A breakthrough, or clutching at straws?

[Janet in Yorkshire]

Would you accept the following as a valid and connecting piece of evidence?

For a couple of decades I’ve had this marriage on file, believing the bride to be a member of one of my extended families, but unable to find proof.
Mar by lic at Gt Yarmouth 4 Mar 1784 William Ellis & Sarah Boulter, both single, both marked, wits Mary Ellis & James ……. ??? (Unfortunately I haven’t managed to find the licence bond which should have given parishes for both parties)
This couple had several children, including Hannah Boulter Ellis b 27 April & bp Gt Yarmouth 4 May 1787, d/o William Ellis & Sarah (maiden name Boulter)

Last night I found the following Gt Yarmouth marriage record – 12 Sep 1808 Thomas Sadler & Elizabeth Pratt Meall, both single - there were 3 witnesses, one of whom was Hannah Boulter Ellis.
Elizabeth Pratt Meall was bp Mundesley 21 Sep 1777, daughter of James Meall & Hannah Boulter, who had married at Mundesley in Nov 1776.
Hannah Boulter was bp at Mundesley in 1753, the youngest of six siblings, all of whom reached adulthood and I’d managed to marry them all off, apart from Sarah bp Mundesley 1749. I can’t find a likely burial record for Mrs Sarah Ellis to work out her birth year.

I realise that if this marriage was for MY Sarah, then she married rather late, at 35, but her sisters married at the ages of 22, 28 and 21, with one remaining unmarried and dying aged 37 yrs. So none them desperate to rush up the aisle asap!
My thinking is that Hannah Boulter Ellis and Elizabeth Pratt Meall were cousins, hence Hannah being a witness at Elizabeth’s wedding, but I’d value some opinions, please.

Thanks for reading
Jay

[kiterunner]

Mar by lic at Gt Yarmouth 4 Mar 1784 William Ellis & Sarah Boulter, both single, both marked, wits Mary Ellis & James ……. ??? (Unfortunately I haven’t managed to find the licence bond which should have given parishes for both parties)


The parish register entry shows both to be "of this parish".

I reckon that witness is James Meall. Just need to go and check against the James Meall / Hannah Boulter marriage...
(the attached is the sig from the William Ellis / Sarah Boulter marriage witness)

Bother, the Mundesley PR's don't seem to be on FamilySearch.

[kiterunner]

I can’t find a likely burial record for Mrs Sarah Ellis to work out her birth year.



FreeREG has Sarah Ellis, wife of William Ellis, buried 24 Jan 1793 at St Nicholas, Great Yarmouth, but doesn't give her age. Annoyingly enough, her age doesn't seem to be shown on the PR image although all the other ages are.
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-266-12346-119617-88?cc=1416598&wc=92BV-C6N:30456601,29369001,31404901

[Janet in Yorkshire]

Thanks for that, Kite. Yes, it's a pain Mundesley images not being available - many years ago (pre internet) there was a transcript of Mundesley PR on open shelves at Norwich record office and researchers were directed to use that, although the BTs had been filmed.
The James Meall/Hannah Boulter was another marriage licence bond I couldn't find, although I'm not sure the signatures were signatures rather than just a record of the names.

[kiterunner]

I guess nobody knew Sarah's age as it is blank in the AT's too:

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-266-11556-93711-81?cc=1824688&wc=M62Y-Q3D:160239801,161132301,161136201,160239804

[Janet in Yorkshire]

Thanks for the burial record - I had got myself into a bit of a muddle, thinking there were TWO contemporary William Ellises, both with a wife named Sarah - seems the other one was married to MARY. At least that's cleared things a bit on that score..

Jay

[kiterunner]

Anyway, yes, I think the witnesses' names are good evidence to tie them together.

[Phoenix]

I have a chap from Cley marrying in Great Yarmouth, so that's nothing out of the ordinary. If a woman were in service, she'd be otp wherever she married. I'd say your instincts were good.

Have you checked NROCAT, to see whether the registers have now been deposited? Those filmed by the Mormons were filmed pre 1994.

[Janet in Yorkshire]

Thanks Kite, and Phoenix too.
I think I am going to claim Sarah as one of my "gang." This is the first potential "clue" in over 20 years of searching - if she's not my missing family member, I'm totally devoid of ideas as to who else she could be, unless she came up from Lowestoft:eek:

Jay