1
Lanarkshire / Re: Brick wall
« on: Sunday 16 March 25 08:23 GMT (UK) »
Thank you so much, you have given me lots to look into, hopefully one of these days I’ll find the illusive Geo
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
Lanarkshire / Re: Brick wall
« on: Saturday 15 March 25 22:21 GMT (UK) »
Sorry I was using my phone and I seem to be getting into a bit of a muddle, as I said it must be an age thing 
3
Lanarkshire / Re: Brick wall
« on: Saturday 15 March 25 22:14 GMT (UK) »Possible death for the father Adam Williamson in 1859, Bridgeton, age 66.
4
Lanarkshire / Re: Brick wall
« on: Saturday 15 March 25 22:08 GMT (UK) »Possible death for the father Adam
Williamson in 1859, Bridgeton, age 66.
Yes that was Adam dc 1859 at 69 Main st, Bridgeton, spouse Rachel Stevenson
Spouse should be Barbara Burton.
Mother? - Rachel Stevenson?
Ops, my mistake, think it might be an age thing
5
Lanarkshire / Re: Brick wall
« on: Saturday 15 March 25 16:08 GMT (UK) »Possible death for the father Adam Williamson in 1859, Bridgeton, age 66.
Yes that was Adam dc 1859 at 69 Main st, Bridgeton, spouse Rachel Stevenson
6
Lanarkshire / Re: Brick wall
« on: Saturday 15 March 25 12:57 GMT (UK) »The 3 illegitimate children of Jane Peel and George Williamson born between 1856 and 1860 –
What street address is shown on their birth certificates?
I don't have their birth cert, William was 1 1/2 yr when he died in 1861 at 41 Ozwald st
I have John Peel Williamson BC 1856 illegitimate mother Jane Peel, can't make out the address,
Between prison and everything else I think they are just all broken people and not a true family
7
Lanarkshire / Re: Brick wall
« on: Friday 14 March 25 13:41 GMT (UK) »Would he be a weaver at 10?
If he was 20 in 1841 then he wouldn't be my Geo, all the other info I have even though its not a lot show him born around 1830/31
8
Lanarkshire / Re: Brick wall
« on: Friday 14 March 25 13:00 GMT (UK) »Re hand writing on census…..
George could be read as 10 or 20. 10 makes sense in the ordering of the ages, but it looks like 20 because of the loop at the start/ top. It is necessary to see more of the page to see how the scribe forms the number 1. Is it written elsewhere with a bit of a loop at the top?
yes I agree, there's not another 1 like that although some a bit of a scribble
9
Lanarkshire / Re: Brick wall
« on: Friday 14 March 25 11:01 GMT (UK) »
Jane just her mark X on the mar.