Author Topic: Mysterious Extra Child  (Read 2132 times)

Offline keyboard86

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 17,056
    • View Profile
Re: Mysterious Extra Child
« Reply #9 on: Tuesday 10 April 18 22:03 BST (UK) »
There is a child Florence Elizabeth Cotton born in Woodbridge in 1876 no mmn living with her grandparents, James and Martha in the 1881 census, could this be the 5th child?

Baptism Florence Elizabeth Foster Cotton 7th May 1876 Woodbridge Mother Elizabeth address Theatre Street.
Keyboard86
Pelly/Pelley/Kingsbury/Challis/Nalder/Rochester/Raydenbow

UK Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Girl Guide

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,488
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Mysterious Extra Child
« Reply #10 on: Wednesday 11 April 18 00:02 BST (UK) »
Could this fifth child have been a still born one?  The gaps between children are big enough.

I had a case in a family that I was researching.  The 1911 stated 11 born 8 living 3 died.  I knew about ten children but not the 11th.  However despite intensive searching of the GRO no 11th child could be found.  I came to the conclusion that the parents had included a still born child.

I had to assume that perhaps they misunderstood the question about children on the 1911 census.
Ashford: Somerset, London
England: Devon, London, New Zealand
Holdway: Wiltshire
Hooper: Bristol, Somerset
Knowling: Devon, London
Southcott: Devon, China
Strong: Wiltshire
Watson: Cambridgeshire
White: Bristol
Windo - Gloucestershire, Somerset, Wiltshire

Offline Ayashi

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,926
  • Lost in the DNA rabbit hole
    • View Profile
Re: Mysterious Extra Child
« Reply #11 on: Wednesday 11 April 18 00:13 BST (UK) »
I wondered that, but it doesn't make sense when you consider that they didn't account for it in the "children that have died" column :/

Offline Annette7

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,013
    • View Profile
Re: Mysterious Extra Child
« Reply #12 on: Wednesday 11 April 18 03:30 BST (UK) »
James and Martha Cotton did not have a daughter named Elizabeth, only Mary Elizabeth, and they did indeed live in Theatre Street, Ipswich. 

Having found James Morris on 1881 census in Leeds, since they married very soon after I looked for Mary Elizabeth and eventually found her working in Leeds but listed as Elizabeth Cotton!

So it seems pretty clear that grand-daughter Florence Elizabeth Foster Cotton born in 1876 was indeed a child of their daughter Mary Elizabeth who it appears was calling herself plain Elizabeth between 1876 and 1881.

Perhaps Mary Elizabeth insisted this child was counted too.   In 1891 said daughter Florence was working as a servant in Yorkshire too, at Ilkley, but I can't seem to see any further trace of her after 1891.

Annette
Scopes (One-Name Study - Worldwide)
Suffolk - Grist, Knights, Bullenthorpe, Watcham
Scotland - Spence, Horne, Cowan, Moffat
London -  Monk

Don't walk behind me, I may not lead.   Don't walk in front of me, I may not follow.   Just walk beside me and be my friend.

Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Offline Gan Yam

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 641
  • Going Home - exploring my past
    • View Profile
Re: Mysterious Extra Child
« Reply #13 on: Wednesday 11 April 18 10:43 BST (UK) »


  In 1891 said daughter Florence was working as a servant in Yorkshire too, at Ilkley, but I can't seem to see any further trace of her after 1891.


There is a Florence E Cotterill born Woodbridge 1875 on the 1901 census living in Hackney, husband George . There is a marriage between George Cotterill and Florence MORRIS. There doesn't appear to be a Florence Morris born in Woodbridge - could be that Florence has taken on  James' name?
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Galium

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,135
    • View Profile
Re: Mysterious Extra Child
« Reply #14 on: Wednesday 11 April 18 11:17 BST (UK) »
Marriage at St Mary, Stanwell, Middlesex

20 June 1900
George William Cotterill bachelor aged 24  shop assistant of Stanwell
s/o John Cotterill
Florence Elizabeth Morris spinster aged 24 of Stanwell
d/o James Morris   policeman

UK Census info. Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline keyboard86

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 17,056
    • View Profile
Re: Mysterious Extra Child
« Reply #15 on: Wednesday 11 April 18 12:42 BST (UK) »
Hi looking good, the couple had one daughter Mary Florence Cotterell March qtr 1901 Hackney 1b 506 mmn Morris, Florence E Cotterell died Sept qtr 1947 Dartford 5b 336 aged 71
Mary Florence Cotterell was buried December 1952 St Paulinus, Crayford, Kent aged 51 address 8, Edendale Road.
Florence Elizabeth Cotterell was also buried 24th September 1947 St Paulinus aged 71, address 8, Edendale Road, Crayford
The Florence Elizabeth F Cotton was registered June qtr 1876 Woodbridge, the Florence E Cotterell in 1939 Crayford was born 12th March 1876
Keyboard86
Pelly/Pelley/Kingsbury/Challis/Nalder/Rochester/Raydenbow

UK Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline oots

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 6
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Mysterious Extra Child
« Reply #16 on: Wednesday 11 April 18 13:13 BST (UK) »
I had a case in a family that I was researching.  The 1911 stated 11 born 8 living 3 died.  I knew about ten children but not the 11th.  However despite intensive searching of the GRO no 11th child could be found.  I came to the conclusion that the parents had included a still born child.
it is very interesting

Offline Cotton Reel

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 19
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Mysterious Extra Child
« Reply #17 on: Wednesday 11 April 18 20:53 BST (UK) »

Many many thanks to all who have searched the various records for me.

   I can see from the info you found that the 5th child must be Mary's illegitimate daughter. If they had read the census instructions thoroughly - I probably would never have known of her existence.
 
      Thank you one and all for your time.  :)