Missing from 1861 census?

[heywood]

Marriage September 1861 Leek

William Alcock and Hannah Hollinshead are on the same page

1871 2880/75/31

William Alcock   45 yrs
Hannah Alcock 38 yrs
Geo Hy Alcock 11 yrs
John W Alcock 9 yrs
Henry Alcock 6 yrs
Franck Alcock 3 yrs

All born Leek

[Tom Langley]

Sorry asking too many questions!

I have spotted Moses before, and I believe he is a witness on the will of John Hollinshead, the father of Ann. He appears to be the illegitimate son of a Sarah Hollinshead. I've not yet found where he fits.

I have found Ellen in further census's with her brother Ralph and have her death as 1892.

James and George I believe are the illegitimate children of Hannah. George certainly is as he adopts the name of Alcock.

Thanks again for the help!

[Pennines]

Good find Heywood.

I'm packing in for the night now having exhausted my brain cells. I'll have another look tomorrow though.

Tom -- in the meantime - would you mind confirming what you said about Ellen Hollinshead -- ie that she married a John Dale and not a Thomas Dale. (I see you have now just given us yet more names!) I am now clearing off until tomorrow.


P.

[Tom Langley]

It was definitely John Dale Ellen married.

Thanks again

[heywood]

I thought Ellen mayhave died because William was with grandma Ann in 1861 but as you say she is with her brothers Ralph and Thomas and James Hollinshead (Hannah’s son?) in 1871 2878/4/2

It would help Tom, if, after you have gone over this you summarise who is still missing in 1861 

[Tom Langley]

I think its just Ellen I cant find in 1861 now. The 1851 census she is with her parents, but it doesnt say if she id a widow or not. She is in the 1871 census. So John died between 1849 and 1871.

I have just found their son William married his cousin Sarah Ann Hollinshead (Daughter of John and Sarah).

I believe James must be Hannah's son, but I would have to get the certificate to be sure.

[heywood]

James is perhaps Hannah’s son with one man and then George might be William Alcock’s son with the marriage happening soon after George’s birth.
I can’t see Ellen though in 1861.

[Pennines]

Well this has moved on since I last was here.

Just for the record -- I can't find Ellen in 1861 either. Looks like whoever she was staying with, or working for in a 'live-in' capacity, simply omitted her from the census.

[Tom Langley]

Thank you both for your help, you have really helped me expand this area of the family/confirm a few theories.

Tom