Tony, thank you very much for your help. There’s a lot of info there to be researched. To tell you the truth, I had never thought about buying a certificate..., everything having been done via Ancestry and the Internet. Please don’t laugh..., but who do I contact on-line ?
Casalguidi…, as usual, you are a wonderful help ! Thanks !
As you say, we’ve been there before but it pleases me to mention that I’m not the only one..., lol ! Probably because things just don’t tie up. You said... “Pamela, I'm pretty sure, is the daughter of James and Celia.”
But Pamela/Pemta, (unless there’s another one somewhere) in the 51 census is down as Boorman. (and not Wood)
Also, in the 1841 census, Pamela Boorman (aged 2) is down as sister to Celia Boorman. Ten years later, Mother Mary has probably died and in the meantime, Celia (now married to James and with their own children John, Bianca, Mary Ann, Henry and William) she seems to be looking after her 12-year old sister Pamela.
1841:
Mary Boorman 50
Celia Boorman 20
Amy Boorman 5
Pamela Boorman 2
Comfort Boorman 10
Silas Boorman 4
James Boorman 1 Mo
1851:
James Wood 42
Cecilia Wood 33
Pemta Boorman 12
John Boorman 8
Binaca Boorman 6
Henry Boorman 4
William Boorman 2
Mary Ann Wood 5
Richard Wood 11
As for James/Jasper Boorman..., I also had my suspicions as to the father. Lol ! But of course, this is pure speculation as Father Boorman could simply have been out hawking at some near-by fair ground.
But if we keep with what we officially see on the 41 census, all the family are Boormans and while the enumerator is taking the names, James Wood has just knocked at the front door, so-to-speak.
That Rootsweb URL looks extremely interesting especially those dates..., but once again, “Pamely” is down as a daughter when she’s in fact a sister.
As for poor old Richard..., no mention of him ! Ho hum..., back to the drawing board ! Lol !
Thanks Casalguidi and Tony…, despite my problems, your info has been a great help.
Have a nice week end..., Iain.
