Author Topic: Date of Smith family group please  (Read 238 times)

Offline goldie61

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,207
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Date of Smith family group please
« on: Saturday 09 January 21 03:53 GMT (UK) »
Iíd be grateful if someone could put a date on this.
The young lady on the back row is supposedly Alice Smith, born 1889, but itís difficult to say exactly how old she is here.
She married in 1912, and only had one child, born in 1914. Is it possible the baby in Ďgrandadísí arms is this child born in 1914?
The man to her right is her father Charles Smith, born in 1863, and his wife, also named Alice, is the lady in the big white blouse in front of the young Alice. (I have a photo of this woman with Alice as a baby, and it is definately the same woman).
The man with the flat cap on next to Alice is certainly not her hiusband though. I have their wedding photo, and it is definately not him.
Alice did have some brothers, aged 8, 6 and 4 in the 1901 Census when Alice was 11, plus a 4 year old sister in 1911. I canít see this really tallying with the children on this photo.
I wonder if the older lady next to Alice the mother could be HER mother.
She was born in 1867, and was 75 when she died, so still possible to be in this photo. She looks too old to be married to the man in the flat cap.
I don't have the original, but I don't think there was any mount, or photographer's name with it.

Any ideas gratefully received!
Lane, Burgess: Cheshire. Finney, Rogers, Gilman:Derbys
Cochran, Nicol, Paton, Bruce:Scotland. Bertolle:London
Bainbridge, Christman, Jeffs: Staffs

Offline jim1

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 22,939
  • ain't life grand
    • View Profile
Re: Date of Smith family group please
« Reply #1 on: Saturday 09 January 21 16:15 GMT (UK) »
The big white blouse was commonly called a pigeon-breast & was popular
from around 1903-08. The puffy sleeves are similar to the gigot which
dominated most of the 1890's & made a brief re-appearance mid 1900's.
So I would suggest 1905 +/- a couple of years.
The 2 men look a bit dressed up so maybe the Christening of the baby.
Warks:Ashford;Cadby;Clarke;Clifford;Cooke Copage;Easthope;
Edmonds;Felton;Colledge;Lutwyche;Mander(s);May;Poole;Withers.
Staffs.Edmonds;Addison;Duffield;Webb;Fisher;Archer
Salop:Easthope,Eddowes,Hoorde,Oteley,Vernon,Talbot,De Neville.
Notts.Clarke;Redfearne;Treece.
Som.May;Perriman;Cox
India Kane;Felton;Cadby
London.Haysom.
Lancs.Gay.
Worcs.Coley;Mander;Sawyer.
Kings of Wessex & Scotland
Census information is Crown copyright,from
www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/

Offline goldie61

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,207
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Date of Smith family group please
« Reply #2 on: Sunday 10 January 21 09:16 GMT (UK) »
Thanks very much Jim
That would make more sense with the ages of Alice the daughter, and the two boys as her brothers.
Those 3 do have quite the family resemblance.
The tot at the front and the baby must belong to the other man.
The baby in arms looks a bit old for a christening do you think? Probably nearly a year old.
Not imposible of course.

Lane, Burgess: Cheshire. Finney, Rogers, Gilman:Derbys
Cochran, Nicol, Paton, Bruce:Scotland. Bertolle:London
Bainbridge, Christman, Jeffs: Staffs


Offline Ruskie

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 24,276
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Date of Smith family group please
« Reply #3 on: Sunday 10 January 21 10:25 GMT (UK) »
I originally thought that man with baby might be the husband of lady with checked blouse - and white blouse woman (who I think looks younger) might be wife of mystery man - with children belonging to mystery man and white blouse woman.

Baby could belong to them too if date is wrong for it to be Aliceís baby.

Alice looks like she could be in her mid 20s. That probably doesnít tally with birth years or Jimís estimate, but I jsut thought I would confuse the issue by offering these thoughts.  :)

Offline goldie61

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,207
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Date of Smith family group please
« Reply #4 on: Sunday 10 January 21 20:17 GMT (UK) »
Thanks Ruskie (I think! ;) )
The information I have, third hand, could be questionable then.
In fact, that information says all those children are siblings, but from Census and baptism entries that can't be the case.
So perhaps other parts of the information have got muddled too.
Keeps us on our toes!

Lane, Burgess: Cheshire. Finney, Rogers, Gilman:Derbys
Cochran, Nicol, Paton, Bruce:Scotland. Bertolle:London
Bainbridge, Christman, Jeffs: Staffs

Offline Ruskie

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 24,276
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Date of Smith family group please
« Reply #5 on: Tuesday 12 January 21 05:04 GMT (UK) »
Sorry Goldie.... I realise my reply was somewhat confusing.

Clarification of my theory (I hope)  :) :

I think the young boys and the baby could be siblings (to each other) but Alice is not their sibling.  :)

Alice looks to have her hair up so is not a young girl.

Man holding baby is married to woman in front of him.

Man with flat cap is married to woman with white blouse.

The way that Alice is leaning towards the man with the baby originally made me think the baby might be hers and might be held by her father, however Jimís 1905ish date doesnít fit with that idea.

Did Alice have an older sister? I think might be some similarity between Alice an the woman with the white blouse. (A sister with three boys and a n other child by any chance?)  ;D

Offline goldie61

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,207
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Date of Smith family group please
« Reply #6 on: Tuesday 12 January 21 09:15 GMT (UK) »
Thanks for your thoughts Ruskie.
Here's what I know, or have found out recently.

Alice (May) was the eldest child of Charles and his wife (another Alice (Mary)).
Alice May was born in 1889. So by 1906, say, she would be 17 or so.
Her father was born in 1863, so by 1906 would be 43. Could the man with the mutton chop whiskers be that old do you think? Or is it the man holding the baby?

The problem I have is that this photo is at the Manchester Record Office, and is itemised on the National Archives Discovery site. Not the actual photo, as these are  tiny thumbnail negatives at Manchester, which have to be developed.
It, along with many other photos, were deposited there by the daughter in law of the daughter, Alice May, in the photo here, probably about 1984. This daughter in law was my aunt. Alice May was still alive at this time - she was 103 when she died in 1992. I remember her well. On the precis on TNA, my aunt has said that this is a photo of ďAlice (on the back row); her father is to her right, and her mother is sitting in front of herĒ. Mind you, she has also said that this is a photo of Alice's father and his 5 children. This must have been what Alice May had told her.  But I have all the children on the Censuses, and their birth registrations, and these cannot all be the children of Charles Smith. So room for doubt as to the accuracy of the precis.
As I say, Alice May was the eldest, then 2 sons, born 1892 and 1894, and then twins, a boy and girl, born 1896. No younger children. The twins are obviously not on this photo.
There is also a photo of Alice May as a baby with her mother Alice Mary . She, (the mother), is very distinctive, and it is the same lady as the one on this photo with the white blouse, so that much would seem to be correct.
I have found out that Charles Smith had a brother, the wonderfully named Jesse James Smith. He was 11 years younger than Charles (several sisters in between them). Is this the man with the mutton chop whiskers? Born in 1874, he married in 1897, and by 1906 had 2 children, a little girl aged about 3, and a baby aged about 1. He would be about 33 by 1906. I wonder if this is them? Those whiskers possibly make him look older than he is I think. He was a fairly well to do coal agent, who lived in a 10 room house in London by 1911 with a live in cook, nurse and housemaid.
His wife was younger than him, only about 31 in 1906, so somehow not the lady in the check blouse I think.
I thought perhaps this lady may have been the mother of Charles and Jesse. She was born in 1842, so  would have been about 64 by 1906. Too old to be this other lady?
The mother of Alice Mary, was born in 1839, so even older at about 67.
Of course she could be an aunt, or a sister or the lady who lived next door!

Interesting trying to put names to faces from over 100 years ago.  :)
Lane, Burgess: Cheshire. Finney, Rogers, Gilman:Derbys
Cochran, Nicol, Paton, Bruce:Scotland. Bertolle:London
Bainbridge, Christman, Jeffs: Staffs