1881 Census Entry - What is it supposed to mean...?

[Keith Sherwood]

Hi, Everyone,
Just thought I'd put this little poser in front of you to see whether anyone can make head or tail or what the true DYSON family relations are meant to be in this household, at 5, Clay Street, Oldham, Lancs.  RG11 Piece/ Folio 4073/68 Page no. 46. 
Name                 Relation  Marital Status  Gender  Age Birthplace Occupation
Thomas DYSON    Head            M               Male      51   Ashton      Labourer
                                                                                       Lancs
Sarah DYSON        Dau             M              Female   55  Plymouth  Housekeeper
Samuel H...           Son              U               Male      18  Plymouth    Cotton
(DYSON)                                                                                         Operative
Agnes H. H...         Dau             U              Female    13 Plymouth     Cotton
(DYSON)                                                                                         Operative
Rosina H...             Dau                             Female      9 Plymouth   Scholar
(DYSON)

As you can see, the ages, relationships, and even place of birth do not add up at all.  Any ideas about what errors have possibly been put down, and does anyone have access to the original image of this entry, as this is off the familysearch. org website...
very best wishes,
Keith

[MaryA]

Bit difficult to read Keith but, yes it does give those ages, the middle initial "H" for the children isn't right though.

I would imagine the enumerator has just had a couple to drink and wrote "daur" where it should have been wife, nevertheless she could be a little on the mature site to have a 9 year old child. 

Send me a pm with your email address and I'll send further details.

Mary

[MaryA]

I'm still thinking - will need to search a couple of other censuses but I wonder if she became housekeeper to Thomas, moved in together with HER family and then married Thomas and all the family were classed as "Dysons" when the enumerator came around.

Mary

[Keith Sherwood]

Great, Mary,
I'd really like to have a look at the original.  There are still one or two question marks even assuming a mistake writing "dau" instead of "wife"; and her extreme age when giving birth to her 9-year-old.  I don't see why the "DYSON" name is in brackets for the children, for one thing...
Very best wishes,
keith

[Keith Sherwood]

Sorry, was just finishing my reply when you were adding a postscript - you must admit it's a bizarre entry all told.  Alcohol abuse might cover a multitude of sins...!
Keith

[MaryA]

Ooops  hangs head in shame

I'm not allowed to offer you the scan, been told off 

Send me a pm and commiserate.

BTW I'm not sure that Dyson is in brackets, in fact I'm not positive that it is DYSON at all for the children - maybe Higham ...

[suegill]

I agree with Mary A.

The image is not the greatest but it looks like the children have a different name beginning with H something like H**ham.

Sue

[Nessie]

The interesting point is that in 1871 he is at home with his parents and in 1891 living with his brother at a pub.

[MaryA]

I'm wondering about Ingham, only because there's a marriage in 1874 December qtr of Sarah Ingham to James Thomas Dyson Oldham 8d 1153