Where is Edward Hanley on 1861 census Scotland.

[Rosinish]

Thanks Carole...I can put my calculator away now   

Might this be Edward although age out here too?

HANLEY EDWARD 29
1861
573/1 27/ 3
Paisley High Church, Renfrew

Edit...

HANLARY THOMAS 51
1861
685/3 76/ 11
Canongate, Midlothian

The above are the only 2 entries I can see too in the whole of Scotland that might fit?


Annie

[CaroleW]

Something odd.  Edwards death reg shows mmn Dowand.  Suspect Thomas was previously married

1851 shows a 3wk old daughter Ann & SP has a Catholic baptism for Ann Hanly b 12 March 1851 & bap 23.3.1851  Falkirk, St Francis Xaviers Stirling

Parents Thomas Hanly & Anne Farrel

Also Mary Hanly b 24.2.1849 bap 18.3.1849 Falkirk, St Francis Xaviers Stirling - parents Thomas Hanly & Anne Farrell (2 x L this time)

[Rosinish]

The DC for Thomas should state both wives names if the info. was known to the informant.

Annie

[CatK66]

Thanks everyone.    Yes, Thomas was married before and had a Thomas and Edward.  On Edward's death cert the informant is his step mum Ann (Farrell).      On the 1851 census it looks like Edward is listed as 11 as he is a scholar.  Plus this is in line with his age on his death cert.  I've noticed many if the ages are out by a year or two on many documents. Also the surname varies a lot, which is no doubt because they couldn't write and the registrar would spell it how he thought it was.  I will check out those possible contenders.   Thank you so much everyone.   

[Rosinish]

What was Edward' occ. on his DC?

The possible one I posted earlier for 1861 HANLEY EDWARD 29 Paisley High Church, Renfrew can be ruled out.

If Edward' occ. was Seaman at time of death...age out again & from the anc transcription this one was born Armagh...

HANLON EDWARD 26
1861
903/S 5/ 23
Shipping - Merchant Navy, Shipping

Very difficult to know with name variants & age

Annie

[CatK66]

Hi Rosinish,  I've checked those 2 possibilities.  Both are part of a family so not them.  Worth a shot.   
 
Is it the case that if someone is the 'head' on a census, that it means that is the usual order.  I.e if Thomas was away for a job or visiting relatives would Ann still have been classed as the head?   
 
Ann didn't put down Thomas's first wife on his death entry.   
 
Edward hasn't got a profession listed on his death entry.  Ooh. I hadn't noticed that.

[CatK66]

So Edward didn't have a profession and didn't marry.  His place of death is just 'Denny'.  As it's his step mum who registered it, I'm wondering if he was there at the 1861 census but maybe too Ill or maybe in hospital?  Would people with TB be ok living with the rest of the family?  Wouldn't Ann his step mum have worried the rest of the kids might get it too? 

[CatK66]

Thanks CaroleW, you saved me a new post.  I couldn't read Ann's profession.   Hawker.  Ooh how interesting.  Anyone know what this would entail?   

[Rosinish]

I think if hubby was away from home, wife would automatically be "head"?

Is it possible Edward was with relatives/friends & enumerated under their surname?

I picked this out as the age would fit?...

SCALON EDWARD 21
1861
476/ 3/ 10 Denny, Stirling

May be worth checking if there's an Edward Scanlon matching the above on 1851 & 1871...a long way for a shortcut 

According to Edward' DC, he'd been ill for 6 months & census night was 7/8 Apr i.e. I don't see there was a problem with health issues on census night but I can't see why he wouldn't be enumerated even if he was in hospital.

May be worth checking out where the nearest TB Hospital was at the time as he may only have been enumerated by his initial & surname?

Hawker...https://www.thesocialhistorian.com/pedlars-tinkers-and-hawkers/

Annie