Didcocks in Berkshire

[Gadget]

I don't think it was an error,  Marg, which was why I described  the A; C, I cols. I think it was the way the passenger lists were supposed to be filled in.  A mark in the I column denoted a child under 1 year  (i.e. it was an infant and became a C (child) when it reached 1)  Further down the page are infants listed as 11;  8; 7.

See also col 7   


Gadget

[LizzieL]

Annie's birth?:
December qtr 1910
Wallingford district     vol 2c, page 307

Didcock, Annie G


None of this matches a 1911 census?!

Would match if the number (in years) was actually months.

Have found marriage of parents of this Annie to find mother's maiden name, then searched for any later children. None came up so it looks as if this Annie was their last, so no younger sisters.

But she does seem to be the only candidate to have married a Pratley.

I don't think it was an error,  Marg, which was why I described  the A; C, I cols. I think it was the way the passenger lists were supposed to be filled in.  A mark in the I column denoted a child under 1 year  (i.e. it was an infant and became a C (child) when it reached 1)  Further down the page are infants listed as 11;  8; 7.

See also col 7   

An odd way of listing it, but understand it now. Perhaps they needed to split children from infants to allocate cabin space, food rations etc

[KGarrad]

I found Annie Gwendolyn in 1911.
But there is no brother Harry, neither is there a sister Cecelia?
And no births after the 1911 census appear to be the same family?

So I am not convinced that this Annie, who appears to marry Mr Pratley, is the right family?


It's all very confusing!

[MargP]

I don't think it was an error,  Marg, which was why I described  the A; C, I cols. I think it was the way the passenger lists were supposed to be filled in.  A mark in the I column denoted a child under 1 year  (i.e. it was an infant and became a C (child) when it reached 1)  Further down the page are infants listed as 11;  8; 7.

See also col 7   


Gadget

That's Gadget, the penny has dropped

[Gadget]

I found Annie Gwendolyn in 1911.
But there is no brother Harry, neither is there a sister Cecelia?
And no births after the 1911 census appear to be the same family?

So I am not convinced that this Annie, who appears to marry Mr Pratley, is the right family?


It's all very confusing!

You can say that again, Kevin. I'm coming to the conclusion that her name was none of the ones that we've looked for so far (first or surnames)  and she doesn't want us raking up her past.

[LizzieL]

I found Annie Gwendolyn in 1911.
But there is no brother Harry, neither is there a sister Cecelia?
And no births after the 1911 census appear to be the same family?

So I am not convinced that this Annie, who appears to marry Mr Pratley, is the right family?


It's all very confusing!

If you look at Berks burial index the address at which Annie was living when she died in 1955 is the same one given by Cecilia and children on the passenger list when they went to USA in 1947.

Very confusing with two threads running.

[KGarrad]

I have said, on the other thread, that there is obviously something here that Gran wants to be kept secret!

And OP should tread very carefully!

Now, whether it's an adoption, an illegitimate birth, workhouse, mental asylum or something other, I still think it best to leave well alone?

[Gadget]

I have said, on the other thread, that there is obviously something here that Gran wants to be kept secret!

And OP should tread very carefully!

Now, whether it's an adoption, an illegitimate birth, workhouse, mental asylum or something other, I still think it best to leave well alone?

I agree, Kevin 

[rosie17]

I have said, on the other thread, that there is obviously something here that Gran wants to be kept secret!

And OP should tread very carefully!

Now, whether it's an adoption, an illegitimate birth, workhouse, mental asylum or something other, I still think it best to leave well alone?
My heads spinning here 

I agree, Kevin