Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic: Accuracy of the 1891 census  (Read 2615 times)

Offline Lizzielogs

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Accuracy of the 1891 census
« on: Friday 15 August 14 17:32 BST (UK) »
Please could someone help me, I have been chasing my tail for hours and am now wondering if my family are just not listed on the 1891 census
I have
Hannah Adeline Bayley
Registration Year: 1889
Registration Quarter: Jan-Feb-Mar
Registration district: Hereford Herefordshire
Volume: 6a
Page: 488

and
George Henry Bayley
Registration Year 1883
Registration district Hereford Herefordshire
Volume: 6a
Page: 487

But I don't seem to be able to trace either of them any further forward, I know Hannah subsequently called herself Adeline and her married surname was Thomas (possible husband's name David??) and George went into the British army in 1900 so isn't on the 1901 census but I can't find either of them in 1891 nor a record of Hannah/ Adeline's marriage to Mr Thomas.

Could anyone spare time to see if I am looking for something which just isn't there. Thanks everso in advance

Lizzielogs x



Hand, Gower, Turner
Mile End Old Town London, Margate Kent.

Online heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 40,866
    • View Profile
Re: Accuracy of the 1891 census
« Reply #1 on: Friday 15 August 14 17:39 BST (UK) »
Hello,

Do you know their parents names?

There is a George 6 yrs and an Annie 3 yrs with several siblings and parents George and Elizabeth Bailey in Hereford at 1891 2063/98/7

Regards
Heywood
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Lizzielogs

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Accuracy of the 1891 census
« Reply #2 on: Friday 15 August 14 17:41 BST (UK) »
Yes, thank you I have seen that one and ATM don't have parent's names. I will send for Hannah Adeline's BC next week, I wondered if Adeline was Annie but it seems so far fetched that you would name a child Hannah Adeline and then call her Annie that I really discounted them!
Hand, Gower, Turner
Mile End Old Town London, Margate Kent.

Online heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 40,866
    • View Profile
Re: Accuracy of the 1891 census
« Reply #3 on: Friday 15 August 14 17:44 BST (UK) »
Where do you have them?
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline mrs.tenacious

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
    • View Profile
Re: Accuracy of the 1891 census
« Reply #4 on: Friday 15 August 14 17:46 BST (UK) »
Hi Lizzielogs -

The family are mistranscribed on the 1891 census as 'Bagley' - they are living at 'The Laurels', Eywas Harold, Hereford.  :)
Rogers: Sussex
Sanders/Saunders: Brenchley, Kent
Hales: Navenby, Lincs
Lidbetter: Sussex
Burns: Birmingham/Weston-super-Mare
Gray/Stocks: Weston-super-Mare
Hayden
Bubb: Kent
Ward: Notts

Offline Craclyn

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,462
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Accuracy of the 1891 census
« Reply #5 on: Friday 15 August 14 17:47 BST (UK) »
If the head of the household may have been Luke, then try Bagley as a possible mistranscription. There is a Bagley family with a Hannah and a George of about the right age in Ewyas Herold/Harold in Herefordshire.
Crackett, Cracket, Webb, Turner, Henderson, Murray, Carr, Stavers, Thornton, Oliver, Davis, Hall, Anderson, Atknin, Austin, Bainbridge, Beach, Bullman, Charlton, Chator, Corbett, Corsall, Coxon, Davis, Dinnin, Dow, Farside, Fitton, Garden, Geddes, Gowans, Harmsworth, Hedderweek, Heron, Hedley, Hunter, Ironside, Jameson, Johnson, Laidler, Leck, Mason, Miller, Milne, Nesbitt, Newton, Parkinson, Piery, Prudow, Reay, Reed, Read, Reid, Robinson, Ruddiman, Smith, Tait, Thompson, Watson, Wilson, Youn

Offline Craclyn

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,462
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Accuracy of the 1891 census
« Reply #6 on: Friday 15 August 14 17:48 BST (UK) »
Looks like my post and Mrs. Tenacious crossed. Increases the likelihood of it being the right folks when we have both arrived at it independently :)
Crackett, Cracket, Webb, Turner, Henderson, Murray, Carr, Stavers, Thornton, Oliver, Davis, Hall, Anderson, Atknin, Austin, Bainbridge, Beach, Bullman, Charlton, Chator, Corbett, Corsall, Coxon, Davis, Dinnin, Dow, Farside, Fitton, Garden, Geddes, Gowans, Harmsworth, Hedderweek, Heron, Hedley, Hunter, Ironside, Jameson, Johnson, Laidler, Leck, Mason, Miller, Milne, Nesbitt, Newton, Parkinson, Piery, Prudow, Reay, Reed, Read, Reid, Robinson, Ruddiman, Smith, Tait, Thompson, Watson, Wilson, Youn

Online heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 40,866
    • View Profile
Re: Accuracy of the 1891 census
« Reply #7 on: Friday 15 August 14 17:52 BST (UK) »
That looks better! I was just going to check them also  :)
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Lizzielogs

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Accuracy of the 1891 census
« Reply #8 on: Friday 15 August 14 17:55 BST (UK) »
Oh goodness, thank you all so much, you have saved me having to buy a wig.

Thank you, thank you, thank you xxxx
Hand, Gower, Turner
Mile End Old Town London, Margate Kent.
Pages: [1] 2 3