4

Today I paid to gain access to images on Fold3 website. As a result I have deleted some of the content of the document:

enter image description here

It is a WW1 Pension Document but I am confused. Her birth name is Mary Elizabeth Brown and she married William Finlay Partridge on 21 Jan 1907.

William died in WW1 on 25 Jan 1915 and Mary later marries. According to the Civil Registers she married Walter John Banning sometime around Jul 1918.

Yet, on this pension notice she is already a BANNING. I can only assume that this document was created after that date but I see nothing to indicate that apart from her name.

The official record is from WWI Pension Record Cards and Ledgers.

Can anyone shed light on this?

Improve this question
4
  • 1
    Banning and the Salisbury address seem to be different ink and handwriting than the rest, probably added later. There appears to be a date in 1917 under the READ stamp, probably intended to be part of the Form received field. Did you check if there was an image of the card's reverse? (Note: you have 2015 instead of 1915 for his death year).
    – bgwiehle
    Commented Nov 17, 2020 at 14:02
  • @bgwiehle Thanks for spotting the error with the year and the other observations.
    – Andrew Truckle
    Commented Nov 17, 2020 at 14:50
  • 1
    @bgwiehle Note that I think it is a DEAD stamp and not a READ stamp.
    – Andrew Truckle
    Commented Nov 17, 2020 at 15:12
  • I believe it says DEAD as well. But the stamp doesn't appear on all the war widows pension documents, so it might refer to the pension.
    – user6485
    Commented Nov 17, 2020 at 15:55

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
5

The card would have been produced in the process of granting her a pension as a war widow, and then updated when she remarried and became ineligible to receive the pension (as she now had another husband to provide for her, relieving the state of the necessity to provide).

The Western Front Association has some useful background information on these documents.

Improve this answer
2
  • Thanks. The three children on the form said the dates of expiry were in 1923, 1925 and 1927 respectively. Would it have stopped with respects to them to?
    – Andrew Truckle
    Commented Nov 17, 2020 at 14:51
  • 2
    I believe her new husband would be expected to provide for them as well.
    – user6485
    Commented Nov 17, 2020 at 15:09

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.