1911 Census

[acorn2]

Hi,
Sorry, here is 1891: RG12/1984/32/18.

Sripe dresser is listed as Frederick's occupation in the 1911 Census.
On his marriage certificate  he is listed as a fireman on boats as was his father
Cheers

[Arranroots]

Sripe dresser is listed as Frederick's occupation in the 1911 Census.
On his marriage certificate  he is listed as a fireman on boats as was his father
Cheers

Hmmm - that doesn't help much, does it?

What about censuses?

 

[acorn2]

Frederick was a scholar in the 1901 census at the boys home with Alfred.

Frederick was born in St George, Bristol. Perhaps I'm in the wrong tree 

They also dropped the s from Maunders

[Arranroots]

Oh sorry - I was thinking Frederick was the father - silly me!

 

Can you post the relevant portion of the 1911 so that we can take a squint at it?

[Arranroots]

Some ideas from

 http://rmhh.co.uk/occup/s.html

Stick dresser

Tripe dresser

Stone dresser

The board of guardians would have been responsible for apprenticing out a boy in receipt of poor relief, so it would be a good idea to get hold of their records and see whether there is any reference to Frederick being apprenticed to a tradesman.

[acorn2]

Name: Relationship to head: Marital Status: Years married: Sex: Age in 1911: Occupation: Where born: Report error View Original Page
MAUNDER, CLARA HEAD WIDOW  F 54 BOOT MACHINIST BRISTOL     
MAUNDER, FREDRICK GEORGE SON SINGLE  M 22 SRIPE DRESSER BRISTOL     
MAUNDER, ALBERT EDWARD SON SINGLE  M 18 BOTTLING DEPT BRISTOL     

[Arranroots]

Nooooo - not what I meant!

You can't post the transcription for copyright reasons - unless you typed it up yourself.  Have you looked at the image and does it actually say sripe dresser?

 

[acorn2]

Ooops
I have viewed the original and it does say sripe dresser.
I have also found out that there were nine children in the family-- 3 listed as having died. Perhaps Alfred was one of them

[Necromancer]

Oh sorry - I was thinking Frederick was the father - silly me!

 

Can you post the relevant portion of the 1911 so that we can take a squint at it?

another no no   

actually, it must be getting close to when we can treat the 1911 census (in terms of selective pasting of image-areas and our own transcriptions) as we can the 1841 - 1901 ?