Author Topic: Help needed with 1939 census  (Read 286 times)

Offline dicko99

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 208
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Help needed with 1939 census
« on: Tuesday 12 November 24 08:48 GMT (UK) »
Could someone please guide me to the alternative entry for this person please? It's crossed out in red with a comment saying see BK2 Page 1

Here's a link to the entry: https://www.ancestry.co.uk/search/collections/61596/records/19315305?tid=21132706&pid=162094599391&queryid=afe40047-571d-495a-abfb-2b804a52f5a3&_phsrc=kBQ2892&_phstart=successSource

Thanks,
Richard
Pratt, Smith, Jay, Wyatt - Essex
Dickens, Betteridge - London, Oxfordshire
Perrins, Bourne, Hickman, Fletcher - Aylesbury, Stoke upon Trent

Online Jon_ni

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 696
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Help needed with 1939 census
« Reply #1 on: Tuesday 12 November 24 09:12 GMT (UK) »
those redirections are normally to the end of the book but unlikely to contain different info as are typically because the row on the hand page is full of NHS annotation (the stuff we can't see). In this case seem to be to a new book page 1 & 2 for the other one on the same page.

8. What does it mean when an entry is crossed out and marked ‘See page…?’
https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/1939-register/

Offline dicko99

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 208
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Help needed with 1939 census
« Reply #2 on: Tuesday 12 November 24 09:26 GMT (UK) »
Thank for the link. I'd assumed it meant he was living at an alternative address...

Regards,
Richard.
Pratt, Smith, Jay, Wyatt - Essex
Dickens, Betteridge - London, Oxfordshire
Perrins, Bourne, Hickman, Fletcher - Aylesbury, Stoke upon Trent

Online KGarrad

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 26,686
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Help needed with 1939 census
« Reply #3 on: Tuesday 12 November 24 09:34 GMT (UK) »
Just a reminder!
There was no census in 1939!

A census is a snapshot of who was where on a single specified night.
The 1939 Register was continually updated by the NHS until the 1990s - hence the multiple surnames for many women!
Garrad (Suffolk, Essex, Somerset), Crocker (Somerset), Vanstone (Devon, Jersey), Sims (Wiltshire), Bridger (Kent)


Online Jon_ni

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 696
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Help needed with 1939 census
« Reply #4 on: Tuesday 12 November 24 10:15 GMT (UK) »
Wouldn't be a different address. Whilst it was a legal requirement to inform of authorities of address changes they were recorded at a local level and do not appear in the 1939 Register. It was also a requirement to inform police etc of loss of card and to carry at all times until the National Registration Act was repealed in 1952. [section 7 & last line of 12 in the previous TNA link]

His i.d. Card Number was the District JBBV followed by the page number and row number on that page and that stayed the same even if he moved house. Additionaly no other family members have the annotation or the females with surname changes due to marriage. The number was also recorded on the ration books they were issued with.

See an id card vs register entry on https://www.lostcousins.com/newsletters2/inside1939v2.htm also blurred right hand page snipping.

His address then was 26 Windsor Crescent, Bridlington. The Ancestry transcribers never bother to look back at previous page for the street if the 1st row on the page is redacted. Findmypast often do, but they have opened the 1st row on the page anyway for someone born 26 July 1924.

If use the drop down at the top for Enumeration District of the film strip at bottom I don't think the other book for JBBV has been digitised, likely because for our use is irrelevant.