RootsChat.Com

Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: chempat on Thursday 19 June 25 21:44 BST (UK)

Title: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: chempat on Thursday 19 June 25 21:44 BST (UK)
This is from the 1911 census and may be a child born with the mother's maiden name.  The Father died on the Titanic and the claim is the parents never married and the mother's fate was unknown.

Any guesses for first or surname, please.

Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: JenB on Thursday 19 June 25 21:56 BST (UK)
The surname looks like Instance. The first name might be Will’m?
Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: Ayashi on Thursday 19 June 25 21:58 BST (UK)
There's a birth for a William INSTANCE 1909 Southampton with corresponding death in 1994- so the surviving child of the three just not at home that night?

(William and Joseph appear to be twins, with a death of a Joseph 1909 in South Stoneham?)

That said, there is a census that could be the above William, living with his father (Mr INSTANCE...), a widower. (Any chance your people didn't marry because she was already married...?)

~~

OK, the father of the above William was Joe Joseph INSTANCE. Perhaps the William on the census wasn't a child of hers, but they looked after William for his widowed father, accidentally put him down on the census when he was at home that night, and crossed him out?

They were neighbours. The DICKSONs lived at no10, INSTANCE at no13.
Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: Ayashi on Thursday 19 June 25 22:33 BST (UK)
On an unrelated note, I was flicking through other neighbours and came across this- I think I feel unwell  :'(

Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: chempat on Thursday 19 June 25 22:42 BST (UK)
Thank-you for that.  She could have been still married to someone else, yes.

If that child does belong to the neighbour I wonder where their surviving child was and why not with them.  Oh, well.
Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: mckha489 on Friday 20 June 25 03:41 BST (UK)
On an unrelated note, I was flicking through other neighbours and came across this- I think I feel unwell  :'(

Imagine sitting there and counting them up.
Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: chempat on Friday 20 June 25 06:43 BST (UK)
Does it read 17 children born and 6 still living - which should make 11 died?
Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: mckha489 on Friday 20 June 25 06:48 BST (UK)
Does it read 17 children born and 6 still living - which should make 11 died?

That’s why I was imagining the counting… I’ve a family similar. Where they clearly lost count.
Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: LizzieL on Friday 20 June 25 07:20 BST (UK)

That said, there is a census that could be the above William, living with his father (Mr INSTANCE...), a widower. (Any chance your people didn't marry because she was already married...?)



The William Instance next door with his father has been added in a different hand. So it does look as if he moved between households, and there was a bit of confusion where he was on census night. Or he was really with Mrs Dickson, but they thought he ought to be listed with his father.
Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: LizzieL on Friday 20 June 25 07:35 BST (UK)
Picture of Oriental Terrace
http://sotonopedia.wikidot.com/page-browse:oriental-terrace

Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: hanes teulu on Friday 20 June 25 08:44 BST (UK)
Portsmouth Evening News, 13 Oct 1936
A separate newspaper report gives his age as 27 (born c.1909)
Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: LizzieL on Friday 20 June 25 08:51 BST (UK)
Orchard place running roughly N-S

https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17.6&lat=50.89829&lon=-1.40097&layers=168&b=MapTilerStr&o=100

I think Oriental terrace is roughly E-W at end of Charlotte Street

added
No sorry, Oriental T is further west, Northern  edge of Hartley University College. You can see it if you overlay with Google satellite hybrid map
Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: Ayashi on Friday 20 June 25 08:59 BST (UK)
Does it read 17 children born and 6 still living - which should make 11 died?

I puzzled over that... I wondered if she counted stillbirths in the "children that have died" column.  :'(

Going back to the original family, is there anything else we can help with? The two questions implied are- their actual children and mother's maiden name?
Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: LizzieL on Friday 20 June 25 09:09 BST (UK)
Thank-you for that.  She could have been still married to someone else, yes.

If that child does belong to the neighbour I wonder where their surviving child was and why not with them.  Oh, well.

What age would the surviving child be? I can see one  called William in 1901 with what looks to be the same Martha. He is 7, so would be about 17 in 1911, old enough to live independently, or be working away from home on census night.
Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: chempat on Friday 20 June 25 12:12 BST (UK)
The William in 1901 could also have died and 2 more children born between 1901 and 1911.

I had hoped that even if that William was registered under a different surname he might have been baptised somewhere with 'correct' parents or just Martha but not getting anywhere.

It does not matter, I was just being side-tracked.

Thank-you
Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: hepburn on Friday 20 June 25 18:07 BST (UK)
I'm thinking this migt be him in 1901 with his wife Martha and son William..Apologies if you know a bout it.
William Dickson
Sex   Male
Age   25
Birth Year (Estimated)   1876
Birthplace   Southampton, Hampshire
Marital Status   Married
Occupation   SHIP'S FIREMAN
Relationship to Head of Household   Head
Event Type   Census
Event Date   31 Mar 1901
Event Place   Southampton St Mary, Hampshire, England, United Kingdom
Title: Re: deleted name on 1911 census
Post by: Pennant on Saturday 21 June 25 12:02 BST (UK)

That said, there is a census that could be the above William, living with his father (Mr INSTANCE...), a widower. (Any chance your people didn't marry because she was already married...?)



The William Instance next door with his father has been added in a different hand. So it does look as if he moved between households, and there was a bit of confusion where he was on census night. Or he was really with Mrs Dickson, but they thought he ought to be listed with his father.

A relative of mine was on two census returns in 1871. He was down as being at his parents' and also with his in-laws (with his wife).