Hampshire - Suffolk - Rutland - Herefordshire Tree

Martha was present in the 1851 census record, but not in 1861, for which husband George was recorded as 'widower', so Martha presumably died between 1851 and 1861. Possible GRO records (provided by Robin Lovelock) include:

Maria L 3Q 1851 Winchester 7 189 Martha Jane L 3Q 1856 Amesbury 5a 91 Mary L 4Q 1857 Winchester 2c 57 Maria L 1Q 1860 Hungerford 2c 170 Martha L 1Q 1860 Kensington 1a 80 Martha L 1Q 1860 Winchester 2c 65 Martha L 3Q 1861 Hartley Wintney 9c 89

RL 9/3/07: Above is James's note, following my 'nudge' on the point. In the original discussion with Graham, when I spotted the double use of the death reg'n, Graham (14/11/06) said: "What to do about Martha who died in 1860? I think I must plead guilty to entering her twice, but the question now is, as you say, which one is she? Well, George the putative son of Thomas and Olive was recorded in 1861 as a widower, and the image is exceptionally clear and unambiguous. UNFORTUNATELY the image with Thomas on is equally clear, and he too is a widower. Recourse, then, to the 1851? No use, of course, as both Marthas were alive. So we wait for Free BMD to catch up, and then we'll have both references, but the only way to resolve the issue would be for one or other, or indeed both, PRs to have recorded the age. Which PRs? Search me!"

Of my (RL's) list (above) the Kensington and Hartley Wintney records seem the most likely, but the Winchester death in 1860 could well be that of Martha b 1775/6, the wife of Thomas L bap Compton 10 Aug 1788 (Compton tree). I mused that given the births of several of her children in Middlesex (1844/53), and that the family was in a barracks in Winchester in 1851, it's conceivable that Martha died in Kensington. However, Graham found 8 Martha's in the London area in 1851 who would need to be accounted for.