SOWERBY, William 1841 1851 1861

[Sisterjane]

Hi Kiwi

Here is the image...I thought the stroke indicated she was a widow as the enumerator seemed to use strokes as a ditto 

Jane

Ummmmm forgot..cant post images on some boards..

[Sisterjane]

Perhaps someone else could just take a look and give their opinion...

Jane

[Sisterjane]

Hi again

Right.....looking at it again it would seem the enumerator put a stoke against everyone on the page in the "condition" box so maybe he used the stroke to count the number of people on the page and if that is so then he just left Fannys condition box empty 

Jane

[GeoffE]

The census enumerator left the "marital status" box empty for Fanny HODGSON 26.

I think the person who put the check marks all over the place (when collating the data) was the census registrar.

[Kiwi007]

Many thanks everyone for helping to sought that mystery out!

I have another now - the George LOMBY in 1861 may be a typo - I am thinking it might be SOWERBY as a George S was born to Mary SOWERBY ( nee GRANT ) in 1846, Farlam....father would be George Sowerby who died 1854.

I wonder if Mary S shows up in 1861 - I have George b 1846 married in 1881 with children.

Thanks heaps

Kiwi

[Sisterjane]

Hi

Having looked more closely at the 61 entry it does indeed say George Sowerby......you have the 1851 details that Tati posted earlier and by 1871 he was married.

Jane

[Kirkstall]

Hi  Kiwi,

I am a direct decendant of William 1810 through his son James. There is also a connection with Sri Lanka as my Aunt served with the Red Cross in WW2 in what was then Ceylon.

How did you find all the siblings?

Regards

Kirkstall

[Sisterjane]

Hi Kirkstall and welcome to Rootschat

If you go to www.familysearch.org and select the IGI..where it says fathers name type in George Sowerby..Mother Mary(first name only)then select British Isles..country England..county Cumberland then press search and bingo they should all be there

Hope this helps

Jane

[Kirkstall]

Thanks Jane,
Posses more questions as to how and who is connected to whom. Is the following correct and if so why?
George S and Mary Hardy's children: William 1785, Bella or is that Isabella 1784, margaret 1791, Mary 1796, George 1800 and Sarah 1804 when her mother would have been 49! Also if George was born in 1753 and mary Hardy in 1755 they appear to have started the family late. Is Mary H the same Mary S aged 85 in the 1841 census return for Naworth living with son William 1785?

Similarly William S (1785) and Francis Graham's children:- William 1810, Thomas 1812, George 1814, Jane 1817, Mary 1822 or 1826 (above census), Isabella 1828 and Joseph 1829 (also named in above census record)

Sorry to be a pain but I would like to try and get it right and any evidence would be most helpful

Kiwi I think that I also noted the Stockhill name in NZ connected to a Sowerby my grandfathers' brother also married a Stockhill-any connections? but lightening rarely strikes twice.

Regards

Kirkstall