1856	d.1936
c.	 Albert Stooks											b.1859	d.1945	father of family 56 

	And 2 daughters:

d.	Sarah													b.1843`	d.1903
e	Fanny E.L.												b.1850

	Since Joseph (a) died in childhood,  Samuel (H), born 1876 must be a son of Albert Stooks or Marquis

	Albert Stooks is the father of family 56 and is known to have had a son, Samuel in 1896. This cannot be the Samuel
	Born 1876 (H).         In 1876, Albert Stooks would have been only 17

        There is no record of the birth of Marquies or of a marriage
        His birth year (c.1858) is known from memorial I0002/5 and from C0108/1 and C0137/1.
        His parents are given in  I0002 as Samuel and Sarah of family 45

        In C0109/91 are listed
J	Thomas HUDDER	head
K	Fanny HUDDER     	wife								b.Brixham 1849
L	Albert GEMPTON,	Nephew								b.Exeter 1886

	Assuming the exact meaning of ‘Nephew’, Albert (L) could be:
	The son of a brother in law of Thomas  (J) or  .The son of a brother of Fanny (K)

	We also have the following birth:

M	C0075/5/51	Fanny E.L., daughter of Samuel and Sarah		b.Brixham 1850

	It seems likely that K and M and E are the same Fanny.   K is a child of family 45.  
	The surviving brothers of Fanny (e.) are Albert Stooks (c) and Marquis (b) as noted above.
	Albert (L) , assuming him to be the son of a brother of Fanny (e) ,  must have been the son of a surviving  brother of Fanny: 
	i.e. Albert Stooks  (c) or Marquis (b), like Samuel (H)

     	 Albert Stooks was married when he was 30 in 1889

	 M0033	Albert Stooks  = Susan Ann Tucker  				 	m.Totnes 1889

      	Samuel (H) was born in 1876 and  Albert (L) was born in 1886, both before the marriage of Albert Stooks in 1889
	They were he was most likely  either sons of Marquis   (by an unknown wife) 
      	or an early illegitimate sons of Albert Stooks.       

       In 1876, Albert Stooks was 17  and Marquis was 20
	In 1886, Albert Stooks was 27  and Marquis was 30

	It is perhaps more likely that Samuel (H) was a child of Marquis
 
      	The fact that Albert was born some distance from Brixham in the anonymity of Exeter suggests that he was illegitimate,
    	 though, of whether of  Albert Stooks or of Marquis is unclear.

	The birth certificates of Samuel (b.1876), H, and of Albert (b.1886), L, would settle their parentage and define their mothers

                        Only a Samuel is listed in the GRO birth indexes:

	B0046	Samuel Thomas									b.1776	Caistor
	
	It seems unlikely that this Samuel was born in Caistor and buried the following  year in Brixham – unless the journey killed him!

R7   Charles Walter

	 Although the birth years of C0133/1 and C0127/7 match, neither the names, Walter and Charles,
    	 nor  birth places, Hull and Totnes,  do not.

	The following records are relevant:

A	C0133/1/01	Walter											b.Brixham 1884	

B	C127/7/01	Charles, son of  Samuel & Sarah 					b.Hull 1885

A and B cannot be the same person; they were born in different places and are both in the 1901 census

	Samuel and Sarah (C127) are the parents of family 49.

C        	B0053 	Charles Walter									b.Sculcoates 1885

        	It seems likely  that B & C are the same person, even  though the second name is missing in A and that he is a child of family 49

	      There is no evidence that Walter (A) is the same person. He cannot be further identified

R8   Albert Stooks

Two extras mention Albert:
	C114/2/81
	C005/1/91

	We also have:

A	C0114/1/81	Albert Stooks,	Mate							b Brixham  1861
B	C0005/1/91	Albert		   Fisherman							b.Brixham 1862 

A and B would appear to be the same Albert (Birth year, place), #180.  
The birth of Albert Stooks (an unusual name is recorded in:

C	B0033		Albert Stooks, son of Samuel & Sarah				b.Totnes 1859

Samuel and Sarah were the parents of family 45. Albert Stooks (#180) is thus a child of family 45

D	M0033 		Albert Stooks = Susan Ann TUCKER					m.Brixham 1889

	Albert Stooks, #180,, married to Susan. Albert and Susan were the parents of family 57

E	I0004/2 		Albert, husband of  Susan Ann, 					b.1860

	E, husband of Susan Ann must also be #180

Thus:
	A = B = C = D =  #180, a child of family 45

	Albert Stooks, #180,  was the father of family 57, married to Susan Ann Tucker

R9   William John 1852-1853

Several extra records refer to John or William John,  b.1852-1853 without giving his parents:
	C0086/01
	B0023
	C0134/01
	C0087/01

The following records are relevant:

A	B0023     	William    John       			b.Totnes 1852                     

B	C0086/1/81	William											b.Brixham 1851			Master of ship

C	C0113/1/81      	 Mar y Ann 									b. Sherringham  1849

D	C0087/1	William John										b.Brixham 1852			Fisherman
E	C0087/2/91	Mary Ann                 								b.Sherringham 1847

F	C0134/1/01	Wm. Ino.										b.Brixham 1853			Pontoon labourer
G	C0134/1/01	Mary Ann, wife of Wm							b.Sherringham 1849

	There can be little doubt that C, E & G are the same Mary Ann of Sherrington
        It also seems likely that A, B, D and F are the same person (same birthyear, place, similar occupation)
	Call him person #170

H	M0021	William Boon = Mary A WOODHOUSE	b.1852			m.Caistor 1875	Fisherman
		witness:		Thomas Gempton, Susan Gempton	

Were it not for the second name of this groom, one would conclude that the groom of H was William John.: 
the name of the bride and the age of both agree with  C, D. and F	 	
.It seems likely or possible that Boon is a misprint for John

William Boon Gempton (the elder?) was the father of family 46 and the mother was Susan TENNANT. We conclude that 
William John is a child of family 46

William Boon (the elder) was a child of family 35.
  
The identity of the witness Thomas Gempton is uncertain but it could be the Thomas Samuel (b.1821) a child of family 36
If this is so William Boon (the elder) and Thomas Samuel were cousins and Thomas an uncle of William John

William John and Mary A were the parents of family F55; they had one child, Ernest in 1878

R10  Elizabeth/Sarah c.1850	

We have the following records:

A.	B0021				Sarah Elizabeth					b.1850
B.  	B0020				Sarah Elizabeth              			b.1852

C   C0076/1/1851	Elizabeth                       				b.1850 to Joseph and Sarah
D   C0004/2/1891	Elizabeth							b.1853 to Joseph and ?

It would seem that Joseph and Sarah had two children both called Sarah Elizabeth

Thus  A = C  = 168/GAM
          B = D  = 167/GAM

We also have

E.  D0015                   Sarah										d.1852
F.  M0039                   Sarah Elizabeth                     					m.1899

It would seem that the first Sarah Elizabeth died in 1852, shortly before the birth of her sister, the second Sarah Elizabeth, who survived to marry in 1899
Thus  168/GAM  =  A  =  C  =  E   
          167/GAM  =  B  =  D  =  F

R11  Agnes

Several clan members bore the name Agnes(s) and the following records exist:

A.	X0091	Agnes		b.1798	Brixham			to John and Agnes
B.	X0126	Agnes Ash	b.1822,  Dittisham		to Richard and Elizabeth
C.	B0025	Agness		b.1854, Totnes
D.	F0071	Agnes				d.1800 Brixham
E.	F0006	Agnes				d.1837, Brixham
F.	D0010	Agnes				d.1855 Totnes
G.	C0122/1	Agness		b.1823, Torquay				Servant
H.	W0042	Agnes BOON 			= John GEMPTON		m.1784, Churston Ferrers
I.	M0056  Agnes Ash  GIMPTON	= ?						m.1857, Newton Abbott

There is evidence that family 39 of Richard and Elizabeth moved from Dittisham to Newton Abbott;  
The mother, Elizabeth died there and several of their daughters were married there. 
Her maiden name was ASH

It is clear  that record I refers to the marriage of another daughter and record B to her baptism; call her 126/GAM
Her death would not be that of a clan name
It seems likely that G refers to 126/GAM who was then working as a servant. It is very possible that her employers did not know
to report to the enumerator, her true place of birth. 

Thus we conclude:	B  = G  =   I  =  126/GAM

Record A refers to the birth  of an earlier Agnes to John and Agnes (BOON) the parents of family 29. and record D to her death in infancy 
Call her 91/GAM
It seem likely that record E refers to the death of Agnes, the mother of this family, and record H to the marriage of the parents
Call this Agnes 143/GAM
Record C refers to the birth of another Agness and it seems likely that record F refers to her death in infancy; call her  172/GAM
We do not know the family that #172 was born into but her birth certificate would settle this.

Thus we conclude:     A  =  D  =  91/GAM
And                            H  =  E  =  143/GAM
And                            C  =  F  =  172/GAM

R12  Grace = Dark, Gibbons, Lang , Gerrish

A group of people, several of whom took second spouses is of interest. Records are:

A	W0050	Grace GAMPTON = Samuel LANG					m.Dittisham 1819
                                Grace was a widow

B 	C0001/41 (no relationships are given in the 1841 census)
B1    	Samuel LANG								b.Dartmouth 1787
B2		Grace LANG								b.Dartmouth  1779
B3		Sarah GERRISH								b.1832				Aged 9	
B4		Mary A. GERRISH							b.c.1817				Aged 24-29

It seems possible that Sarah (B3) is a daughter of Mary A (B4)

C	X0157    Edwin LANG son of Samuel & Grace		b.Dartmouth 1820
D	X0158    Ellen LANG son of  Samuel & Grace		b.Dartmouth 1830

It would seem that Grace of A and B2 are the same person and  that Grace GAMPTON married Samuel LANG in 1819 and had two children, 
Edwin (B3) and Ellen (B4) LANG at Dartmouth

E	W0053	Grace GAMPTON = John DARK						m.Portsmouth 1832
F	W0058	Grace GAMPTON = George GIBBONS				m.Portsea  28/11/1841
G	W0061	Grace DARK = George GIBBONS						m.Portsmouth 29/11/1841
H	M0027	Grace DARK, widow = George GIBBONS				m.Portsea 28/11/1841
                               Grace (E) was the widowed  daughter of William GAMPTON, labourer (certificate)
                               She was of full age and therefore born in or before 1820

It would appear that F, G & H are different records of the same marriage
George according to the certificate of M0027 was a Royal Marine, Artillery

It is tempting to conclude that Grace (E) and Grace (F,G,H) are the same person. She first married John Dark, 
and after his supposed death married George GIBBONS. We have not located a record of John’s death
Call this Grace #349

It is uncertain when Grace (#349) was born except that it was before 1820 and no doubt not later than 20 years before her first marriage; 
this puts her birth before about 1812.  Her father, William would have been born 
About 1785  A strong contender is William Andrews GAMPTON b.1777 in Dittisham (X0075)  and 
who died in 1814 aged 36 (b.1778) at Dittisham (I0001/1).  William Andrews was a child of family 26 and the father of family 34
William Andrews and Grace have one recorded child, Jane (J) b.1811

I      I0001/1	William GAMPTON						b.1778		d.Dittisham 1814

J	X0001	Jane daughter of William and Grace		b.1811, Dittisham

If this argument is correct, Grace (#349) was another unrecorded child of family 34, sister of Jane
The parents of Jane were William and Grace

The mother, Grace, family (wife of William Andrews and mother of Jane and Grace) must have born about 1785. 
Let us call her #350

A possible contender for #350 is  B2, Grace LANG. She, a widow, married Samuel LANG in 1819 at Dittisham (A).
We propose that Samuel LANG was her second husband, the first, William Andrews GAMPTON, had died in 1814 (I).in Dittisham

K	W0052	Sarah GAMPTON = John GERRISH				m.1828

L	W0056	Mary Ann GAMPTON = John GERRISH			m.1835

It seems likely that the John GERRISH  of K and L are the same person who married twice. First to Sarah GAMPTON in 1828
and secondly to was Mary Ann GAMPTON in 1835.  
The parish registers of Portsmouth might confirm that John was a widower in 1835

It seems likely that John’s second wife Mary Ann GAMPTON, K, is the Mary Ann GERRISH in B4, born in c.1817.   In 1841 she was living with (?) Samuel and
Grace LANG but she may have been  daughter of Grace by her first husband William,  William died in 1814 so that if he was Mary Ann’s 
father she would have been born no later than 1815.  Her age is given as 25 in the 1841 census (other ages in this census household are exact rather than rounded
 to a multiple of 5) indicating, that she was born in 1816 or 1815.  Thus, Mary Ann could be yet another unrecorded child of family 34

The identity of John’s first wife, Sarah (J),  is also  uncertain as is that of Sarah GERRISH, B3.   The child Sarah, B3,  may have been  a child of 
John GERRISH by his second   wife, Mary Ann, or more likely with first wife Sarah.   It may well be that the first wife, Sarah, J, died in childbirth 
delivering her daughter Sarah B2,in 1832.  The identity of Sarah GAMPTON, John’s first wife, J is also unknown.  There is no known baptismal
 record for a Sarah GAMPTON at an appropriate time.

Somewhat speculatively, we suppose that this Sarah GAMPTON is yet another daughter of William and Grace.
 If this is correct, John Gerrish married two sisters, the daughters of William and Grace.  Thus would be in spite of the illegality of a man marrying his deceased wife’s sister

R13  William John married .c.1910

There are two marriages:
 	1.	M0051	William John  GEMPTON			m.1908	Grimsby   = ?
	2.	M0055	`William J.	 GIMPTON			m.1913    	Grimsby	= Blanche Bowen

We cannot discover the spouse of William in M0051 since it is before spouse surnames appear in the GRO indexes.
FreeBMD Lists person who appear in the same book and the same page as William John in M1908 (Grimsby 7a, 930). 
This indicates that his spouse was:
Either 		Sarah Ann POCKLINGTON    
       or   	Alice ROBINSON. 

An Alice GEMPTON died in 1967 (D0). She was born in 1884 and would have been 24 in 1908.  
Since Alice is a rare first name, it seems that this might be the bride of M0051
 It is impossible to be sure without buying the certificate or waiting for the 1911 census..

There are two possible births for these William:
	1.		B0082    	William John GIMPTON		b.1887		Grimsby
   			C0086/05	William J.      GIMPTON		b.1887		Grimsby	

	2.		B0060       William John GEMPTON         b.1891     Totnes

The balance of probabilities seems to suggest the birth B0082 is that of  the groom of M55: They both spell the surname 
GIMPTON.  They both occur in Grimsby.  B0082 would imply an early marriage at age 21 for M51. 
 The certificate might confirm this.   

Another possibility is that M55 represents a second  marriage of the groom of M51.  The certificates might confirm this.

R14  The Guernsey connection

Several census returns give evidence of at least two families of GEMPTON living at St.Peter’s Port Guernsey:

C073 1851                                     Brixham                7.43,W78  
      1    88/GAM Browse     Sarah       		57  f W  Head         	Farmers Widow        	b.1793/94 Brixham,DEV
      2     0/GAM Browse     Emma        		30  f U  Daughter 	Dress Maker          	   1820/21 Brixham,DEV
      3   152/GAM Gempton    Elizabeth   	45  f U  Sister       	Baker                		   1805/06 Brixham,DEV
      4   318/GAM Gempton    Edwin       	12  m U  Nephew                            			   1838/39 Guernsey,GSY

Sarah GEMPTON married George BROWSE in 1818 (W49). She and her sister Elizabeth had one brother George Elliott GEMPTON.
Thus if Edwin was a true nephew of Sarah, he was the son of George Elliott GEMPTON, bc. 1797

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C016 1861     22 Canricher Street,            St.Peter's Port                  
      1    90/GAM Gempton    George      63  m M  Head         Ropemaker           			b..1797/98 England,
      2   406/GAM Gempton    Sophia      62  f M  Wife                              				    1798/99 Guernsey,GSY
      3   405/GAM Gempton    Mary        28  f U  Daughter     Draper's Assistant   		    1832/33 Guernsey,GSY
      4   404/GAM Gempton    William    22  m U  Son          Shoe Maker           			    1838/39 Guernsey,GSY
      5   403/GAM Gempton    Albert      20  m U  Son          White Smith          			    1840/41 Guernsey,GSY

In this family in 1861 in Guernsey, we find the head is George.  This is apparently George Elliott GEMPTON, father of Edwin who was presumably born between William and Albert.  
We do not know why Edwin was billeted in England with his aunt Sarah 

George and Sophia may have had more children – see C139/01 below
      1   296/GAM Gempton    Sophia      69  f U  Head         Shop Keeper Grocer   		   1831/32 St.Peter's Port,GSY      2   297/GAM Gempton    George      65  m U  Brother      Carpenter            			   1835/36 St.Peter's Port,GSY

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C116 1881     21 Saumarez St.,                St.Peter-Port          W63       
      1   293/GAM Gempton    Harriette   47  f W  Head         Dressmaker           			   1833/34 Catel, St.Peter-Port,GSY
      2   294/GAM Gempton    Isabell M.   7  f U  Daughter                          				   1873/74 St.Peter-Port,GSY
      3   300/GAM Le Tissier Nicolas     50  m U  Brother      Draper               1			   830/31
      4   299/GAM Le Tissier Mary I.     86  f U  Boarder      Domestic Cook        			   1794/95 St.Peter-Port,GSY
      5     0/GAM Singleton  Georgina    15  f U  Boarder      Dressmaker          			   1865/66 St.Peter-Port,GSY

Harriette’s brother is Nicholas LE TISSIER so that Harriette’s maiden name was LE TISSIER.  Her husband has not been identified, 
but he may well have been William  from C16.  George was still unmarried in 1901 (C139).  
It would appear that they married about 1873 when Harriette would have bee about 40 and William about 42
The husband would have died sometime between 1873 and 1881

The baptism of Isabell Mary is recorded in the registers of St.Pierre Port:

X0160	Isabel Mary GEMPTON			    	   									   b.1873, St.Peirre Port

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C014 1891     Aldershot,                      Aldershot              1837online
      1   296/GAM Gempton    Sophia C.   59  f U               Nurse Domestic       			     1831/32 Guernsey,GSY

This Sophia might well be one of the children of George Elliott GEMPTON and Sophia (see C16)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C021 1891     21 Saumarz Street,              St.Peter's Port        1837online
      1   293/GAM Gempton    Harriette   57  f W  Head         	Lodging House Keeper 		1833/34 Catel,GSY
      2   294/GAM Gempton    Isabella    17  f U  Daughter     	Milliner             				1873/74 St.Peter's Port,GSY
      3   300/GAM Le Tissier Nicholas    60  m M  Brother      	Draper's Assistant   			1830/31 Catel,GSY
      4     0/GAM Isabell    Mary        	40  f U  Partner     	 Cook               				1850/51 England

This is the same family as C116 but in 1881, there was an unmarried cook,  Mary  I.  LE TISSIER aged 86 and in 1891 an unmarried  
cook/partner called Mary ISABELL aged 40.  The relationship, if any,  between these cooks is unknown

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C138 1901     21 Suasmarez,                   St.Peter Port, Guernsey W43       
      1   293/GAM Gempton    Harriet     67  f W  Head           Lodging House Keeper 		1833/34 St.Peter Port,GSY
      2   295/GAM Gempton    Mary        30  f U  Daughter     Lodging House Assistant		1870/71 England,
      3   294/GAM Gempton    Isabella     27  f U  Daughter     Milliner             				1873/74 St.Peter Port,GSY
      4   298/GAM Addinsell  Colleen      11  f U  Daughter                         					 1889/90 England,

This is again the same family as C116 but now there is no cook sand Harriette has another elder daughter, Mary.

She is also listed as having yet another daughter, Colleen born in about 1889. But Harriette would have been at least 55 in that 
year. This would make her too old to be the mother of Colleen Addinsell. The identity of this ‘daughter’ remains unknown, 
as does that of her father, Mr.Addinsell, but her birth was registered in Kensington in June 1889 (1a 166)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C139 1901     Conichers,                      St.Peter Port, Guernsey W44       
      1   296/GAM Gempton    Sophia      69  f U  Head         Shop Keeper Grocer   			1831/32 St.Peter Port,GSY      2   297/GAM Gempton    George      65  m U  Brother    Carpenter           				 1835/36 St.Peter Port,GSY

Sophia and George may well be further children of George Elliott and Sophia of C16

R15  Surmised children

There is evidence that certain families had further children whose birth or existence is not otherwise recorded.
The arguments above lead to the inferred existence of people not properly documented in the records
These are marked as ‘surmised’

Family  34  1810-1815 3 surmised children to William and Grace (see R11)

363/GAM		GAMPTON         Sarah                     b. about 1808 
349/GAM		GAMPTON         Grace                                   1810
351/GAM		GAMPTON         Mary            Ann                 1815 

Family 5 (1648-1657)
The death of Thomasin is recorded but not her baptism

381/GAM		GALMPTON        Thomasin                           1657 
Family 33  (1807-1830)
Two funeral of a Caleb Stower are recorded

227/GAM		GAMPTON         Caleb           S.                     1816

Family 56
The existence of Samuel is recorded in I0002/2 as a grandchild.  It is argued above that he was a child of child of Marquis

376/GAM		GEMPTON         Samuel                                   1876
Family 39
The marriage of a Sarah Jane Andrews iGIMPTON n Newton Abbott is recorded in 1857.   Several other daughters of family 39 were baptised in Dittisham and married at Newton Abbott,
 so, we surmise that Sarah Jane was another unrecorded daughter of this family

The following record confirms this:.

C0037/02/41      GAMPTON		 Sarah	aged  16			b.c.1826		fl. Dittisham

404/G                  GIMPTON            Sarah Jane Andrews              1830 

R16  Inferred  families

If there is evidence that a person had a child but no record can be found to document it, it may be necessary to surmise the existence of the family.
One such is the family of Marquis who is believed to have had children born in 1876 and 1886 (see R6)

R17  Illegitimate children

Illegitimate children can sometimes be recognised by the absence of the name of the father in a baptismal register.  
There may also be a note in the register
Two are apparent

1.	John, son of Amey, b.1709, Brixham (X0149)  Family 11
It is likely that he died in infancy in 1712 (F0044)
It seem likely that Amey was a child of family 8 (b.1682) and that she later married Thomas LAWARANCE in 1712/

2. William, son of Sarah,  b.1739, Brixham (X0053)  Family 18
	It seems likely that Sarah is a child of family 15 (b.1720, X0039) and that she later married William BURNMAN in 1740 

R18  Sarah Jane Andrews GIMPTON

Sarah GIMPTON is listed in the 1851 census (C0121/01.51)as a servant aged  21 born at Halberton.  She cannot be found in the 1861 census nor can her death in the period 1651-1861.
It is possible that her employers did not know her exact age.

There is a  marriage (M0057)  of a Sarah Jane Andrews GIMPTON. She has been identified as a child of family 39/2.  She is mentioned in the 1841 census
 (C0037/02/41) being then aged 15. I.e. born in 1826.    Birth places were not given in the 1841 census. 
Some of her siblings were also in service and the birth date is from the 1841 census ()

It is likely that these two Sarah's are  the same person (#408)

R19  Betsy

Betty Wylie was born in Stromness, Orkney  in 1820 to William and Isabella. She is variously named, Betty, Betsy and Elizabeth.  She,  married Thomas in 1842 (M0006). She had several children in the period 1843-1859. She is listed in the 
1851 and 1861 censuses with her husband and family.  But she cannot be found in the 1881 census
.
Her husbands Thomas (a tailor) is listed in several censuses:
  1851	Living with wife and family
  1861	Living with wife and family 
  1871    Living with wife
  1881	Living with married son and daughter in law
  1891	Living with married daughter and daughter in law 
  1901 	In workhouse

This suggests that Thomas' wife died sometime between 1871 and 1881 when he started living with his children before
falling on really hard times by 1901. 
 
There is  record (D0064) for an Elizabeth aged 58 who died in Sheffield in 1878..  Betsy had a son who died in  Sheffield in 1873.  

R20  Anomalies

The funeral of John GEMPTON (1732-1733) is registered in two registers on the same day, 1 July, 1733, those of  Brixham 
(where it is noted that he is the son of Thomas) and in Churston Ferrers (noted as the son of Thomas and Elie).  
I do not know where he was actually buried.

Gertrude M Gempton apparently succeeded in appearing twice in the 1901 census.  Thus Gertrude M Gempton is listed as a daughter,
aged 18, in Hull in 1901 and as a visitor aged 19. in Shelton, Manchester.  No other Gertrude Gempton in known.

R21 John, wife of Mary, married 1749

The parents, John (309/G) husband of Mary CAMPIN (145/G), of family 12 are hard to discern.  Their  marriage (W0028) took place in 1749 in Dartmouth 
which leads to the expectation that John was born in about 1723.   There are, however, records of only three baptisms of John in the century preceding 1749
     
X0031	in   1692 :		 31/G	Son of James and Joan
X0149	in   1708		`   `149/G	Illegitimate son of Amey		Died 1712	F0044
X0049   in   1732                49/G    Son of Thomas and Elizabeth	Died 1733,   F0020,  son of Thomas and Elie

There is reason to believe that 149/G died in 1712.  And 49/G died in `1733.   31/G married Joanne YOULDEN in 1716 (W0019) and had one child 
baptised in 1716..  Joanne YOULDEN died in 1727.  

There are three hypotheses: that one of the three Johns mentioned above was in fact the groom in W0028 in 1849.
A fourth hypothesis (D) is that this groom was baptised in some other parish. Short of searching every parish register in Devon;  it is hard to prove or disprove this idea;  It is however  unlikely.

A	The first hypothesis  is that Mary CAMPIN was living, perhaps as a servant with John (31/G) who made her pregnant.  Mary CAMPIN was baptised in 
1732 which would make her 17 in 1749.   John (31/G), a widower was 57 in that year.

One may argue that the age discrepancy is too great.  The marriage took place on July 11, 1749, and only a month later the child, Mary, of Mary and John 
 was baptised on August 20, 1749.  Clearly Mary was conceived out of wedlock  The wedding looks like a shotgun wedding.  
Note that it took place in Dartmouth, some distance from Churston Ferrers.

If this hypothesis is correct the widower John found himself with a young bride and a new daughter.  The marriage was not unsuccessful for they had a son, John,
later in 1751.

B    The second and perhaps more attractive hypothesis (hypothesis B) is that the John of W0028 is in fact 49/G who had not died (as assumed above) in 1733.  
In this case Both John  (49/G) and Mary CAMPIN were 17 in 1749 when Mary found herself pregnant.  
The young couple, we suppose,  went off to Dartmouth, out of the glare of publicity, and there got married to return later return to Churston Ferrers, where 
John had been born, to rase their two children
We would then assign funeral F0020  in 1733 to Joanne YOULDEN's widower instead

Unfortunately for hypothesis B,  the assignment of funeral F0020 to 31/G is  certainly wrong;  there is a (death) note in the parish register informing us 
that the John of F0020 is 'the son of Thomas and Elie'.  The parents of John of X0049 were registered as Thomas an Elie, whereas the parents of 31/G were 
James and Joan.

Furthermore the parents of Thomas are unknown so hypothesis B does not succeed in establishing the ancestors of John of W0028
 for more than n extra genreration.

C     The third hypothesis is that the John of W0028 is in fact Amey's illegitimate child and that the Death F004 is wrongly ascribed to him.
X0149 in 1708 records the Mary is the mother of John, but no father is recorded.  The inference is that John was illegitimate.  
This is further substantiated by F0044 which is accompanied in the parish register by a (death) note that the John was the base son of Amey.
This death note disproves this hypothesis.

	Thus hypotheses B and C are disproved. Only hypothesess A and D remain.  Of these A is the least unlikely. It is consistent with all known facts 
and establishes the ancestry of John wife of Mary.

It is this hypothesis that we have (provisionally) adopted.

R22 Thomas Samuel Gempton

Below  I have listed Thomas Samuel Gempton (with his families) in every census from 1851 to1901.    I also give a birth and a marriage of a Thomas Samuel Gempton (etc.) and the death of an Elizabeth Gempton.

Thomas Samuel Gempton is a fairly distinctive combination of names (there is but one other, and he could not be confused).  Is thus seem most likely  that Thomas Samuel was  baptised on 29 May 1821 at  Dover, Kent.  It is likely that he was  born a short time before this.  Thomas Samuel Gempton is to be found in the 1851, 61, 71, 81, 91 and 1901 censuses.  In 1851, 1861  and 1871he is married and with a family.  The names and dates of these families are very closely similar leaving little doubt that they are both the families of the same Thomas Samuel.

It should be noted that transcriptions of the 1851 family list him as Thomas L Gempton.  I managed to download an image of this census page.  I can see why the transcriber put his initial as 'L' but in fact, after comparison with letters on the same page, it is unambiguously   'S'.  Likewise in the 1861 census his second name was transcribed as 'John'.  Again, a careful inspection lends no support to this.  It is  malformed but almost certainly 'Saml'

The six censuses are therefore in agreement over his name  and in fair agreement over his date of birth. All but 1891 agree about his place of birth.

The censuses record that in 1851 he was married to Betsy. And in 1861 qnd 1871   to Elizabeth). Both these ladies were born in Scotland in 1821.   Betsy is a diminutive or pet-name name for Elizabeth.

According to the 1851 census, his eldest child,Eliza,  was born in 1843.  The 1861 census puts her ads being born in  1851.  Note how the children are listed by age and that in both 1851 and 1861 Eliza is put before Samuel.  Surely 1861 census is in error and she should be aged 18.  Close inspection of the image confirms that her age in the 1861 census was written as 10. It would seem that the enumerator must have put down the wrong age.

If we accept all this we must look for a marriage between Thomas Samuel and Elizabeth - shortly before 1843.  We find such a marriage in 1842 in Totnes (Brixham probably)  between Elizabeth and Thomas Samuel GALMPTON. .  Kathy Gempton has indicated to me that the banns for this marriage were read at Paignton, but I have not checked this. Purchase of the certificate would probably clinch all this.  Note that Elizabeth's maiden surname is WYLIE. 

Also note that in the 1861 census, Elizabeth is given a second name.  This does not appear in any of the transcriptions.  It is difficult to decipher.  It looks like 'Cane' but this makes no sense.  Maybe it was Jane.

Thomas and Betsy had 10 children, 4 boys and 6 girls.  All the girls except the eldest, Eliza, died in early childhood as did Alfred. Richard died at the age of  7 and William aged 25. Only Samuel and Eliza survived to marry.

In 1851 the family was living in  Hull; they were still there in 1861 and their last child was born there. but in 1871 Thomas and Betsy were living with their son William in Sheffield.   In the 1861 and 1871 censuses, William was described as  a basket maker as was his brother Samuel.. It is not clear why William's parents had gone to live with him.. Maybe there was more call for tailors in Sheffield than in Hull.

In  1873 the death of William aged 25 was registered.  This is almost certainly the son. It seems that Thomas and Betsy continued to live in Sheffield but in 1878, the death of Elizabeth Gempton aged 58 was registered;  she was  no doubt Betsy.  

After this, It would seem that Thomas decided to return to Hull and live with his son Samuel.

 In 1881 Thomas  is living, (without Betsy) , with his remaining surviving son Samuel and his wife.  Maybe Samuel got tired of the old man for  in  1891 he has moved in with his daughter Eliza (the census has her age correct) and her husband.  The informant in 1891 seems unsure as to how old the old chap was or where he was born. Maybe she too could not cope, for in 1901 we find him in the workhouse, a pauper. 

In 1906 he died.

The lives together of Thomas and Betsy together seem to be marked by wandering.  Thomas was born at Dover (1822),  married in Brixham  (1842) and had children in Brixham (1843,1844), Ramsgate (1845,1848)  before they moved on to Hull, then to Sheffield and then finally back to Hull  where he remained for the rest of his life.

Thomas was a Tailor, but what made him move around the country?  The necessity of earning a living. One supposes his life was  hard;  it was also tragic. Life was hard for most in the 19th century; no wonder his descendant emigrated.  Never look back nostalgically at 'The Good Old Days'

It is perhaps noteworthy that only the two oldest children survived to marry and that these were born in Brixham.  Did Thomas' fortunes decline about 1844? And did he moved to Ramsgate in the hope of ameliorating them?  Of the two children born in Ramsgate, only William survived to adulthood.  Maybe he had no great success in Ramsgate and moved on to Hull.  All the children born there died young.   By 1864 Eliza and Samuel were married but the other children except William were all dead..  They and their remaining child, William moved to Sheffield maybe hoping for better things among the prospering steel workers. But William died not long after their move.   Thomas and Betsy stayed on in Sheffield till Betsy's death in 1878.  Thomas was now 57 and he decided to move back to Hull to be with his married children. 

Thomas was one of the first of the Gamptons to move from Devon to the Humber estuary.  One might have expected this pioneer to be a mariner, sailing from port to port round the English coast.  But no, he was a tailor.   It was generally true however that his migrations were preceded by the arrival of other members of his clan

Betsy (in fact her birth was registered as Betty) was born in May 1820 in Stromness, Orkney - about as far from Devon as can be in the British Isles.   There is one final mystery.  How did Thomas come to marry Betsy from Stromness?.  The most likely explanation is that Betty was in Brixham, visiting relatives. There were at least two families of Wylies in Brixham, and at least two members claimed  to have been born in Scotland.  But how did this 20 year old lady meet Thomas, who was a year younger than her and who presumably had lived his early life in Kent?