Author Topic: Streetname related question  (Read 389 times)

Online RJ_Paton

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,593
  • Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
    • View Profile
Re: Streetname related question
« Reply #18 on: Yesterday at 19:04 »
Ah yes I see that under the illustration but at the bottom of page 104, continuing onto page 105 it says" James Smith Dixon gifted a site at the junction of Dixon avenue and Cathcart road for a burgh hall". I wonder which statement is correct?

Not on my copy - William Smith Dixon is mentioned on page 105 (not on 104) but as the feuer of the lands of Govanhill. The first mention of a gift of land for the Halls is on page 106.

Online Vendee

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 62
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Streetname related question
« Reply #19 on: Yesterday at 19:53 »
Ah yes I see that under the illustration but at the bottom of page 104, continuing onto page 105 it says" James Smith Dixon gifted a site at the junction of Dixon avenue and Cathcart road for a burgh hall". I wonder which statement is correct?

Not on my copy - William Smith Dixon is mentioned on page 105 (not on 104) but as the feuer of the lands of Govanhill. The first mention of a gift of land for the Halls is on page 106.

That's odd. My online edition is a reprint dated 1998.

Online Vendee

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 62
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Streetname related question
« Reply #20 on: Yesterday at 20:27 »
OK, just realised that Aileen Smart changed the titles of her books in the later edition. They started off  as Villages of Glasgow Vol 1&2. Now they are Villages of Glasgow North of river and South of river. I'm reading the earlier version and you have got the later one.

I've just found some info from the 1871 English census. William S Dixon was spending a lot of time at his London home by then. He is listed (age 46) along with his wife Catherine Ann Dixon (age 40) but there is also a Janel Dixon (age 44) listed on the entry. I think "Janel" might be a transcription error but its possible that W S Dixon had a younger sibling.

Online hanes teulu

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 9,764
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Streetname related question
« Reply #21 on: Yesterday at 20:42 »
The Census '71 describes Janet as "sister, unm, age 44, born Scotland"

The Glasgow Evening Citizen, 16 Jun 1880, re. William Smith states "He was married, but leaves no family". This does not rule out children predeceasing him.

His obit in the Times mentions no family.

 


Offline jonwarrn

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 11,694
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Streetname related question
« Reply #22 on: Yesterday at 20:52 »
its possible that W S Dixon had a younger sibling.

Janet Dixon, born 7 March 1827, Gorbals (some mix ups with the dates on FS on some of these)
parents William Dixon and Elizabeth Strang
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X1SY-GBC

Earlier one in 1822, Janet Smith Dixon
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X1SY-GB3

William Smith Dixon, born 3 October 1824
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X14W-F6T

Elizabeth in 1821
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X1ST-231

Marriage William Dixon and Elizabeth Strang, 27 March 1820, Gorbals
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XTYG-HJF

Entry here for 25 March
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XTB6-XBW

See also ScotlandsPeople, Church of Scotland, Old parish registers

Online Vendee

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 62
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Streetname related question
« Reply #23 on: Yesterday at 20:57 »


The Glasgow Evening Citizen, 16 Jun 1880, re. William Smith states "He was married, but leaves no family". This does not rule out children predeceasing him.



That's a good point and I suppose if you had lost two young daughters, you might want them memorialised as street names.