Where is George Phillips in 1871?

[groom]

Pretty sure it would be Foster Road. It isn't there now, but was near Princess Road, which runs along side Queens Road cemetery. It is now a park  - I used to play there when I visited an aunt and uncle.

Wilford Road Playground was constructed in 1957/8 on the site of an old estate that was demolished after the war and rebuilt during the 1960's.  The area had a very poor reputation and policemen would patrol the streets in pairs. Foster Road was joined to Wilford Road by a walkway and this was the centre for gambling.  Cards and dice were played and also a game called "pitch and toss".

[DavidJP]

Hi Claire & Groom,

Many thanks for your replies, very much appreciated.

Claire, Hmmm, that is very interesting re James. James Arthur would have been 24 by this time. 33 Beulah Grove is the address where George died apparently according to the family trees. There is no James mentioned in the trees at all!

Groom, Many thanks for the info re Foster Road, most interesting!! 

Kind regards

David

[DavidJP]

Hi,

Have finally been able to get back into freebmd & have noticed that all the ages of the children are wrong! Going by the birth indexes they should be as follows:

1891 census is interesting

Croydon 33 Beulah Grove

Emma Phillips hd wid. 5?  laundress 
Florence dau 17  Florence b1869 therefore should be 21
JAMES  son  15  James Arthur b1867 therefore should be 24
Thomas  "   14  Thomas b1871 therefore should be 19/20
Norman  "   12  Norman b1873 therefore should be 18
George   "   10  George b1876 therefore should be 14/15
Emily    dau   7  Emily b1879 therefore should be 12
Henrietta "    7  Correct age b1883
William  son  5  correct age 1885
Rosa    dau  2           All born Croydon  Lilian Rose b1887 therefore should be 3/4

Class RG12 Piece 592 Folio 24 Page 48.

claire

There is no other James born for him to be 15 in 1891. Therefore the James in the Industrial School in Byfleet that I posted about earlier is looking more & more like James Arthur.

Kind regards

David

[groom]

Perhaps they just weren't any good at maths. 

I'm wondering whether that Byfleet Industrial school was some sort of approved school and whether James had been a naughty boy.

http://www.missing-ancestors.com/surrey_county_industrial_school%20byfleet%20info.htm

This is interesting as well

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/prisoner4099/behind-the-scenes/tim-industrial.htm

[DavidJP]

Hi Groom,

Yep, I think that James had been in trouble as well. Many thanks for the links, the instructions & regulations certainly make for interesting reading!

As regards the ages being out, those are the worst age differences I think I've ever seen!

Kind regards

David

[groom]

You often get them out by a year or so, but as you say, not by that much and not for so many in one family.

[alpinecottage]

Hi,

Have finally been able to get back into freebmd & have noticed that all the ages of the children are wrong! Going by the birth indexes they should be as follows:

1891 census is interesting

Croydon 33 Beulah Grove

Emma Phillips hd wid. 5?  laundress 
Florence dau 17  Florence b1869 therefore should be 21
JAMES  son  15  James Arthur b1867 therefore should be 24
Thomas  "   14  Thomas b1871 therefore should be 19/20
Norman  "   12  Norman b1873 therefore should be 18
George   "   10  George b1876 therefore should be 14/15
Emily    dau   7  Emily b1879 therefore should be 12
Henrietta "    7  Correct age b1883
William  son  5  correct age 1885
Rosa    dau  2           All born Croydon  Lilian Rose b1887 therefore should be 3/4

Class RG12 Piece 592 Folio 24 Page 48.

claire

How sure are you about those births? - Henrietta and Elizabeth were twins (as per 1881 census), births reg Croydon Mar 1881 and Henrietta would have been 10 in 1891.  In fact they may have been triplets as there was also a Violet Gertrude Phillips registered same place and quarter.  I wonder if the enumerator made the mistake with the ages, failing to line up the correct age against the correct child 

[groom]

I'm not sure if those 2 in 1881 are right, as they seem to have died a few months later

Deaths Dec 1881   
Phillips    Elizabeth Mary    1    Croydon    2a   138    
Phillips    Henrietta Maud    1    Croydon    2a   138

The only way would be to get all the certificates, but that would be rather expensive.

[alpinecottage]

Looks like the twins/triplets did die, but a new baby born later and given one of the same names.  With all those children, it's not surprising no one could remember how old they were!  Even Emily, the mother, has aged about 20 years in a decade!