HEMSLEY - Census anomalies

[Sherwood]

I'm going round in circles with this one.  Should be straightforward, John and Mary HEMSLEY and family, Arnold.  However, Mary's age and birthplace are confusing.  Here goes:

1851 HO107/2128/164/15
John, 33, Arnold
Mary, 33, Arnold
Rachill, 5, Arnold
Ann, 10, Arnold

1861 RG9/2443/21/17
John, 45, Arnold
Mary, 36, Lenton
Rachel, 17, Daybrook
John, 7, Daybrook
Samuel (Cutts?) 7, Glasgow

1871 RG10/3492/16/8
John, 53, Arnold
Mary, 40, Basford
John, 17, Arnold
Samuel, 16, Glasgow
Betsy, 9, Arnold
Elizabeth, 4, Arnold

1881 RG11/3336/23/17
John, 66, Arnold
Mary, 48, Arnold
Betsy, 19, Arnold
Elizabeth, 14, Arnold

I believe this to be the same family; Rachill/Rachel link '51 to'61 (maybe, age differs a little), sons John and Samuel link '61 to '71 (Glasgow connection helps to convince me).  Daughters Betsy and Elizabeth link '71 to '81.

However, looking at details for the mother, Mary:

1851 age 33, born Arnold
1861 age 36, born Lenton
1871 age 40, born Basford
1881 age 48, born Arnold

I accept that Arnold (and Daybrook) come under Basford district, but where does Lenton fit? (wrong side of town).  Moreover, what's going on with her age?  Am I looking at two (or three, or four) Marys?

Even the father John's age is fluctuating a bit more than the expected 10yrs between Censuses: 33, 45, 53, 66.

Maybe they just didn't have a clue at the time!

Finally, Samuel in '61, does that say Cutts and if so, do you think it's a middle name or one of those instances where mother's maiden name is used?  Would that reinforce the notion that there was more than one Mary?

Any suggestions welcome.

Sherwood.


The attached image extract is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

[MJP]

Hi Sherwood,

This doesn't help with your puzzle much, but here is what seems to be John with his parents and sister in 1841:

HO107/855/4/29/9
Daybrook, Arnold, Notts
John Hemsley, 50, Ag Lab, born in county
Elizabeth Hemsley, 50, bic
John Hemsley, 25, FWK (=Frame Work Knitter), bic
Rachael Hemsley, 25, occupation unreadable, bic

MJP

[Sherwood]

Thanks for that MJP,

That Baybrook will be Daybrook (close to Arnold).  Also, Rachill (1851)/Rachel (1861) could have been named after her aunt Rachael.

Cheers,

Sherwood

[MJP]

Hi Sherwood,

The only marriage record (on freebmd) for a John Hemsley in Basford is in Jun Qtr 1840.

One of the possible spouses is a Mary Carnall, which could explain Samuel's name in 1861.  (It doesn't say Cutts - there are 2 letters between the C and the tt - but it doesn't quite say Carnall either...)

It is hard to tell if it is meant to be a middle name or surname, since the enumerator has not put ditto marks for the surnames of the rest of the family, it is just blank. 

But then why is John not with Mary in 1841?

The IGI has John's christening in Arnold, and some other siblings, but not Rachael. 

Maybe you should order a birth cert. for one of John and Mary's children to get Mary's maiden name.  Betsy's is clearly there - Dec Qtr 1861 Vol 7b page 134. (The other children have names that are a bit too common to be sure which is them, as there are other Hemsleys in Basford.)
 
MJP

[Sherwood]

MJP,

Thank you for the extra digging. I had found the Hemsley/Carnall marriage in 1840 but not done anything with it yet.

The occupation of Rachael (1841) looks like needle w (presume needleworker).  Interestingly Rachill's occupation in 1851 (Rachael's neice) looks like seamster and in 1861 she is shown as Cleaner? of Cotton.  All cloth related, but then most of Nottingham was in the 'rag trade' in various guises.

Sherwood

[Robin Hood]

Hi
  Just to help with the confusion.

  Marriage. John Hemsley/Mary Carnall, Arnold 21.4.1840
                  John Hemsley/Mary Cutts, Basford 9.4.1860

 Christenings at Arnold  to parents named John/Mary Hemsley

           19.7.1840 Ann
           24.3.1850 Rachel
           5.2.1854 John
           19.1.1862 Betsy

  I cannot find a death for Mary (Carnall) on my system

  NB In 1841 at Peters Row Folly Lane Arnold

   Mary Hemsley 25 Yrs, Ann 11 Months

  They are with a Lodge and Ann Richmond 35 yrs FWK and a John Marriott 15 Yrs

                                           

[Sherwood]

Thanks Robin Hood for further info.  I am working on the following premises:

John Hemsley married at least twice, both times to Marys. Have confirmed both events in GRO Index.

Mary Hemsley (nee Carnall) died Basford, either Jul-Sep 1853 or Oct-Dec 1859 (both entries found in GRO Index).  Former entry is probable if Mary died in childbirth (John Christened 5 Feb 1854).

Samuel (born Glasgow abt 1854) was son of Mary Cutts before she married John Hemsley.  This makes him similar age to John ('61/'71 Censuses concur)

Rachel born abt 1846 (5 on 1851 Census) but not Christened until 1850.

John Hemsley and Mary Carnall both born bet 1816-18 (both 25 in 1841, both 33 in 1851).

Still struggling with age of Mary Cutts: 36 in 1861, 40 in 1871 and 48 in 1881.

In 1861 she could be 34 rather than 36; need 2nd opinion, have attached extract, Mary is second figure down (others included to show style of writing).

Sherwood.


Census extract Crown Copyright, National Archives

[MJP]

Wow great sleuthing Sherwood!  OK, so maybe it does say Cutts   

I'd say that's defintely a 34 for Mary, not a 36.  That puts her a bit closer to a 30-40-50 age progression...

MJP

[Sherwood]

MJP,

Yeah, I'm running with 34.  The age third from the bottom in my extract looked similar style (i.e. is it 45 or 65).  I found the person (Harriett Dove/Done) in 1871 and she was then 55, making her 45 in 1861.

Sherwood.