Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    soc.genealogy.britain    |    Genealogy in Great Britain and the islan    |    130,039 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 129,306 of 130,039    |
|    Jenny M Benson to All    |
|    Name anomaly    |
|    17 Apr 20 16:12:10    |
      From: NemoNews@hotmail.co.uk              Can anyone suggest what is going on in this scenario.              In the 1881 Census (RG11-3529-94-38) John Weedall, who married an       Elizabeth Fletcher in 1876, and his wife Elizabeth are shown with a       daughter, Lily, aged 1 year and an unspecified child of unknown name       with the age of 8 days in the "Female" column.              In the 1891 Census (RG12-2841-111-32) the John is absent and Ann's name       is partly obscured, but is readable as Annie. Her children are shown as       Florence, Lilly, Ruth, John H, Mary Jane and Sarah Annie. As Ruth is 10       years old, she will be the unnamed child in 1881.              Before finding the Census entries, I had located the birth registrations       of Florence, Mary Jane, Ruth and Sarah Annie in the GRO index, all with       the maiden name Fletcher. (Plus 2 boys who do not appear on the       Censuses so probably died.) After seeing the 1881 Census, I searched       for, but could not find, an entry for Lilly or Lily Weedall with MMN of       Fletcher. After viewing the 1891 Census, I did a less specific search       and found John Holford Weedale with mother's maiden name Holford. I       then searched for other Weedalls with MMN Holford and found Leonora in       June Q 1880, the right age to be Lil(l)y.              I wondered if Ann(ie) had been previously married and had confused her       former married name with her maiden name, but can't find any       Holford/Fletcher marriage. The Holford children cannot be the product       of either parent from an earlier relationship because they are both       between other children of the marriage. They could be the product of       one of John's relations and adopted by John & Ann, but it's unlikely as       that would mean 2 convenient gaps in the sequence of their birth children.              I am at a loss to explain it myself.       --       Jenny M Benson       Wrexham, UK              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca