RootsChat.Com

General => The Common Room => Topic started by: MJW on Monday 18 November 13 10:00 GMT (UK)

Title: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: MJW on Monday 18 November 13 10:00 GMT (UK)
I am trying to discover when and where John Wynne died (he was born in 1864).  The last definite recorded event I can find for him is on the 1901 census in Blackburn, age 37 Cotton Weaver, with his wife Mary Ellen Wynne and 5 children.

I’ve found his family on the 1911 census but John Wynne’s entry is very odd.  It shows he was originally recorded as Head, age 48 Weaver, with his wife Mary Ellen and 5 children.  However, his name and other details have been crossed out and his wife’s status changed to “widow” & Head, and total number of persons in household reduced from 7 to 6.

I’m trying to make sense of this which seems to suggest he was deceased but why was he first recorded.  Had someone forgotten he’d died -  or had they simply misunderstood what they were supposed to enter ?  Or was the entry amended later ?

Also, the signature box originally showed Thomas Wynne’ name (their 17 year old son) but Thomas is crossed out and replaced with Mary Ellen Wynne (the wife/widow).

I would be really grateful for any opinions on this entry.

*** I’m not sure after reading our Copyright rules whether I’m allowed to post the 1911 image or a portion of  it (even though I’m not asking for a look-up).  Please can someone clarify.

Thanks ... Malcolm
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: aghadowey on Monday 18 November 13 10:05 GMT (UK)
It could be that Mrs. Wynnne (or her son) did not understand the census instructions and placed John's details on the first line but when the enumerator came around to collect the forms he crossed out the dead man's details and then got John's wife (as head of household) to sign the form.
It's also possible that John was alive when the census form was delivered to the household but died before the census night itself.
My guess is that the former is more likely but have you searched for possible deaths 1901-1911 yet?

Added- you haven't said if the family were still in Blackburn in 1911 but this is the only death for a John Wynne in Blackburn district between 1901-1911:
John Wynne, age 48, Jan./Mar.1910 Blackburn volume 8e page 307
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: trystan on Monday 18 November 13 10:15 GMT (UK)
Malcolm,

Yes, you can, no problem there.  (Terms, Section 6.5 (http://www.rootschat.com/forum/terms.php))

A low resolution portion of a census record may be posted on the Forum, provided that it is only used for private study or research purposes of a non-commercial nature. The Forum limits file attachments to 500kB in order to limit resolution and sizes of images posted for this reason. We would expect such images to be used for handwriting recognition

Census information is Crown Copyright, National Archives for academic and non-commercial research purposes only

Trystan
RootsChat Caretaker
Title: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: MJW on Monday 18 November 13 10:18 GMT (UK)
Aghadowey

Yes, the family were still in Blackburn in 1911 although a different address than 1901.  I've searched for possible deaths 1901 to1911, and the 1910 Blackburn death is not him.

John Wynne was not recorded on the first line of 1911 census, his wife Mary Ellen was.  He was on the second line.

Thanks .... Malcolm

Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: aghadowey on Monday 18 November 13 10:22 GMT (UK)
Are you positive the Blackburn death cannot be the correct John Wynne?
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: aghadowey on Monday 18 November 13 11:14 GMT (UK)
According to Lancs FreeBMD the 1910 John Wynne death was in the sub-district of Darwen- not sure where that is in relation to the family's address in 1911 and 1901.
Title: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: MJW on Monday 18 November 13 11:18 GMT (UK)
Thanks Trystan for that clarification on Copyright.

Here are the relevant relevant portions of the census image.

Thanks .... Malcolm
 
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: aghadowey on Monday 18 November 13 11:21 GMT (UK)
Looks like they just botched up the return and the enumerator made corections. Have you gotten the 1910 John Wynne death to eliminate that as the correct death certificate or is there another reason you think it can't be correct?
Title: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: MJW on Monday 18 November 13 12:50 GMT (UK)
Looks like they just botched up the return and the enumerator made corections. Have you gotten the 1910 John Wynne death to eliminate that as the correct death certificate or is there another reason you think it can't be correct?

I think you could be right with the "botch up" suggestion, perhaps they just didn't understand what they were supposed to enter.  Also, I thought it a little odd that 17 year old Thomas (rather than his mother or one of his older siblings) apparently made the original entries but perhaps he was the most literate or had the best writing.

The only other suggestions I can think of are:-
- John and his wife were not living together, and Mary Ellen (after the initial mistakes in entering) decided she wanted him removed and/or actually thought he might be deceased
- John wanted to disappear for some reason and not be on the census (but this botched entry almost draws more attention)

I'm checking this John Wynne issue on behalf of an old friend of mine who's been baffled by this for some time.  He told me that he had eliminated the 1910 death.  I'm not sure whether he actually got the death certificate or there is some other reason. Darwen is a small town very close to Blackburn, and the Darwen registration district used to extend into parts of Blackburn. I will check with him.
 
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
  Malcolm
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: Rena on Monday 18 November 13 13:40 GMT (UK)
How sad that he should have died so young.

I think the new layout of the 1911 census might have confused the household.  This census asks about children born to the couple and maybe it was thought that the father's name should be entered.
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: JenB on Monday 18 November 13 13:54 GMT (UK)
  He told me that he had eliminated the 1910 death. 

I think the first thing you need to do is to discover on what basis he eliminated the 1910 death.
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: jim1 on Monday 18 November 13 14:26 GMT (UK)
Many of the 1911 census entries have mistakes as they were the first to be filled in exclusively by the householder.
It looks to me that Thomas has correctly put his mother as head but where the question asks "how many years married" he's become confused & included his deceased father in order to give an answer.
He's probably queried this with the census collector who's corrected it for him.

jim
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: chris_49 on Monday 18 November 13 19:24 GMT (UK)
I've found two families who'd misunderstood the "children alive and deceased" question and included their dead children as if they were living. I could work it out from the number of children born to the marriage equalling the total number of children present, and from death record detail matching. I expect these children were added to the population totals!
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: Sinann on Monday 18 November 13 19:51 GMT (UK)
John is down as 48, is this the age he died at?, do you have a birth date for him?
What was his age in 1901?
Title: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: MJW on Monday 18 November 13 21:59 GMT (UK)
Thanks to everyone for interesting and constructive comments.

Many of the 1911 census entries have mistakes as they were the first to be filled in exclusively by the householder.
It looks to me that Thomas has correctly put his mother as head but where the question asks "how many years married" he's become confused & included his deceased father in order to give an answer.
He's probably queried this with the census collector who's corrected it for him.

jim

Jim - that sounds very plausible.

Sinann - We don't know when and where he died, that's what triggered this query. It was whilst looking for his death that we found the confusing 1911 census entry. He was born in 1864 - his age is shown as 37 in 1901.

As I mentioned earlier, I will check with my friend (whose great grandfather this is) as to why/how he eliminated the 1910 Blackburn death as not being the correct John Wynne.

Thanks ... Malcolm
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: Sloe Gin on Wednesday 20 November 13 13:50 GMT (UK)
Many of the 1911 census entries have mistakes as they were the first to be filled in exclusively by the householder.

That's not correct.  It is a common misconception.

All the censuses from 1841 involved a form being left with the householder to be completed by them, and collected a few days later by the enumerator.  The 1911 census was no different in this respect from the preceding ones. 

What was different was that all the original forms for the earlier censuses were destroyed, and all that was retained were the enumerators' schedule books, into which the details had been copied.  So those are secondary sources and contain plenty of omissions and errors.

The 1911 census is just the first for which the original forms were kept.
Title: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: MJW on Thursday 12 December 13 22:09 GMT (UK)

As I mentioned earlier, I will check with my friend (whose great grandfather this is) as to why/how he eliminated the 1910 Blackburn death as not being the correct John Wynne.

Thanks ... Malcolm

Just an update on this.  I checked with my friend and he already had the 1910 Blackburn death certificate for John Wynne.  There were several issues/anomalies with this that made him very doubtful that this was his G GF, including :-
- address where he died (in Darwen) was unknown to him
- his occupation was shown as gardener (on other records he was always a cotton weaver)
- his age was a couple of years out
- didn't recognise informant

Since then, I've now found this Darwen address on the 1911 census and there is a Wynne family living there - Head is Annie Wynne, widow age 47, with 3 children, all born in Scotland. Annie would be the widow of this John Wynne who died in 1910.

Based on this, I think we can eliminate this John Wynne as not being the correct person. This is a different family.

So, this takes me back to the question in my original post of when & where John Wynne died, and whether he really had died before that confusing 1911 census entry.

Any thoughts most welcome.

Thanks .... Malcolm
     
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: Colin Cruddace on Thursday 12 December 13 23:22 GMT (UK)
I would be tempted to investigate the Darwen family in earlier census records to confirm that there are 2 John Wynne's, to rule out the possibility of bigamy.  :o

Colin
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: LizzieW on Friday 13 December 13 00:43 GMT (UK)
If the children were all born in Scotland, perhaps John Wynne had either just gone back to Scotland to live, or went to visit and died up there.  Or even started a new family up there.  There are 4 deaths of John Wynne on Scotlandspeople between 1901 and 1911 but none of them are anywhere near the correct age.

Lizzie
Title: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: MJW on Friday 13 December 13 20:37 GMT (UK)
Thanks for replies.

Colin, I think bigamy is highly unlikely in this situation but I'll look into it.  As mentioned earlier, I have the correct John Wynne with his wife Mary Ellen in 1901 (and earlier) census in Blackburn - this is the last recorded event we've found for this John Wynne.
 
I haven't found the Darwen Wynne family in 1901 but I suspect they were in Scotland as all their children shown on 1911 census were born in Scotland.

Lizzie, not sure I fully understand your point.  We know that the John Wynne (with Scottish family) died in Darwen in 1910.  It is John Wynne (husband of Mary Ellen) found in 1901 in Blackburn and his family on the strange 1911 census entry that we're trying to find. 

Malcolm
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: JenB on Friday 13 December 13 20:57 GMT (UK)
I haven't found the Darwen Wynne family in 1901 but I suspect they were in Scotland as all their children shown on 1911 census were born in Scotland.

They are indeed all in Kircudbrightshire in 1901. John is a gardener aged 39, born in England.
Wife Annie aged 38, children Christina 13,  Thomas 11 and Kate 3.

In 1891 they are in Dumbartonshire, John aged 29 a gardener.
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: heywood on Friday 13 December 13 22:29 GMT (UK)
Hello,
It is odd - maybe they separated but Mary Ellen didn't want to admit it.
Do you have a grave for Mary Ellen?

Heywood
Title: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: MJW on Friday 13 December 13 22:59 GMT (UK)
Thanks for latest replies.

JenB, this fits the names on the Darwen 1911 census and I think helps confirm that this is not the Blackburn-based John Wynne (wife Mary Ellen) that I'm looking for.

Heywood, a separation is something I have considered and might be a possibility.  As I previously mentioned .....
The only other suggestions I can think of are:-
- John and his wife were not living together, and Mary Ellen (after the initial mistakes in entering) decided she wanted him removed and/or actually thought he might be deceased
- John wanted to disappear for some reason and not be on the census (but this botched entry almost draws more attention)


No known grave for Mary Ellen. She died 16 Sept 1927 at Moss Street Blackburn (where she was in 1911), aged 68. Her Death Certificate gives her occupation is "Cotton Weaver, Wife (NB not widow) of John Wynne a Cotton Weaver".
 
Thanks ...Malcolm
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: LizzieW on Saturday 14 December 13 00:04 GMT (UK)
Quote
Lizzie, not sure I fully understand your point.  We know that the John Wynne (with Scottish family) died in Darwen in 1910.  It is John Wynne (husband of Mary Ellen) found in 1901 in Blackburn and his family on the strange 1911 census entry that we're trying to find. 

Sorry, having a senior moment.  I looked at the wrong 1911 census entry. :-[
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: suegill on Saturday 14 December 13 01:37 GMT (UK)
Maybe John Wynne was in prison, or some type of institution, as such, he would still be alive but no longer head of the family.

He could have died outside the local area.  (It took me ages to find my GGrandfather, he was killed in an accident when he was 200 miles from home, the dead was registered in that area.)
Title: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: MJW on Monday 16 December 13 14:08 GMT (UK)
Maybe John Wynne was in prison, or some type of institution, as such, he would still be alive but no longer head of the family.

He could have died outside the local area.  (It took me ages to find my GGrandfather, he was killed in an accident when he was 200 miles from home, the dead was registered in that area.)

That's possible. I think we'll need to widen the search and check all possible John Wynne deaths (and all spelling variations) in all areas.  A long shot (because I don't think he owned property), but might be worth looking for his last known address on electoral rolls.  Also, newspaper archives.

Thanks everyone for your interest and help.
  Malcolm   
Title: Re: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: josey on Monday 16 December 13 14:32 GMT (UK)
Maybe John Wynne was in prison, or some type of institution
In which case he might be entered on the form by just his initials, making it very difficult to identify anyone accurately.

Title: Strange 1911 Census entry – was he there or deceased? (Not a look-up request)
Post by: MJW on Tuesday 17 December 13 18:37 GMT (UK)
Maybe John Wynne was in prison, or some type of institution
In which case he might be entered on the form by just his initials, making it very difficult to identify anyone accurately.

Josey, that's useful to remember.  I've got some of my lot just recorded by their initials when in the workhouse.  I'd forgotten about that.

Thanks .... Malcolm