www.925-1000.com

He married Hannah Okely in 1805 at St Botolph, Aldersgate; both were from that parish.
The christening record for their son Thomas at St Giles, Cripplegate in 1806 shows his father as a water gilder but without an address.
Subsequent christening records of their children at St Botolph, Aldersgate 1813-19 show their address as Fann Street from where Thomas had entered his first maker’s mark as a plateworker. The christening records show he was still a water gilder.
He notified Goldsmiths Hall of a change of address to 4 Goswell Street in 1819 and a christening in 1820 at the same church records that as their address. It is from where he entered a second mark in 1822. The christening record shows Thomas as a silversmith.
The burial of a Thomas Austin recorded in 1831 at St Botolph, Aldgate shows his last address as Goswell Street Road. His age is shown as 40 years but the record may be relevant as the 1841 UK Census shows Hannah Austin aged 50 years at Radcliffe Terrace, Old Street without a husband, living with her children and all working as water gilders or burnishers.

Along with Thomas there was also a son named John christened on the same day. On the surface, it looks as though Thomas and Hannah had three sets of twins. I wonder what the odds of that are. Thomas and Hannah's year of marriage and no mention of her being a minor seems a little out of place considering that at least from my experience British records are much more accurate on dates than American. It makes me wonder if there are not "parallel" families involved. I know, I'm not much help, but I can't help but wonder about it.

The christenings in 1806 were of twins; the same date of birth is recorded for each. The christening records of two children in each of 1813 and 1819 show different dates of birth for all of them so although two pairs were christened on the same day they were not twins. Perhaps Thomas realised having had two children christened in 1806 at the same cost as for one he could get a bargain if he took two along to the church each time? This scheme failed of course in 1820 when only one child was christened.
There are at least two reasons why his wife Hannah appears to have married in 1805 at the age of 14 years (1841 minus 50=year of birth). Firstly, as we have seen, the 1841 Census records generally do not accurately reflect the age of the person.There are several records for the christenings of Hannah Oakley which mean the accuracy of the 1841 recorded age cannot be tested. Secondly the first Hannah may have died and Thomas married another and younger lady of the same christian name.The possibility was explored in writing the first post but without a positive result but not to say such evidence does not exist. It would be necessary to compare signatures on marriage records to determine if Thomas stood in front of the minister a second time.
Mike

Thanks for the response Mike. Your analysis seems quite sound. More than anything else, I let myself get hung up on the age recorded for Hannah in 1841. Pat