RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: PeteBrooks on Friday 27 January 17 15:22 GMT (UK)
-
Is it possible for whole families to live under the radar, with no apparent birth or death records?
My ancestor, Alfred Love, married Sarah Ann Scott in 1875. According to the marriage certificate his father (deceased) was also called Alfred.
Alfred junior appears in the 1881, 1891 and 1901 census records, and I have his death certificate dated 26th January 1910.
I can find absolutely no records appertaining to the Love family before 1875.
I have searched BMD's from all over the country, even though census records show his birthplace being Nottingham, to no avail. I'm beginning to believe that Alfred's family managed to leave no traces at all prior to 1875. Is that possible?
Pete
-
Now that sounds like a challenge ;D
What is his approx. birth year/birth place from census please?
He may have been illegitimate and made up a fathers name.
-
On the 1881 census he is 26. He seems to be married to Eliza, but I think this is a mistake and Sarah has been confused with Eliza, the daughter. The older Eliza is the same as as Sarah Ann.
On the 1891 census he is 38 and Sarah is 37
On the 1901 census he is 45!! and Sarah is 44!
Both Alfred and Sarah appear to have been illiterate as the marriage certificate just bears both their marks.
Never though about the illigitimatacy angle. That's interesting!
Pete
-
Sorry, I meant to say Eliza and Sarah are the same age.
He was born in Nottingham, Nottingham - Sneinton Parish.
-
Thank you I see him now.
On the marriage certificate what are the names of the two witnesses?
If by chance one of them was called Love they were likely a relative and might help us.
Not seeing a birth for him as you say. It could be his mother was unmarried and he was registered under her name then she married a Mr Love, several possibilities.
His birthplace 1891 is Sneinton Purich - not sure where that is! Could check the registration district for an Alfred and see if one pops up.
-
Or his father may have changed name for other reasons?
It seems unlikely that this surname would have been mis-spelt in earlier censuses, but it's always a possibility - Luff, for example, or Lough. The existence of a national census was no guarantee that all citizens were recorded, or that all records were complete, or that they all survived.
-
His birthplace 1891 is Sneinton Purich
I'd venture 'Parish' ...... :P
-
Yes, Sneinton was a rather "rough" area of Nottingham at that time! The witnesses on the marriage certificate are William and Martha Warsop.
-
Well ventured!
Looking for Love families from that parish 1861 has this
James Love 35
Betsy 34
William 12
Elizah 10
Emma 7
James 1
just in case our Alfred is an off shoot of this family
-
The witnesses on the marriage certificate are William and Martha Warsop.
Aha William Warsop marries Martha Love
Dec 1864 Nottingham
-
Births Mar 1854
Love William Radford 7b 162
Births Jun 1855
LOVE William Radford 7b 165
Births Jun 1856
Warsop Alfred Radford 7b 1[35]2
WARSOP Alfred Radford 7b 182
I dont have Census access - but would help to see where Alfred Warsop is in 1861 ....
Nope, false alarm !
Name: Mother's Maiden Surname:
WARSOP, ALFRED CLARKE
GRO Reference: 1856 J Quarter in RADFORD Volume 07B Page 182
-
That's really interesting!
I can't keep up! I've got to go and pick up my granddaughter now. I expect you to have completed the whole family tree before I get back!!!!
-
And I have to go cook dinner (much rather be doing this) but Martha Love seems a bit of a mystery too.
No obvious hits for her before she marries and birth supposedly 1847 Notts.
Maybe there was a change of name as Andrew suggested.
-
I hunted two different elusive people for ages, when I finally cornered them:
* Had gone under a different surname, mum and child, for 2 censuses, apparently Mum "married" another ..... took ages to track that one down, had birth record, and marriage data, but in between???? Zilch!
* Mum and son hitched up with another man, ( apparently mislaid real Dad) and ALL THREE , Mum, son and Mum's " fancy man" (I love that term!) adopted that rare surname "Smith" as an alias from shortly after son't birth until Man died, and was buried under his real name .... and younger bro/half bro of son resumed real family name, which was fortunate, for original son also reclaimed his real family name! That took 6 years to track out.
-So don't give up! The chances are they'll be out there somewhere - and if anyone can fish them all out from under that radar, someone on here WILL manage it!
-
Births Mar 1854
Love William Radford 7b 162
Births Jun 1855
LOVE William Radford 7b 165
Births Jun 1856
Warsop Alfred Radford 7b 1[35]2
WARSOP Alfred Radford 7b 182
I dont have Census access - but would help to see where Alfred Warsop is in 1861 ....
Don't know if I'm allowed to add this from the GRO, but Elijah (removed from post?) has mother's maiden name Allen, both Williams are illegitimate, and Alfred Warsop has MMN Clarke
-
I was just editting in the MMN of Clarke as you posted !
-
what was wrong with Elijah then?
Chris (wishes he had an Elijah)
-
prob too early in the decade - feel free to reinstate !
-
These are just a few ideas. May have no relevance but just in case!!
In 1881 the neighbours of Alfred Love and his family were as below with a Mary Ann Love
Christopher Hefford 65 Nottingham Framework Knitter
Mary Ann Love 67 Inmate? -Laundress Birthplace Not Known
Sarah Priestley 14 Granddaughter
Benjamin Priestley 8 Grandson
At the moment I can't see Mary Ann Love pre 1881. Tracing Christopher Hefford's family back I think in 1871 he is living in Snenton, Nottingham and has a son Alfred of the same age as Alfred Love in 1881
Christopher Hefford 55 Silk ?? Maker Nottingham
Mary Hefford 55 Nottingham
Charles Hefford 18 Nottingham
Alfred Hefford 15 Nottingham
And in 1861 without Christopher I think his family are transcribed as Hebbord and living in Nottingham All children born Nottingham and include a child Martha - the same age at the Martha Love who married William Warsop
Mary Ann Hebbord 44 Silk Worker b Nottingham
Martha Hebbord 16
Emma Hebbord 11
Charles Hebbord 8
Alfred Hebbord 6
Elizabeth Rogers 19 Boarder
Harriet Jackson 37 Boarder
Harriet Jackson 13 Boarder
Could Alfred Love have been the child of neighbour Mary Ann Love (1881) and is it a pure coincidence that Alfred was living next door to Christopher Hefford in 1881. I can't find Alfred Hefford post 1871?? :-\
-
Alfred Hefford birth Sep 1855 Nottingham has a mothers maiden name Dodd
Martha Hefford birth Jun 1846 Nottingham has a mothers maiden name Dodd
As do Emma and Charles.
-
Mary Ann Dodd baptised 26 December 1813, St Mary, Nottingham, father William mother Ann (Familysearch)
Mary Ann Dodd married 18 January 1831, Radford Nottingham – husband David Love
-
Oh the plot doth thicken - so David Love was the father or did he pass away and Christopher Hefford was the father or ??? am getting confused now.
-
Not sure?
LOVE, DAVID 40
GRO Reference: 1842 M Quarter in BATH Volume 11 Page 44
LOVE, DAVID 29
GRO Reference: 1842 S Quarter in WEST BROMWICH Volume 18 Page 385
Edited to add that David Love possibly died but Mary Ann and Christopher didn't marry but are the parents of Alfred, but why would Alfred use the surname Love?
Edited again as now I don't think David Love did die but married again bigamously?
-
This gets even more complicated.
The death registrations I posted earlier are most likely not for David Love who married Mary Ann Dodd, I don’t think he died which is why Mary Ann Love and Christopher Hefford didn’t marry – she wasn’t free to marry.
There is a death registration in Nottingham for David Love in 1897 aged 79 which means born about 1817/1818, but his age may not have been correct. I have found a David Love on several trees on Ancestry using this death ref and he has a wife Margaret who was born in Ireland and they appear on the 1861, 1871 and 1881 Census living in Liverpool and Everton, but all trees have his date of birth as about 1813 (same year as Mary Ann Dodd). None of the trees show a marriage between David and Margaret, and none show her surname.
The year of birth comes from the Census where he is shown as a Chelsea Pensioner. His discharge papers are on Ancestry. He joined the 89th Regiment of Foot as a Private (reg no. 581) at Leicester on 4 July 1831, age 18, some six months after his marriage to Mary Ann, and served in the regiment for twenty years 327 days having spent 5 years 6 months in the West Indies and 5 years 10 months in North America. He was discharged at Cork Barracks on 13 May 1853.
1861 -RG 9; Piece: 2654; Folio: 135A; Page: 42
126 Hopwood Street, Liverpool
David Love, Head, Mar, 47, Chelsea Pensioner, Notts Nottingham
Margaret Love, Wife, Mar, 32, Ireland
John Love, Son, 13, Scholar, Ireland
Elizabeth Love, Daur, 7, Lancashire Lpool
Phillip Love, Son, 6, Cumberland Workington (MMN = Kennedy)
David Love, Son, 4, Cumberland Workington
William Love, Son, 2, Cumberland Workington
1871 - RG10; Piece: 3814; Folio: 98; Page: 22
142 Elias Street, Everton
David Love Head, Mar, 58 Bricklayer’s Labourer, Nottinghamshire
Margaret Love, Wife, Mar, 42, Ireland
Philip Love, Son, 15, Sailor Boy, Workington Cumberland
David Love, Son, 13, Scholar, Workington Cumberland
Mary E Love, Daur, 11 Scholar, Liverpool Lancashire
James W Love, Son, 9, Scholar, Liverpool Lancashire (MMN = Kennedy)
1881 - RG11; Piece: 3660; Folio: 76; Page: 22
142 Elias Street, Everton
David Love Head, Mar, 68, Army Pensioner, Nottingham
Margaret Love, Wife, Mar, 52, Ireland
James Love, Son, 18, Cotton Mill Labourer, Liverpool
Margaret Sullivan, Gr Daughter, 9, Scholar, Liverpool
Charles and Margaret Teasdale - Lodgers
I have checked some of the birth registrations for the children of David and Margaret and her maiden name is Kennedy.
David Love, age 36, son of David Love married Margaret Kennedy, age 23, daughter of Philip Kennedy on the Isle of Man on 20 Aug 1849. From Familysearch.
-
Oh -it does get complicated
Interesting that one of Christopher and Mary's early children was I think registered as Love - from GRO index
ELIZA LOVE Mother's maiden name DODD
1838 March Quarter NOTTINGHAM Vol 15 Page 561
Looks like youngest child Charles Hefford also used the surname Love by 1881 https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:Q27K-VMTP
-
Wow! Thanks everone for all of this very interesting information. You must have spent hours researching on my behalf!
I think I'm now going to "mind-map" it all to see try to get it straight in my mind, and to see if other connections suggest themselves.
Thank you again for your efforts. Not only do I have loads more information, but being a beginner you've shown me research ideas which will no doubt be very useful in future.
Dare I say it ..... if you have any more ideas - keep them coming!
Pete
-
Bet you didn't expect so much intrigue from your initial question Pete ;D
It's been very interesting, if you have any other questions you know where to come!
-
To answer your original question - yes, a family could go under the radar. A lot of births weren't registered, and some households were missed from the census.
However, having read everyone's suggestions, it looks like Alfred Love could have been known as Alfred Hefford in earlier years. This is definitely worth pursuing. But you might never find a reason for the change of name.
Suggestion - look for military records for Alfred. A relative of mine changed his surname to his mother's maiden name, and this was documented in a series of letters attached to his army records.
-
Thanks Claire,
It seems to me that it wouldn't be that unusual to find an ancestor missing from a particular set of records.
Would I be right in thinking that death records are the most reliable? I would imagine that everyone had to obtain a death certificate before a body could be buried.
Or was that not the case either?
Pete
PS. Can I add how friendly and patient everyone has been. This has certainly not been the case on another forum to which I've posed questions. Definitely a "pat on the head and don't be silly" vibe on there!
-
Yes - ancestors can be missed of records, but they can also be mistranscribed.
Sadly the age of a person on death records is only as good as the knowledge of the person who registered their death. My own grandmother was rather creative with her age and took years of her age each time she married :)
Re death certs I have had elderly relatives disappear in 1840/1850's with no sign of a death cert and I have checked all the possible certificates and burial records. An earlier thread on missing death certs may be of interest http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=65806.0
Thanks for your kind comments. We all love a puzzle. However most are not as intriguing as your family!
Kay
-
Would I be right in thinking that death records are the most reliable? I would imagine that everyone had to obtain a death certificate before a body could be buried.
In theory, yes, but I've found a couple of relatives who were definitely buried but there's no sign of them in the death index.
Here's an interesting article about registration of births and deaths - it explains why some births were not registered: http://www.sog.org.uk/learn/help-getting-started-with-genealogy/guide-three (http://www.sog.org.uk/learn/help-getting-started-with-genealogy/guide-three)
-
Just found the article below detailing Mary Ann's fate, although her surname has a typo. It was in the Nottingham Evening Post on 8 November 1881.
-
Thanks for that Gail.
It seems that the Hefford children, Alfred, Martha and Charles disappear off the face of the earth after the 1871 census so I suppose it's possible that they all changed their name to Love.
That would give me the Martha Love/William Warsop marriage, a link to the Alfred Love/Sarah Scott marriage at which Martha is a witness, and the fact that there is a Charles Love on the 1881 census with the same age that Charles Hefford would be but no Charles Hefford.
But why do they change their name when their mother (?) Mary is still alive, and before Mary Ann Love appears in 1881?
Interestingly Mary Ann Love appears to be an "inmate" and I do know that the County Asylum was virtually next door to Front Row, the address on the 1881 census.
Good job it's demolished. I think I'm rapidly heading there!
I have a sort of mind map/flow chart on excel but it's not allowing me to attach it. Shame.
Thanks again for the article.
Pete
-
Converted it to pdf if anyone is interested in having a look