Missing 1891 Census

[Sisterjane]

Just to clarify Matt

I can see a marriage of Walter Willian Cutler in Prestwich in 1889..is he the correct one ?

There are 2 other women on the page
Annie Burgess
Jane Meek

It would seem there is a lady missing is she your Mary..if so whats her maiden name

Jane

[matt94]

No I have his marriage Certificate:

20 April 1889
Walter William Cutler, 29, Bachelor, chairmaker, 3 Legh Place, Stockport Road, father: Reuben Cutler, Chairmaker
Mary Ann Bennell, 22, Spinster, Domestic Servant, 336 Queens Rd, Cheetham, father: Edmund Bennell, chairmaker

Sorry earlier i meant 1889, not 1887.

Matt.

[Pels.]

Going back to the earlier post from East London .. I have to say I think this was a very good find, although I called it a long shot, we haven't been able to come up with anything better .. ? 

The only differences are the marital status and the surname .. ?







Place of birth, registration district, occupation etc. are correct in comparison to the 1901 .. ?

[matt94]

Yes that is a close match

But I am really not sure :S

I know that he definitely married 1889 to Mary Ann Bennell, and had children
Mary
Reuben
Florence
William
Emily (my gt. grandmother)
Walter Wm
Frederick.

I dont think that is him, somehow.

But what else is there?
Outbound passenger lists? >> I will check those now

Matt

[matt94]

Just checked them - no Walters, Williams, or Walter williams travelling with a Mary anywhere... and only a few walters from after 1900.

Just wondering... how could he have even been omitted?

Matt

[Stone931]

If I can comment please?

the 1881 census can be searched on occupation: the list of Chairmakers includes (besides Mr Cutler), a William Sawyer who is in Lancs, Ancoats, and in 1891 is married elsewhere in Lancs.

The names in 1881 dont look like any could be maniplated to match what has been found in 1891 so this is your only candidate. Unless Cutler has used totally different birthplace information and his wife too.

The fact that they cant be found as a couple or seperatly does however suggest they were missed, or are lodgers etc not linked by the indexing and not using their familiar life data?


Just a thought from a newby - thank you for listening.

 

[Stone931]

I have mused over this, and I think the very pertinant question is "Just who is the man on the 1891 census"

 

[Pels.]

We are all being extremely rude ignoring you, I am so very sorry .. firstly welcome to RootsChat Stone931 .. !! 

I think you have just asked a very pertinent question .. ?

I've searched .. and I think so has Mum, neither of us have found a Walter McClorey anywhere on the census returns .. let alone one born in Buckinghamshire .. ?

Just checked FreeBMD, not one there either .. he just seems to have popped up out of the blue .. ?

[Stone931]

Hello again Pels.

No need to apologise, most forums are like this, so many members, some stay some go!

Yes, I had covered the same ground which leads me to believe he can only be the man sought.

In fact, with a bit of eye-screwing I think the name is Walter W. something. Which reinforces the opinion?

The fact he is shown as 'single' is neither here nor there census-wise, he may not have communicated the facts to the Household Head?

The lad who is aking the question; it is good to see people starting so young, I wish I had asked more questions, but they have all gone donkeys years ago.

I'm over 80 you know and loving this way to use my PC.

God has been kind