Author Topic: Samuel Gill-Ohio  (Read 296 times)

Offline suzanne2812

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 338
  • My Great, Great Granny Willoughby
    • View Profile
Samuel Gill-Ohio
« on: Thursday 25 February 21 16:44 GMT (UK) »
Hi,

I wonder if anyone can have a look & see what my Samuel Gill was up to in Ohio in the early 1880's please?

Samuel was born in Lewannick, Cornwall in 1856. He & his wife, Mary Elizabeth Neale married in 1879 & had at least two children, George b1882 & Philena/Lena b1883 born in America. George has Egloskerry/United States/Canada & USA as place of birth. Philena/Lena actually has Ottawa, Ohio, USA as her place of birth. By 1885 their next child is born, Samuel born in Egloskerry again.

I don't have a World subscription to Ancestry, so I can't have a look myself. I also know there are probably records I can't access. I would just love to know why they went & where the children were born/baptised.

Thanks in advance.

Suzanne.


Online *Sandra*

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 58,728
  • Marie Curie
    • View Profile
Re: Samuel Gill-Ohio
« Reply #1 on: Thursday 25 February 21 17:11 GMT (UK) »

You could try, once registered, records are free to search.

https://www.familysearch.org/en/

Sandra
"We search for information, but the burden of proof is always with the thread owner"

Census information is Crown Copyright  http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

British Census copyright The National Archives; Canadian Census copyright Library and Archives Canada

Online shellyesq

  • Moderator
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 13,632
    • View Profile
Re: Samuel Gill-Ohio
« Reply #2 on: Thursday 25 February 21 19:17 GMT (UK) »
This looks like the birth record for Phinela (spelled Finelo) - https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X6JN-3V3

Offline suzanne2812

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 338
  • My Great, Great Granny Willoughby
    • View Profile
Re: Samuel Gill-Ohio
« Reply #3 on: Thursday 25 February 21 19:36 GMT (UK) »
Thank you! I always forget Family Search for outside of the UK.


Offline oldohiohome

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,803
    • View Profile
Re: Samuel Gill-Ohio
« Reply #4 on: Friday 26 February 21 23:30 GMT (UK) »
Arriving Quebec on the SS Sardinian, left from Liverpool 5 May 1881
ancestry.com says they arrived on 15 May 1881

Thomas Neal, 27, laborer
Susan, 26
William, 2
Elizabeth, infant

Samuel Gill, 25, laborer
Mary, 26
Catherine, infant

?? Neal, 18, male, laborer

All are English

The side column for the whole page says "Government assisted passengers to Quebec"

[were they expected to help settle Quebec?]

Attached is the male Neal name on the image. Ordinarily I'd guess it was George but that is not the way "G" was written elsewhere on the manifest. I don't want to attach the whole list, since it "belongs" to ancestry. you might find it on a free site somewhere, maybe at Canada's archives.

https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/Pages/home.aspx

----------
This looks like George, with his father's name wrong:
George Gill born 20 Dec 1881, Genoa, Ottawa County, Ohio
parents Thomas Gill and Mary E Neal

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X689-QX7

Thomas and Susan (Box) Neal, of Genoa, have a birth listed on the same page, and there is a William and Rose (Close) Neal of Clay Township listed just above them.

----------
As to what Samuel Gill was up to, you could see if Thomas Neal stayed and what his occupation was. Maybe Samuel tried his hand at that for a while and then returned to Cornwall.

For occupations in the area, all I could find was farming and lime products. (not the fruit :) )
https://ottawacountyhistory.org/west

Offline oldohiohome

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,803
    • View Profile
Re: Samuel Gill-Ohio
« Reply #5 on: Friday 26 February 21 23:40 GMT (UK) »
As to what Samuel Gill was up to, you could see if Thomas Neal stayed and what his occupation was. Maybe Samuel tried his hand at that for a while and then returned to Cornwall.

Thomas Neal was a day laborer in 1900, so that doesn't help much. No wife in the household, and not listed as a widower, but his birth year is missing also, so maybe one of the children provided the information and figured the only choices were married or single. Youngest child in the household was b 1892.

1900
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MM6X-B2G

widowed and with daughter Lizzie in 1920:
1920
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MDR8-YDF