1851, 1861 and 1871 - Pitt COMPLETED

[Ewan]

If I do get desperate that is what I could do, don't think this one is so desperate though.  I'll wait and see what turns up ...... if anything.
Ewan 

[lizdb]

Hi !! Its me!

Not much success on this one yet, only one finding whichI think only muddys the waters (Oh no, I can hear you all sigh)

There are two Ada Pitts around born in 1870 ish
1871
RG10 264 31 59
54 Outram? Street Islington
Joseph 35 Washerwoman (well, thats what it looks like) bn Clerkenwell
Sarah wife 35 bn Lurgershall Wiltshire
Sarah 2 bn Islington
Ada 1 bn Islington

I did wonder for a mo if the enumerator got very muddled and jotted down Shelah bn Wiltshire, and then misread it as Sarah and enterred it up as wife, ............ who knows!

but I guess they are a red herring (I know I am good at those, but experience shows that you have to look at every lead, and just sometimes something really odd comes up trumps!)

[lizdb]

there is something not tying up with Shelah (crumbs, I havent even started looking at Luke yet....)

In 1861 he is 34, wife Ann 23, little girl Eliza age 3

this fits in with marriage:

1856 Kensington
Shelah Pitts also on page Ann Robinson

In 1881 he is 54, fine, but wife Annie is only 30, and children are aged 10,8, and 1. So this must be a different wife! Well, I suppose the age could be wrong and she is really 43 and baby Harriett was one of those little late surprises.
 

[carol8353]

Both Ann's are born Hammersmith and there isn't a second marriage on Free BMD,so either they didn't actually marry or she IS the first wife but with the age down incorrectly.

Once they'd moved up from Wilts ,they never moved far from Hammersmith,so they ought to be around somewhere,but sadly they're not 

Carol

PS I think that her age actually says 38-whaddya think Liz?

[lizdb]

You're right, Carol, 38 it is!

So she's only lost about 4 years (what is her secret...!)

OK - only one wife

But still cant find him, and I must go now. Looked for Luke too, but no luck. Is the 1871 finding for him one that says born Hammersmith, with a brother ALfred and Mum with a surnam thatis irreadable? or have I not found the right one?

Oooh Ewan - you do get 'em dont you?

[carol8353]

Mum with a surnam that is irreadable? or have I not found the right one?

Oooh Ewan - you do get 'em dont you?

Mum is Ann Toy married to Thomas.

I almost know more about Ewan's tree than I do my own 

[lizdb]

how many of these Pitts are there?

That one in 1871 was the one I was looking at. So Mum is Ann Toy.
That Luke gives his p-o-b as Hammersmith.
He has brother Alfred age 35 and sister Fanny age 40

Anyway, I have just found these in 1861, you may already have them:

RG9 26 2 18

Plantation Place Hammersmith

At number 4 we have:

Martha Lay widow
Louisa Lay 8
Emily Lay 6
George Lay 4
Fanny Pitt sister 30
Louisa Pitt dtr 11    all bn Hammersmith

and at Number 9 we have:

Thomas Toy 49
Ann Toy  54
Ann Pitt dtr-in-law  18
Abel Pitt son-in-law 36

SO - looks like Martha was also a Pitt before she married Lay.  Looks like the Fanny that is with Luke in 1871 is here with sister Martha in 1861. And looks like there is an Ann and an Abel around too, presumably actually step children.
But no Luke there in 1861 with them.

[carol8353]

Liz,

See also http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=288435.0

He has a lot of the family in various censuses already 

Carol

[lizdb]

Just read it - see my name taken in vain!!!!

Also just found the family myself in 1851 and see there are several more around - Nathaniel etc that I hadnt seen before.