Author Topic: 1901 Census - a real challenge !  (Read 3418 times)

Offline Necromancer

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 18,073
  • I've updated my profile ......
    • View Profile
Re: 1901 Census - a real challenge !
« Reply #9 on: Friday 12 January 07 17:06 GMT (UK) »
much appreciated Kath .... yes, seen that lass in Nottingham  ... thought it might be her at first as Orrible Orace parents are in Nottingham  ..... but the marriage Cert showed twasnt !

Her family is as bad, her mother was ne้ Gowenlock, but after a couple of Certs she turned out to be a Kew - which led nowhere ! And her father disappears 1891 and 1901 .... must be in the blood   :(
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline katherinem

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 979
    • View Profile
Re: 1901 Census - a real challenge !
« Reply #10 on: Saturday 13 January 07 12:50 GMT (UK) »
Have you considered that 'Oribble Orace', got married at some point?  I realise trawling through the BMD indexes is laborious and time consuming, especially when there is the possibility he didn't go on to marry anybody else :P

Back to Elizabeth, did you find the rest of her family on the 1901, or is it just Elizabeth you can't find?

Really sorry, that it is just questions ???

Regards,
Kath
Bladen (Tipton, & Yorks), Teece, Cooke(Coalville), Stott (Staffs), Carr, Armitage, Henrickson, Lisle (Yorks), Pailing, Stott, Leach, Davies (Llanasa), Taylor, McDonald, Garry, Brackenbury, Brand, Rewston
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Necromancer

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 18,073
  • I've updated my profile ......
    • View Profile
Re: 1901 Census - a real challenge !
« Reply #11 on: Saturday 13 January 07 13:08 GMT (UK) »
No problem !

Elizabeth can be seen 1881 and 1891 - with her mother Hannah, and a younger sister Ada in 1891, so dad was still around somewhere..
Hannah et al can t be seen 1901, prob remarried - altho I pretty much exhausted that line of enquiry.

Prety sure that 'OO' didnt marry Elizabeth / Eva - as the 3 sons were only told that they werent Turners when the oldest married in the mid-1930s ! One brother still signed as a witness as Turner !

Birth Certs are in the right surname  .... always surprised me that they didnt need to get copies when they were young men pre-marriage !

Didnt pursue looking for him marrying after 1911 - concentrated on WW1 activities and a Death entry and/or Emigration.

Nowt ..... ::) ::)
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Carmella

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
  • nsus information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1901 Census - a real challenge !
« Reply #12 on: Wednesday 29 June 11 16:21 BST (UK) »
Hello,

Just a message to say that Horace's middle initial  "L"  might stand for Laird.

On the Ancestry website somebody has him listed on their family tree as:

 "Horace Albert Laird Davison"  born June 28th 1878 King's Lynn, Norfolk. 
 There's no more information on there on him I'm afraid.