Abducted by Aliens


                  
This is not of course a serious title for the collection of brief notes that follows, which addresses Lovelocks who have disappeared without (apparently) leaving any evidence of their ultimate fates. If you can provide any further information in respect of any of those mentioned below please let us know through a message to the Discussion Group.

There are sometimes, of course, very obvious reasons why Lovelock branches and even Lovelock trees, as opposed to individuals, disappear or, rather, come to an end. This link will take you to just one such example.

Benjamin Lovelock (H-S Tree*): he was with his parents Thomas and Mary Ann (nee Card) in 1841 at Star Place, Fulham, Middlesex, England aged 3, but untraceable in any subsequent Census. His older sister Rosanna and younger brother George were both born in Wroughton, Wiltshire. There is no record in Free BMD or the GRO Online Index of his death.

Eliza Ann and Lucy Lovelock (H-S Tree): these sisters were with their parents James and Maria (nee Beldom or Beldon) in 1881 at 110 Union Street, Southwark aged 5 and 2 respectively, but untraceable in any subsequent Census or the 1939 Register. No record in Free BMD of their deaths.

George Lovelock (H-S Tree): with his parents George and Editha (nee Acfield), and sister Nora Lillian, in 1911 at 19 Cathnor Road, Fulham aged 8, but untraceable in the 1921 Census, 1939 Register or any on-line marriage or death records. No trace of him on the CWGC website.

Emily Lovelock (WR2 Tree): born on 19 October 1845 in Marlborough, Wiltshire, England, recorded in Marlborough with her widowed mother Susan in 1851 and 1861, but not recorded in any Census thereafter, nor the subject of any marriage or death in the online records.

Emily Lovelock: another Emily about whom we know little. She was recorded as a Boarder with George and Maryann White at Cowley in Oxfordshire in the 1871 Census, aged 10 and born in Warwick. Her birth entry is included in the GRO data, and her mother's maiden name is given as Cooper, but the marriage has not been traced and Emily does not appear in any later online record. Confusingly, in 1861 she was recorded with the Whites as an illegitimate nursechild aged 4 months, with her birthplace unknown.

Amelia Martha Lovelock (RCD Tree): born in January or February 1881, she appears with her parents in 1881 and 1891, and as a member of the Domestic Staff of University College Hospital in London in 1901. After that there seems not to be a single record of her existence or demise in UK records. However, an entry on the 'MyHeritage' Web Site states that Amelia Martha Lovelock born 1881 married Marie Eugene Desire Delioux in 1909. He was born on 10 June 1879 in Crezancy-en-Sancerre, in the Cher Departement of the Centre-Val de Loire region of France. Sources are not quoted.

Edith Maud Lovelock (RCD Tree): born in the April-June quarter of 1898, but not recorded with either of her parents in 1901, and not the subject of a death entry in the GRO Index. However, her sister Edith Forster Lovelock was born in 1906, so what had become of Edith Maud?

Phebe Lovelock (L Line): baptised at Easton Royal, Wiltshire, England on 25 Aug 1799, recorded in service in St Pancras, London in 1841 and then in Ipswich, Suffolk in 1851 and 1861, with the same mistress in each case. In 1861 was recorded as a Widow named Sawyer, but there is no record of the marriage or of her death (in either surname).

Walter Lovelock (L Line): baptised at Pewsey on 18 Nov 1875, recorded with his parents in 1881 and 1891, and then with wife Ellen, nee Farrington (whom he had married in 1897), in 1901 in Brighton, Sussex. After that there seems to be no trace of the couple.

Leonard Lovelock: Leonard is almost unique in this small collection of Lovelocks as not only do we have no idea of his ultimate fate, but we have no family tree attribution for him, and no idea of when he was actually born. What seems to be his one and only appearance in any documentation is an entry for Cudworth, Yorkshire in the 1901 Census where as a Boarder with the Greenwood family he claimed to be 23 years old, and born in Clay Cross, Derbyshire. The GRO Index as presented on the Free BMD website has no record of a male Lovelock birth in Derbyshire before 1878, and rather than a Leonard the 1878 birth was of Frederick Thomas, a member of the Shipton Moyne and Derbyshire Tree that we can place separately in 1901.

Caroline Lovelock (Bp): Caroline was baptised in West Drayton, Middlesex on 24 Sep 1848. The baptism entry includes her date of birth as 20 Aug 1848 and identifies her as the daughter of Thomas Lovelock and Charlotte (nee Downham) who had married in 1844. There is no trace of her death in the GRO records and she does not appear in any Census Return.

Stephen Lovelock: Stephen is very much in the same category as Leonard above. We know not whence he came, nor where he went. What we do know is that he was recorded as a Glass Dealer's Apprentice in the 1841 Census, living with presumably the man to whom he was apprenticed - a Benjamin Wiley - in Wolverhampton, Staffordshire. He was aged only 12, and not born in Staffordshire. There is no record of his baptism in any online source, nor of his death.

Jessie Lovelock (L Line): Jessie was born on 18 June 1902 and appears with her parents Edward and Amelia in the 1911 Census Return for 198 St James Road, in Bermondsey, London, and with her widowed mother, still in Bermondsey, in 1921. She is also recorded in two images of Admission Registers for Bermondsey County Secondary School, entering school on 14 September 1915. One of the images indicates that she left on 14 December 1917, but also records that the Autumn Term of 1915 and the Spring and Summer Terms of 1916 were 'Not Kept'. There seems to be no other evidence of her existence. Do the 'Not Kept' terms indicate that she perhaps had health problems necessitating her to miss school?

Edgar Robert Lovelock (StP-M Tree): Edgar's case is similar to Jessie's above. He was one of those rare Lovelocks (in fact he may be the only one) who was born on the 29th of February - in 1904 in his case. He was baptised on 2 May 1904 and was recorded with his recently widowed mother Harriett (nee Taylor) and brother Herbert John in Kennington, London in 1911. The only other evidence of his existence is an image of an Admission Register for Hatfield Street School, Southwark which rather surprisingly shows that he entered the school on 4 March 1907 when barely 3 years old, having not even reached, by then, the first anniversary of his birthdate.

Mary Ann Lovelock (Ly Line): Mary Ann's case is one with the minimum of evidence to go on. She is the subject of a baptism at Corston, Somerset some time in February 1885, the daughter of George Farr Lovelock and his wife Clara Bodman. The GRO database records the registration of the birth in the Keynsham Registration District. George died in 1888, aged only 22, so very quickly exited the scene. Clara and Mary Ann seem not to have been recorded in the 1891 Census, and indeed there seems to be no other evidence of Mary Ann's existence. Clara, however, married a John James Wilkes in 1893, and the couple were recorded in Gloucester in 1901. They then disappear, although Clara is possibly the one who died in the City of Gloucester Registration District in 1957. Her declared age at death is not totally consistent with earlier records, but since her birth seems not to have been registered who can say which entry is absolutely true?

George and Emma Lovelock: Now here's a case that really baffles. George and Emma appear in the 1921 Census, living at 26 Half Moon Street in the Islington district of London. They are recorded as being married, presumably to each other, and both working for a Chocolate Manufacturer - he as a Warehouse Labourer and she as an Aldmond (sic) Picker. They claimed to have been born in Islington, in 1897 and 1896 respectively. There is no record of George's birth in the GRO data, no record of a marriage, no record of their deaths, and they do not appear in the 1939 Register. A proper 20th Century Mystery!

Walter Lovelock: In a sense Walter belongs twice in this list because as well as being abducted by aliens, he appears to have been delivered by them. Like George and Emma above he appears in the 1921 Census, living alone in Southampton, Hampshire. He claimed to have been born in Witney, Oxfordshire in 1869 but there is no record of the birth in the GRO data, and he does not appear in any other Census, nor in the 1939 Register. There was a birth in the Witney Registration District in 1864, but that was of an unnamed Female that we eventually identified as Ann Lovelock. There is no record of Walter's death of course.

William Lovelock: This curious case may be nothing more than some erratic bureaucracy, on the other hand it may be a baffling mystery. Mark Lovelock and Emily Mancey, who married in Dogmersfield, Hampshire on 22 July 1865 had a son William baptised in Christ Church, Cookham on 27 September 1876. Alas William, for we presume it to be him, was buried 3 days later on 30 September, his age being recorded as 0. The GRO Index does not apparently have any record of William's birth being registered. However, in the April-June quarter of 1877 the birth of a William, mother's maiden name Mancey was registered in the Hartley Wintney Registration District. If this was another son of Mark and Emily's he makes no further appearance in any records. Or had someone realised that an omission had been made in 1876?

Alfred Lovelock: There are three pieces of evidence for Alfred's existence, one rather poignant. On 3 June 1900 he married Alice Rushbrook in St Michael's church, St Pancras in London. In 1901 they were living at 115 Bayham Street in St Pancras, but they do not appear in the 1911 Census nor the 1921 Census. There is no entry for them in the 1939 Register, neither of them seems to be the subject of a GRO death registration, and no children's births were registered. Alfred claimed to be 30 at his marriage, and 33 in 1901, when he named St Pancras as his birthplace, but he does not appear in the GRO data nor in our collection of St Pancras baptisms. We could almost believe they were a fictitious couple, or at least used fictitious names, were it not for a newspaper item that appeared in 'The Loughborough Herald and North Leicestershire Gazette' of 30 October 1890 which reported as follows:
An inquest was held on Friday by Doctor Thomas upon Emily Rushbrook, aged 25, who died from the effects of burns. Apparently there was a quarrel between herself and her sister Alice, in the presence of the latter's sweetheart, a man named Lovelock. Lovelock seemed to be the only one who can give any account of the occurrence, but from his version it would appear that the two girls began a squabble, in the course of which a paraffin lamp was upset, and the dresses of both were set on fire. Emily rushed into the street with the flames shooting two or three feet over her head, and although Police-constable Collins managed to extinguish them she succumbed to her injuries. Alice was also badly burned, but is expected to recover. The jury returned a verdict of 'Accidental Death'.
Alfred and Alice waited 10 years before committing themselves to marriage, but what a terrible experience to haunt the pair of them for the rest of their lives.

William G Lovelock: William is yet another who seems to make but a single appearance in the online documentation. That singular instance was in the 1891 Census, when he was to be found lodging with the Bradwell family at Goring in Oxfordshire. He was recorded as being 19 years old and born in Twyford, Berkshire, but no such birth record appears in the GRO data, and there is no online record of a baptism. To cap it all, and of course thereby qualifying for inclusion in this collection, he does not appear in any other Census, and there is no death registration that fits.

William Lovelock: There have been so many William Lovelocks born since written records began that it is hardly surprising that a number of them find their way into this collection. This particular William was baptized in St Mary, Devizes, Wiltshire on 19 May 1867, the son of William and Ann Maria. We do not know where William the son was born, but there is no record of such a birth in the GRO records for the Devizes Registration District. Nor are there any records of the marriage of a William to an Ann Maria, nor of the death of an Ann Maria. Almost needless to say they have not been identified in any Census Return.

Alfred George Lovelock: One of the items in our 'Lovelocks in Wiltshire' collection records the baptism of Alfred George, the son of Alfred and Jane Lovelock of Shalbourne, on 3 December 1882. However, neither Free BMD nor the GRO's Online Index have any record of the birth. Curiously, both sources do include the birth of an Alfred George in the Basingstoke Registration District in the July- September quarter of 1883. There is no mistake in our transcription for the image of the relevant page from the Baptism Register at Ancestry.co.uk is very clear, as can be seen in the Parish Register extract below.



The 1883 GRO Index entry reveals that the mother's maiden name was Aubery, but there is no Lovelock/Aubery marriage amongst the Free BMD data. As Alfred senior was recorded as a Labourer in the baptism entry of his son, one might expect him to be fairly local in his origins, but his baptism is not included in our Shalbourne data. Furthermore, none of the three of them seem to be identifiable in any Census Return.

Thomas Lovelock: In 1881 the hamlet of Northwood on the Isle of Wight included a Police Station. The Census Return for that year shows that resident in the Station at that time were Police Sergeant John Gibbs, his wife Maria and seven children, together with three lodgers who were all Police Constables. One of those Constables was 32 year old Thomas Lovelock, born in Winchester. Being a Police Constable we might expect Thomas to have given truthful answers when asked for his age and birthplace. And yet, there is no GRO record of his birth, there is no record in the online sources of his baptism, he does not appear in any other Census Return, and the GRO data has no entry for his death.


* Legend:
Bp
H-S Tree
L Line
Ly Line		 = Brimpton Branch
= Hungerford-Shalbourne Tree
= Lieflock Line
= Lyneham Line		 RCD Tree
StP-M Tree
WR2 Tree
= Ropley, Crondall and Dogmersfield Tree
= St Pancras (Main) Tree
= Second Wootton Rivers Tree