LOUISA JANE MORRIS b. 1876 Bridnorth in Lancaster in 1891

[Lesleyperry]

1891

(Fanny) Louisa MORRIS b. 1876, 15 Bridnorth and Alice E. MORRIS b. 1874, 17, Bridnorth appear to be sisters on the 1891.  Both are servants in Chorlton/Didsbury, Manchester - mmn DAYUS.

1901

The issue I have is that when I get to the 1901 census Alice ELLIS b. 1874 Wolverhampton (who I know is my Alice Edith ELLIS (nee MORRIS) because I recognize the family) has a birth place as  Wolverhampton which does not correspond to the 1891 census.

Originally, I want to see what (Fanny) Louisa had as her birth place on the 1901 and it is something else again (have to double check it - about 15 miles from Bridnorth). 

So I just can't get any consistency confirming the 1891 Alice E. MORRIS in Didsbury, mmn DAYUS and the 1901 Alice (E.) ELLIS (nee MORRIS) in Stockport are the same person.

Thanks again,

Lesley

[wilcoxon]

Is Alice still alive in 1939, what was her husbands name.

[Lesleyperry]

Re: Alice E. ELLIS nee MORRIS b. 1874 Wolverhampton 1901 census

Alice E. ELLIS nee MORRIS, b. 1874 died in 1931, age 58.  Her husband George W. ELLIS b. 1872 Leeds, died in around 1938. 

Thanks,

Lesley

[wilcoxon]

They had a civil marriage in Salford in 1898, have you got the certificate for fathers name and witnesses
All children have mmn Morris,  but the fact that this one was born in Wolverhampton in 1901 and 1911 is a bit of a problem.

Is this your ancestor.

[Lesleyperry]

Yes, my ancestor Alice (Edith) ELLIS (MORRIS) b. 1874 Wolverhampton 1901 - I do have the physicial marriage certificate 1898 - George W. ELLIS is correct - Block Cutter - his father's name and occupation correct - I can see the ELLIS family all through the 19th century.

Witnesses: Catherine ROBERTS and a J. N. SEACK/SLACK not very readable.  Neither name has ever rung a bell.

My relative was known as Alice Edith ELLIS throughout the family and this confirms with her death certificate (which I have also). 

1891 Fanny Louisa EDWARDS nee MORRIS, Thomas SAUNDERS widow, mmn DAYUS, servant (Alice E. MORRIS 1891, servant, sisters most likely) listed her father as Thomas MORRIS, gardener on the later (re)marriage George EDWARDS/SAUNDERS 1913

1898 marriage certificate my relative Alice Edith ELLIS puts her name as Edith ELLIS and father as Fredrick MORRIS, gardener (domestic), deceased.

Two discrepancies on my relative's (Alice) Edith ELLIS nee MORRIS 1898 Salford marriage certificate to consider compared with the 1891 Alice E. MORRIS mmn DAYUS, servant.

1.This Alice's father (Alice E. MORRIS mmn DAYUS on the 1891, servant) clearly has Thomas MORRIS - not Frederick (throughout all the records I'm getting at).

2. Alice Edith ELLIS nee MORRIS (my relative) used only "Edith" on her 1898 marriage certificate - I consider that minor - the bigger issue is the Frederick.

1891 Alice E. MORRIS, EDWARDS, SAUNDERS mmn DAYUS along with (sister) 1891 Alice E. DAYUS 1881 (later MORRIS 1891) were two of 8 - one of the siblings was Frederick MORRIS - siblings did not seem to be in the Manchester area (down near Bridgnorth - parents moved around).  Have not researched extensively those 6 siblings.

The DNA which my brother had my mom just do shows a 99.9% or so match with the 1891 Alice E. MORRIS, EDWARDS, SAUNDERS, mmn DAYUS (via one of those 6 siblings - Beatrice MORRIS)

Just threw out the names/places, coming up on this thread, to my mom, to see if anything rings a bell also.

Again, all this is to confirm the Alice E. MORRIS mmn DAYUS 1891 is the same person as the Alice ELLIS on the 1901 (who I know is mine 1901).

Thanks again.

Lesley

[wilcoxon]

It is a tricky one.
 I can see in 1901 that Thomas Morris is an ordinary agricultural labourer.
 in 1911 he is a farm labourer.
To say he was a gardener was gilding the lily a bit.
There doesn`t seem to be a Frederick Morris a gardener anywhere that fits.
 

[Lesleyperry]

Re: Frederick MORRIS, gardener, 1898 marriage certificate

Thank you for your reply.  I have never been able to find a Frederick MORRIS, gardener. 

I think my relative Alice Edith ELLIS (MORRIS) 1901 on her 1898 marriage certificate made a mistake with the name Frederick.

If my relative Alice ELLIS 1901 is the same person as the 1891 Alice E. MORRIS, mmn DAYUS then she should have put Thomas MORRIS - Frederick MORRIS is a brother - so my relative Alice shoud not have put Frederick.

I come to this conclusion because Alice E. MORRIS, mmn DAYUS 1891 - seems to have sister (Fanny) Louisa MORRIS mmn DAYUS 1891. Fanny Louisa put Thomas MORRIS, gardener on her (re)marriage EDWARDS 1913.

That's as close as I can get to any confirmation that my relative Alice (E.) ELLIS (MORRIS), Stockport 1901 is the Alice E. MORRIS 1898, Didsbury servant.

Same general location for the 1901 Alice (E.) and 1891 Alice E., same name (with initial for the 1891 Alice but other verification of that initial for the 1901 Alice) and a high DNA match - but father's names Frederick and Thomas are a mismatch. 

Yes, the gardener does seem a stretch, but at least there is some consistency - these people were extremely poor and moved around quite a bit. Maybe the dad (whatever his first name) worked on an allotment too.

Not sure if that is enough.  Checking with my mom for names (again) also. 

Thanks again.

Lesley

[Maiden Stone]

It is a tricky one.
 I can see in 1901 that Thomas Morris is an ordinary agricultural labourer.
 in 1911 he is a farm labourer.
To say he was a gardener was gilding the lily a bit.
There doesn`t seem to be a Frederick Morris a gardener anywhere that fits.

Gardening may have been a job they did when they couldn't be a farm labourer for some reason. Some farming jobs were seasonal. There may have been less demand for labourers at times. Farming became increasingly mechanised from 19th century so there were fewer jobs for ag. labs. Farmers died or retired, farms were sold or tenancies given up, workers let go. Land near expanding towns and cities might be sold for building on.

[wilcoxon]

Reply 67.

1898 marriage certificate my relative Alice Edith ELLIS puts her name as Edith ELLIS and father as Fredrick MORRIS, gardener (domestic), deceased.

On following Thomas and Louisa,  he is still alive in 1911