General Chat
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
blank find
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Lorraine | Report | 9 Apr 2010 21:49 |
|
Hi just want to pick any ones brain really.what would you think and do if you could not find any of your family in 1891 census but then they popped up again in 1908. any ideas on this would put a new slant on this puzzle.thanking you very much L(confused) |
|||
|
AnninGlos | Report | 9 Apr 2010 21:51 |
|
Presume you mean 1901 but could they have been mistranscribed in the 1891? |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
Lorraine | Report | 9 Apr 2010 22:29 |
|
hi, no i did a check in the 1881 census because her birth was 1879 and she was 2 then. i have looked in the 1891 when she was 12 but couldn't find her so i looked in the 1901 and couldn't find her there even under the alias's i have for her.then she married in 1908 and again in 1944.i'm baffled. in what way would they have been miss-transcribed please. |
|||
|
Gwyn in Kent | Report | 9 Apr 2010 22:31 |
|
Post the names and what you know about birth year or place of birth. |
|||
|
Lorraine | Report | 9 Apr 2010 22:58 |
|
Didnt think of that thanks.....Emma Neeves dob 15/04/1879 Lenham in Wychling |
|||
|
Choccy | Report | 9 Apr 2010 23:08 |
|
|
|||
|
Thelma | Report | 9 Apr 2010 23:08 |
|
1891 |
|||
|
Lorraine | Report | 9 Apr 2010 23:18 |
|
thanks for that info still cant find emma thou! |
|||
|
Kate | Report | 9 Apr 2010 23:20 |
|
Got them in 1901 - |
|||
|
KathleenBell | Report | 9 Apr 2010 23:38 |
|
This is the family in 1891 census (Mis-transcribed) The writing is terrible:- |
|||
|
Lorraine | Report | 9 Apr 2010 23:39 |
|
Thanks Kate!L |
|||
|
Lorraine | Report | 9 Apr 2010 23:56 |
|
Hi Kath thank you. i have one for 1881 and there is a william on it. at 2 months.i suppose he could have died and then she had more children (francis) that is :) |
|||
|
Lorraine | Report | 10 Apr 2010 00:02 |
|
Kath i wonder if the Henry I was William I as on the 1881 c? |
|||
|
KathleenBell | Report | 10 Apr 2010 00:04 |
|
No, William didn't die. Choccy found him staying with an aunt and uncle in the 1891 census. |
|||
|
Janice | Report | 10 Apr 2010 00:09 |
|
If William was born in Lenham, then that 'Sanoway' should be Sandway. |
|||
|
KathleenBell | Report | 10 Apr 2010 00:11 |
|
I think your William I. Neeves is actually William J. Neeves. I think this is his birth:- |
|||
|
Lorraine | Report | 10 Apr 2010 00:26 |
|
Thanks yes i found that one .L :) |
|||
|
Janice | Report | 10 Apr 2010 00:31 |
|
Can't work out how James Alfred Goodwin and Mary are the aunt and uncle. |
|||
|
Lorraine | Report | 10 Apr 2010 21:40 |
|
Ah... that would be why i had some much trouble matching it, i thought the name was waters thanks again for you help all of you your fab! L |
|||