1939 Register

[Boongie Pam]

Hi All,

Has anyone used the 1939 register and learnt new things?

I have a suspected bigamy in a relatively speaking (pun) close relative (Grt Grandfather).  The 1921 census will solve the problem it's not a common name and he will be in one of two places or there is miraculously 2 people with the same name, age and occupation. I can see the 2 households in the 1939 register and I THINK but haven't paid to confirm that he is absent from the 1st wife's household.

It is quite pricey though!  I don't have anyone else to look up as most of my family are in Scotland at this time.

What are your thoughts on the info you get from the register?

P

[Rosinish]

With the details you have on 1st wife you can do another search for him separately same address I think?

Annie

[chris_49]

I've learnt a lot, and not just about the bewildering variety of occupations. Many marriages I didn't know about (or didn't know the surname). One family I thought had completed their family by 1902 had two more after 1911.

Then there are new mysteries. I don't understand why my mother - single, 25 and at home, in a working-class family, just had a blank space for occupation (unemployed I could understand). Many people are missing (not just the obvious like servicemen) but surely they'd have wanted a ration book? Probably mistranscribed. 

[Boongie Pam]

With the details you have on 1st wife you can do another search for him separately same address I think?

Annie

That's what I have done, but there is a locked individual which could be interesting. 

Essentially there are 3 individuals in the 1st wife's house - the 1st wife, the daughter and a locked individual.  In the 2nd wife's house (if she is the 2nd) there is the 2nd wife, her husband the man in question and 2 locked individuals which are likely to be my nan and one of her brothers).

I doubt the locked individual with wife 1 is a man born in 1875 when the same name, age shows up in the result of wife 2.  What would be interesting is if wife 1 had any children post 1911 as the 2nd marriage happened in 1915. I CAN'T WAIT  UNTIL 2021!!! 

I've learnt a lot, and not just about the bewildering variety of occupations. Many marriages I didn't know about (or didn't know the surname). One family I thought had completed their family by 1902 had two more after 1911.

Then there are new mysteries. I don't understand why my mother - single, 25 and at home, in a working-class family, just had a blank space for occupation (unemployed I could understand). Many people are missing (not just the obvious like servicemen) but surely they'd have wanted a ration book? Probably mistranscribed. 

I'd definitely be coughing up for that  I only have 2 families that would show up - I probably will cough up and spend!

[cuffie81]

Have you checked the birth date for the 2 people you've found? It is possible using the free search, albeit a bit tedious. Enter the exact birth year and then work through the months until you get a match, and then do the same for the days.

That said, if he is a bigamist I doubt if he'd have any scruples about fibbing about his birth date.


As for learning things from the register, I've found it quite useful in tracing family members and helping confirm marriages. And the occasional oddity, such as men having their surname amended. I have found quite a few instances of birth dates being slightly off though (eg the day and month correct but the year incorrect), so you have to be bit wary of the dates.

[panda40]

I found my great grandmother hop picking with her sister in law. Great piece of social history and it answered the question why she was not with her husband in 1939.
Regards panda

[Boongie Pam]

Have you checked the birth date for the 2 people you've found? It is possible using the free search, albeit a bit tedious. Enter the exact birth year and then work through the months until you get a match, and then do the same for the days.

That said, if he is a bigamist I doubt if he'd have any scruples about fibbing about his birth date.

Do you mean on the 1939 register? I haven't paid to see the record yet.  He does only appear once though, so maybe that is the reason to pay if he gives 9th Jan then I know he is the man I thought he was.
...............................
Ok so I bought credits(in 2nd wife's house)  his birthdate states 16th Jan 1875, where as the parish record I think belongs to him is the 9th Jan though it isn't recorded until 14th Oct 1877, noting his birth date as 9th Jan 1875. So 7 days out.  It also says he is a journeyman sailor instead of journeyman tailor - transcription error I suspect? Gah not concrete enough!

[Rosinish]

It also says he is a journeyman sailor instead of journeyman tailor - transcription error I suspect? Gah not concrete enough!

Tailor & Sailor are often mixed up on the transcriptions.

Annie

[Boongie Pam]

It also says he is a journeyman sailor instead of journeyman tailor - transcription error I suspect? Gah not concrete enough!

Tailor & Sailor are often mixed up on the transcriptions.

Annie

Aye, I'm quite confident "journeyman" sailor isn't even a thing 

If only the dob was the same! I opened the 1st wife's household as well and there is no husband there but it states "married". Looks like I'll have to wait until 2021 to be totally sure! If my grt grandmother's husband was born in Stoke sub Hamdon then it is a certainty (as far as one can be certain!).