Author Topic: 1881 Census Entry - What is it supposed to mean...?  (Read 5528 times)

Offline Keziahemm

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,760
    • View Profile
Re: 1881 Census Entry - What is it supposed to mean...?
« Reply #27 on: Friday 21 October 05 19:49 BST (UK) »
I have had the disc on for the 1881 census and failed to find the mixed up entry for Thomas Dyson ???

Nessie - Disc 1 North Central Region Lancashire A-J  ;D

 Reads the same as on the Ancestry transcript, I reckon they couldn't read the surname that's why H... (DYSON) appears  ::)

Susan  :)
Herefordshire: Mytton.
Lincs: Ingham
Northants: Knight (Welford); Linnell;  Gaudern.
Staffs (Brierley Hill, Kingswinford): Wood; Eades.
Somerset: Bailey; Lewis
Warwickshire: (Alcester, Henley in Arden) Lewis; Casey/Keasey
Warwickshire (Birmingham suburbs) Knight
Yorkshire (Bradford):  Ingham


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

Offline Nessie

  • I am sorry my emails are not working.
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,361
    • View Profile
Re: 1881 Census Entry - What is it supposed to mean...?
« Reply #28 on: Friday 21 October 05 19:52 BST (UK) »
Thanks Susan. went back and found it as I had been 10 years out in the birthdate :) But I still can't find him with that birthdate and birthplace in the other censuses. Looking at the 1881, I am not sure it is Aston anyway ;D
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline MaryA

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 9,309
  • St Chads, Kirkby
    • View Profile
Re: 1881 Census Entry - What is it supposed to mean...?
« Reply #29 on: Friday 21 October 05 20:44 BST (UK) »
I've even had a whisper in the ear from MaryA to hurry up and send her a PM with my e-mail address so she can send me a copy of the image.

I'll have you know Keith that when MaryA gets impatient she doesn't whisper, she gets LOUD!!!!!  ;D ;D ;D

Me thinks Annie has a good imaginashun  :P

I didn't find the correct Thomas either, was a bit bothered by what you had found but weren't telling us Nessie.  However, I would agree with the transcriber that his birthplace reads ASHTON which could well mean that earlier census entries could be in Cheshire as Ashton Under Lyne is often noted as being there.

I thought maybe Rosina would be the easiest name to find (although coincidentally having just today helped somebody else with a family with a Rosina and found her birth had been registered "Rose Helena" ) the only Rosina I could find born Plymouth in 1891 was in Bootle, but strangely enough the parents were Thomas and Sarah, ages and birthplaces out though .....

Just food for thought.

Mary
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from The National Archives <br />Lunt (Wavertree/West Derby), Forshaw (West Derby), Richardson (Knowsley), Kent (Cheshire), <br />Cain (Hertfordshire, London), Larkins (Bedfordshire, London), Nunn (London), Lenton, Hillyard (Bedfordshire), <br />Parle, Lambert, Furlong, Wafer (Wexford)<br />Special separate interest in Longford (Blackrock, Dublin)

Offline Keith Sherwood

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,439
  • The grass covers and the rain effaces. Victor Hugo
    • View Profile
Re: 1881 Census Entry - What is it supposed to mean...?
« Reply #30 on: Friday 21 October 05 22:03 BST (UK) »
Mary,
The roaring hurricane has appeared in my PM's - very large and VERY difficult to say without the slightest doubt what the exact intention was.  I'm going to be quite feeble and say that the familysearch.org version seems a pretty good stab at it, though I'm still not sure about the DYSON/INGHAM thing...
Talk about sitting uncomfortably on the fence, but at least this topic has been thoroughly aired, and thank you all for diving in to help.
Hadn't realised that Ashton might have come under Cheshire once - that might encourage me to look in places I hadn't even considered before...
keith


Offline suey

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,843
  • The light is on but there's no-one at home!
    • View Profile
Re: 1881 Census Entry - What is it supposed to mean...?
« Reply #31 on: Friday 21 October 05 23:48 BST (UK) »

I can't see Ingham on that image  ??? but then I've gawped at it till I'm now boss-eyed ::) has anyone found an Agnes or Samuel born Plymouth in the 1871 yet cos I'm dipped if I can find one to fit.

Suey
All census lookups are Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
Sussex - Knapp. Nailard. Potten. Coleman. Pomfrey. Carter. Picknell
Greenwich/Woolwich. - Clowting. Davis. Kitts. Ferguson. Lowther. Carvalho. Pressman. Redknap. Argent.
Hertfordshire - Sturgeon. Bird. Rule. Claxton. Taylor. Braggins

Offline Keziahemm

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,760
    • View Profile
Re: 1881 Census Entry - What is it supposed to mean...?
« Reply #32 on: Friday 21 October 05 23:55 BST (UK) »
Hi Suey,

Doesn't look like Ingham to me  ???

Also looked at 1871 for Samuel and Agnes and can't find one to fit.

Fresh eyes tomorrow  :)

Susan

Herefordshire: Mytton.
Lincs: Ingham
Northants: Knight (Welford); Linnell;  Gaudern.
Staffs (Brierley Hill, Kingswinford): Wood; Eades.
Somerset: Bailey; Lewis
Warwickshire: (Alcester, Henley in Arden) Lewis; Casey/Keasey
Warwickshire (Birmingham suburbs) Knight
Yorkshire (Bradford):  Ingham


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

Offline suey

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,843
  • The light is on but there's no-one at home!
    • View Profile
Re: 1881 Census Entry - What is it supposed to mean...?
« Reply #33 on: Friday 21 October 05 23:57 BST (UK) »

Susan, yes 'time for bed'  methinks....
All census lookups are Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
Sussex - Knapp. Nailard. Potten. Coleman. Pomfrey. Carter. Picknell
Greenwich/Woolwich. - Clowting. Davis. Kitts. Ferguson. Lowther. Carvalho. Pressman. Redknap. Argent.
Hertfordshire - Sturgeon. Bird. Rule. Claxton. Taylor. Braggins

Offline MaryA

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 9,309
  • St Chads, Kirkby
    • View Profile
Re: 1881 Census Entry - What is it supposed to mean...?
« Reply #34 on: Saturday 22 October 05 07:09 BST (UK) »
Sorry all, I think I dropped off to sleep and left you all at it!

I did say that the Ingham was only a suggestion because of the marriage I'd found and the possible ending of the children's surname .....ham, nowt definite about it at all.

Anyway Keith, I'd be interested to know what you have for whoever you were looking up at the time, was it Thomas or Sarah? what other info do you have and maybe we can look at this from around a different corner.

Mary
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from The National Archives <br />Lunt (Wavertree/West Derby), Forshaw (West Derby), Richardson (Knowsley), Kent (Cheshire), <br />Cain (Hertfordshire, London), Larkins (Bedfordshire, London), Nunn (London), Lenton, Hillyard (Bedfordshire), <br />Parle, Lambert, Furlong, Wafer (Wexford)<br />Special separate interest in Longford (Blackrock, Dublin)

Offline Keith Sherwood

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,439
  • The grass covers and the rain effaces. Victor Hugo
    • View Profile
Re: 1881 Census Entry - What is it supposed to mean...?
« Reply #35 on: Saturday 22 October 05 09:52 BST (UK) »
Mary,
I'm afraid that I was initially trying a stab in the dark, trying to find a Thomas DYSON who was given as a witness at the second wedding of a James Greaves DYSON in King's Norton in 1871.  His grandfather was the William DYSON whom I've been trying to establish (it seems for ever, now) as having been born in Ashton...
Just looking for some kind of possible family connection - there weren't all that many Thomas DYSON's listed in the 1881 Census, and I just happened on the one in Oldham; then became perplexed by the details of the entry.
Maybe I've caused a bit of a storm in a tea-cup over someone not even related to J.G.Dyson - though threads plucked out of the air like the monthly Rootschat Challenge seem to get a real head of steam up.
But one is still curious about that DYSON family that I unearthed, and I am sure if we were certain about INGHAM or not, we'd have found that family somewhere in Plymouth by now...
Keith (you asked for a ramble, and you got one - I've just re-read this...)