Author Topic: completely and utterly baffled!  (Read 15475 times)

Offline jackski

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 512
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: completely and utterly baffled!
« Reply #27 on: Thursday 25 September 14 19:10 BST (UK) »
Thanks! This is brilliant. How do I search the Bath BMD? Are they online?

http://www.bathbmd.org.uk/

It has the advantages over FreeBMD that it includes the mother's maiden name for births, the age for deaths, and the exact spouse and venue for weddings.

William Kelly's son Joseph with his second wife was registered as

Bath Birth indexes for the years: 1856
Surname   Forename(s)   Sub-District   Registers At   Mother's Maiden Name   Reference
KELLY   Joseph William   Walcot - First Series   Bath   WEETMAN   WL1/14/091

confirming her maiden name (as already suggested by JenB).

David

Thanks! That's great.

Offline jackski

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 512
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: completely and utterly baffled!
« Reply #28 on: Saturday 27 September 14 08:39 BST (UK) »
The 1841 is interesting - raises all sorts of questions!

1841
Cornwell buildings, Walcot
Anna Kelly 40 leather seller N
Cecilia 15 Y
Leonora 15 Y
William 14 Y
Irene 12 Y
Euphemia 10 Y
Othelia 7
Lyndetesa? 5 Y
Delphina 1 Y
Treelore Flowers 45 shoebinder Y. (Or may be Holmes?)
N.K Kelly 5 days Y


Relationships arent given in 1841, but one does wonder who the parents of the new baby are!!


Not finding any of them in later censuses.Iwonder of the whole family went off to Scotland or Ireland, then Irene comes back as a visitor over the 1901 census night.

In the 1851 census Freelove Flowers is listed as a monthly nurse so was presumably at the family's house to care for Anna and the baby who was only 3 days old.

Offline Jo Harding

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,604
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: completely and utterly baffled!
« Reply #29 on: Saturday 27 September 14 10:32 BST (UK) »
The mystery deepens as I have been trying to research Irene Goulston, marriage, death etc. There is no trace of a marriage for an Irene to a Goulston in the UK in the period 1846-1900.

I cannot find a death for her in the UK either. She was in the 1901 census but no death registered for anyone of that name up to 1930.

The onlt thing I would say is that Goulston is a name that could be mistranscribed.

There has to be an overseas connection here, both for Irene Kelly and the possible Goulston link.

I looked at the Biggs family, George and Annie/Mary Ann but there is no obvious connection with the Kelly family.

Jo.

Offline jackski

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 512
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: completely and utterly baffled!
« Reply #30 on: Saturday 27 September 14 11:16 BST (UK) »
The mystery deepens as I have been trying to research Irene Goulston, marriage, death etc. There is no trace of a marriage for an Irene to a Goulston in the UK in the period 1846-1900.

I cannot find a death for her in the UK either. She was in the 1901 census but no death registered for anyone of that name up to 1930.

The onlt thing I would say is that Goulston is a name that could be mistranscribed.

There has to be an overseas connection here, both for Irene Kelly and the possible Goulston link.

I looked at the Biggs family, George and Annie/Mary Ann but there is no obvious connection with the Kelly family.

Jo.

Yes it really is a mystery! I have now sent for the father, William's, will to see if Irene is mentioned in that. Its a last chance I think of being able to link these two Irene's together. The weird thing is that both Irene's are born at the same time in the same place, and neither of them appear on any other censuses, get married or die. Overseas is the only explanation, I feel.


Offline Jo Harding

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,604
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: completely and utterly baffled!
« Reply #31 on: Saturday 27 September 14 15:51 BST (UK) »
Process of elimination again, this time Othelia Kelly bc 1834.

1851 Othelia is with her father and sister, Maria.

1871, Othilia Kelly aged 34, unmarried, born Bath, is in The Convent at Baddesley Clinton, Warwickshire. She is shown as part of the "Religious Community". Her name is transcribed as Oshilia.

1881, Ophelia is living as a Boarder in the household of Alfred Riches, Upholsterer, aged 47, occupation: "Lady", born Bath. They are living in 8 Sutherland Gardens, Paddington.

1891, there is an Ophelia Frances Kelly, single, aged 56, Dressmaker, born Bath living as an Inmate in Gloucester County Lunatic Asylum, Wootton St Mary, Gloucester.

1901 Othilia Kelly is back in Bath, single, aged 66, born Bath and living on own means. She is living in Stanley Road.

A death registered in Bristol RD in June quarter 1911 for Ophelia Kelly, aged 76 years.

Could Irene have taken religious vows and entered a convent?

Jo

Offline jackski

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 512
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: completely and utterly baffled!
« Reply #32 on: Saturday 27 September 14 17:40 BST (UK) »
Process of elimination again, this time Othelia Kelly bc 1834.

1851 Othelia is with her father and sister, Maria.

1871, Othilia Kelly aged 34, unmarried, born Bath, is in The Convent at Baddesley Clinton, Warwickshire. She is shown as part of the "Religious Community". Her name is transcribed as Oshilia.

1881, Ophelia is living as a Boarder in the household of Alfred Riches, Upholsterer, aged 47, occupation: "Lady", born Bath. They are living in 8 Sutherland Gardens, Paddington.

1891, there is an Ophelia Frances Kelly, single, aged 56, Dressmaker, born Bath living as an Inmate in Gloucester County Lunatic Asylum, Wootton St Mary, Gloucester.

1901 Othilia Kelly is back in Bath, single, aged 66, born Bath and living on own means. She is living in Stanley Road.

A death registered in Bristol RD in June quarter 1911 for Ophelia Kelly, aged 76 years.

Could Irene have taken religious vows and entered a convent?

Jo

But the nuns would still be counted in the census wouldn't they? Or do you mean she would be given a new name and recorded under that? Its possible I suppose....

Offline jackski

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 512
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: completely and utterly baffled!
« Reply #33 on: Saturday 27 September 14 17:41 BST (UK) »
I'm still troubled by Irene Goulston though.... ???

Offline Jool

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,524
  • James Dodson, beautifully restored by mozza29
    • View Profile
Re: completely and utterly baffled!
« Reply #34 on: Saturday 27 September 14 17:41 BST (UK) »
Hi Jackski, I have been searching for Irene with no luck so far  :(  I wondered if she may have used her middle name, Julianna (ref your first post).  Where did you find evidence of her middle name?

Jool
Robbins - Wolverhampton.
Spooner - Monmouthshire & Wolverhampton.
Warner & Loundes - Dudley/West Bromwich.
Dod(g)son - Heysham/Liverpool/Wolverhampton

Offline jackski

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 512
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: completely and utterly baffled!
« Reply #35 on: Saturday 27 September 14 18:16 BST (UK) »
Hi Jackski, I have been searching for Irene with no luck so far  :(  I wondered if she may have used her middle name, Julianna (ref your first post).  Where did you find evidence of her middle name?

Jool
Its an embroidered sampler which I have bought and am researching. It says "Irene Julianna Kelly, aged 9 years, Bath, 1837". Irene seems to be a very unusual name at this point in time, and given that all the family seem to have unusual names I feel sure this is the right one.