To live in or not to live in? occupation as servant on 1841 census

[Twochil]

Hello, does anyone know?
On the 1841 census was there any means to differentiate between a servant who was living at their employers address (normally obvious) or someone living at home whose occupation happened to be a servant?
In my case all surnames are the same but the servant (with the said surname) is listed last (not in age order) does this mean they are not of the same family?
An easy answer to this would be all live in servants were listed as servants! and anyone whom happened to be a servant living at home, their occupation just left blank, if only!
Thank you in anticipation.

[BumbleB]

My thought would be:

The named person (last in the list) is not a member of that family.    BUT could be a relative.

[Twochil]

Thank you for your reply BumbleB. Yes, there's no real way of knowing as sadly the 'relation to head of house' came later.

[BumbleB]

I was also told some time ago that landowners etc. did not hire indoor staff local to the residence.  Reason - they couldn't just run off home if things got tough!  I did look into the family who owned property in the village where I was brought up, and it certainly tallied - very few of the indoor staff were locals.

[Twochil]

Thanks for that info. I must admit I always thought the servants would be local.

[BumbleB]

I've just re-found the 1901 census entry for the gentleman I was thinking of.  The residence was Oulton Park, Little Budworth and his family were all born in London - staff's origins were - France, Rutland, Salop, London, Cheshire, Berkshire, Liverpool, Surrey, Gloucester, Somerset, Norfolk and Hereford. 

[Twochil]

In my 1841 case, the family are all living/sharing a small homestead in rural South Wales all but one with the Williams surname (nightmare ) They are listed as follows...

Margaret Rees    > 70 > Shop keeper (I'm working on the assumption she is Elizabeth's mother?)
/Elias Williams    > 40 > Sawyer
Elizabeth Do.      > 40
Rees Do.            > 12
Margaret Do.      > 11
Elizabeth Do.      >   9
Mary Do.            >   7
David Do.           >   6
/Rees Williams    >  20 > Sawyer
//Dinah Williams >  30 > Ind or Inda
Next page
Frances Williams  > 15 > f/s // (this is the female servant I enquired about)

All of the same County.
Confusing mix of ages on the last 3 Williamses and I can't find them either on any further censuses.

Thanks for looking.

[Treetotal]

I can't answer your question but the two occupants listed as "Lawyer" should most likely be "Sawyer"
I've have seen this transcription error many times over the years. The two "Rees" occupants are most likely to be "in-Laws"
Carol

[Twochil]

Thanks for your reply Treetotal. I've been caught out by that Lawyer/Sawyer in the past, but now use to it. Where did you see the 'Lawyer' transcription and I'm intrigued by the two 'Rees' occupants being in-laws?