Genealogy Chat

This might not be very helpful; but the definition of mother-in-law has changed since the 19th century. A mother in law is what we now call a spouse's mother. In the 19th century a mother in law was the wife of one's father; what we now call a stepmother.

http://www.marriage-locator.co.uk/

Is a useful finding tool 1837 - c1911
It's is still a work in progress.

Bernadette - nothing to do with your query, but I notice in your Levi Atherton post, you appealed to a baptismal record to rsolve Levi's bride.

The surest way of resolving marrs pre-1912 is a local index - if one is available online - see http://www.ukbmd.org.uk/local_bmd

The relevant link here is
http://www.lancashirebmd.org.uk/
which gets the hit:
Lancashire Marriage indexes for the years: 1900
Surname Forename(s) Surname Forename(s) Church / Register Office Registers At Reference
ATHERTON Levi KENNEDY Mary J Chorlton-on-Medlock, All Saints Archives+, Manchester Central Library 3/4/461

The last element of a local marr ref is usually an entry # (as here) - for Bs & Ds it is often a page #.
The first element of a local marr ref is a code indicating which series of registers has the marr - for Bs & Ds it is a subdistrict code.
Here the code identifies a church, and this index decodes it as Chorlton-on-Medlock, All Saints - not all indexes decode the series element.

I presume you used http://www.lan-opc.org.uk/ for the baptism.
An obvious church for a baptism for this couple is Chorlton-on-Medlock, All Saints.

13 entries earlier than Levi's child is:

Baptism: 29 Aug 1900 All Saints, Chorlton on Medlock, Lancs.
Florence Cordon - [Child] of Samuel Cordon & Jane
Born: 5 Aug 1900
Abode: 38 Stafford St.
Occupation: Labourer
Baptised by: F. W, Goodyer Pain
Register: Baptisms 1884 - 1904, Page 250, Entry 2806
Source: LDS Film 2112983

Sometimes you just have to accept that the enumerator might have made a mistake. I know that in the 1891 census my grandmother and her uncle were entered with the wrong names. The uncle is even down as a female! This is the entry:-

1891 England, Wales & Scotland Census Transcription
North Gate Road, Pinchbeck, Spalding, Lincolnshire, England

First name(s) Last name Relationship Marital status Gender Age Birth year Occupation Birth place

John Hammond Head Widower Male 56 1835 Agricultural Labourer Pinchbeck, Lincolnshire, England
Rachael Clark Servant Widow Female 47 1844 - Pinchbeck, Lincolnshire, England
George Clark Lodger Single Male 16 1875 Agricultural Labourer Pinchbeck, Lincolnshire, England
Charlotte Clark Lodger Single Female 12 1879 Scholar Pinchbeck, Lincolnshire, England<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<(this should read Chapman Clark, male)
Elizabeth Clark Lodger Single Female 2 1889 - Pinchbeck, Lincolnshire, England<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<(this should read Ethel Clark)

Both birth dates are correct and I know my grandmother Ethel was with her grandmother Rachel at the time, as was Chapman.

This is the 1901 census at same address:-

1901 England, Wales & Scotland Census Transcription
Northgate Road, Pinchbeck, Spalding, Lincolnshire, England

First name(s) Last name Relationship Marital status Gender Age Birth year Occupation Birth place

John Hammond Head Widower Male 67 1834 Market Gardener Pinchbeck West, Lincolnshire, England
Rachel Clark House Keeper - Female 57 1844 - Pinchbeck West, Lincolnshire, England
Ethel Clark Housekeeper's Grand Daur - Female 12 1889 - Pinchbeck West, Lincolnshire, England<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Chapman Clark Lodger Single Male 22 1879 Hay Presser Pinchbeck West, Lincolnshire, England<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Kath. x

Hello everyone, and thanks for the efforts. I did know about the Pemberton grandma, and there's a great grandma whose surname (Backhouse) also occurs as a second christian name in junior members of the family.

But back to my problem. I tried the names of the people next door at 31 Stafford Street (i.e. immediately above the disputed entry at 33 Stafford Street in the 1901 Census) and I thought I might have a lead. Their name is Levi or Levy Atherton 1877/8 Manchester, Mary (wife) 1879/80 Manchester and Eliza Ann (daughter), 4 months, Manchester.

Levi Atherton is not such an unusual name as you might think, there are at least 2, born 1877 and 1879. This one may be the Levi Atherton b Chorlton Q4 1877, and a Levi Atherton married either Mary Ellen Allmark or a Mary Jane Kennedy in Chorlton in Q2 1900. The christening record for Eliza Ann, All Saints, Chorlton, 20 January 1901 shows her mother as Mary Jane, so it’s Kennedy. The marriage record gives the date 14 April 1900, her father’s name is Arthur Kennedy, another present is William Atherton.

Mary (Jane) Kennedy, father Arthur, b 1879-80 Manchester looks like Arthur 1853/4 Chorlton and Mary Jane Kennedy 1854/5 Hulme as parents, living in Chorlton in 1881, Mary Jane born 1880 Hulme with an elder sister Eliza A Kennedy (1874/5). A son, Arthur was born 1887/8. This family lived just up the street, at 29 Stafford Street, in 1891 Census. Mary Jane Kennedy was a widow in 1901, (identity confirmed by Arthur, age 13) living across the street at 48 Stafford Street.

So (in spite of my hopes) I can’t show that Samuel Carden at 33 Stafford Street, had a Mary J Middle living next door, as the two Mary Jane’s (Kennedy and Atherton) are accounted for. I’ve tried contacts Kennedy-Middle and Atherton-Middle, but no joy.

I still hope that Mary J Middle was a visitor or lodger at No 31, but I’m giving up trying to prove it!

Hugh

Thomas Strafford


marriage:1 April 1838 Ardwick, Lancashire, England
spouse:Jane Pemberton ***************

father: George Strafford***************************

It isn't a Scottish census Mel - they are in Lancashire and Yorkshire.

Bernadette possibly has this information as it wasn't what she was asking about in her original post.

Kath. x

Wow Kath that looks good. I did see the Scotish census and bypassed it.

This is where Jane Pemberton Strafford gets her middle name from - it is her paternal grandmother's maiden name:-

Her grandparent's marriage:-

First name(s) THOMAS
Last name STRAFFORD
Marriage quarter 2
Marriage year 1838
Registration month -
MarriageFinder™ THOMAS STRAFFORD married one of these people
MARY JACKSON, >>>>>>>JANE PEMBERTON<<<<<<<<<<<<<
District CHORLTON
District number -
County Lancashire
Country England
Volume 20
Page 85

Kath. x

Same William in the 1851 census:-

1851 England, Wales & Scotland Census Transcription
Nidd, Knaresborough, Yorkshire, England

First name(s) Last name Relationship Marital status Gender Age Birth year Occupation Birth place

Thomas Strafford Head Married Male 38 1813 Painter Wakefield, Yorkshire, England
Jane Strafford Wife Married Female 39 1812 - Acton, Cheshire, England
Thomas Strafford Son Unmarried Male 12 1839 Scholar Manchester, Lancashire, England
Isaac Strafford Son - Male 10 1841 Scholar Manchester, Lancashire, England
John Strafford Son - Male 9 1842 Scholar Wakefield, Yorkshire, England
William Strafford Son - Male 7 1844 Scholar London, Middlesex, England<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Alfred Strafford Son - Male 1 1850 - Knaresborough, Yorkshire, England

Kath. x

Although the birth place is different on this record I think this is the same William Strafford on the 1861 census:-

1861 England, Wales & Scotland Census Transcription
21, Worsley Street, Hulme, Chorlton, Lancashire, England

First name(s) Last name Relationship Marital status Gender Age Birth year Occupation Birth place

Thomas Strafford Head Unmarried Male 22 1839 Plumber Master Manchester, Lancashire, England
Isaac Strafford Brother - Male 20 1841 House Painter Lancashire, England
William Strafford Brother - Male 16 1845 House Painter London, Middlesex, England<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Alfred Strafford Brother - Male 11 1850 - Knaresborough, Yorkshire, England

Kath. x

This is possibly Jane's father's death:-

First name(s) WILLIAM
Last name STRAFFORD
Gender Male
Birth day -
Birth month -
Birth year 1845
Age 42
Death quarter 4
Death year 1887
District CHORLTON
County Lancashire
Volume 8C
Page 568
Country England

Kath. x

This looks like William and Emma Strafford on the 1871 census (before Jane's birth):-

1871 England, Wales & Scotland Census Transcription
Fawcett Street, Hulme, Chorlton, Lancashire, England

First name(s) Last name Relationship Marital status Gender Age Birth year Occupation Birth place

William Strafford Head - Male 28 1843 - Cheshire, England (occupation on image is Painter)
Eliza Strafford Daughter - Female 4 1867 - Lancashire, England
Emma Strafford Wife - Female 29 1842 - Cheshire, England<<<<<<<<<<<<

Kath.

This is Jane's birth.

Name: Jane Strafford
Registration Year: 1872
Registration Quarter: Apr-May-Jun
Registration district: Chorlton
Parishes for this Registration District: View Ecclesiastical Parishes associated with this Registration District
Inferred County: Lancashire
Volume: 8c
Page: 774

There is no doubt about it as in the book she is down as Jane Pemberton Strafford.

I have been looking for you and not come up with anything either except I cannot find Emma Strafford on any other census but the 1911 when she is again mistranscribed as Wafford.

I also looked for a marriage of a Emma Pemberton to a Strafford without success. Then I wondered if Mary J Middle was misheard by her saying Jane was her middle name and he did'nt hear NAME perhaps he was very deaf so did'nt hear Emma either. I don't really know what to say but can anyone find this Emma Strafford on other census??????????

Interestingly on the marriage cert of Jane Pemberton Strafford she is down as Shafford, Father William deceased a Painter. I can't find him on any census either.

The witnesses are interesting too as there is an Emily Widdolp and I am wondering if this could have been misread as Middle??

It is so frustrating when you can't find people on previous census.

Mel

Thanks to Det and Chris, that's very helpful.

It seems that copying errors could occur at the transcription into the forms in the enumerator's book .

I have seen the images of the forms, and Mary J Middle (or Middler) is quite clear. But I have no idea who she is or was, because I can't account for her anywhere else (for example, I wondered if she was a neighbour or relative of a neighbour) but seemingly not. It's particularly odd that she is entered as the Head, with Samuel Carden as her S in Law, so it's not just a name placed in the wrong house. And the date and place of birth are those of Samuel's real mother in law, Emma Strafford.

I shall just have to assume that an unknown Mary J Middle's name happened to be around, somehow. One faint possibility is that another Emma Strafford on another form had wrongly been entered instead of Mary J Middle, and the correction, on a bit of paper of its own, got made on the wrong form. Another relates to the fact that the 1901 entry address (not on ArgyllGran's transcription above) is 33 Stafford Street. Did this cause someone to suppose that the name "Strafford" must be a mistake?? I don't know, but I shall abandon further speculation.

But it can't be just a case of bad handwriting!

Hugh

This is Ancestry's 1901 search form:
http://search.ancestry.co.uk/search/db.aspx?dbid=7814

Below the search form are details of the census and the enumeration, incl:
"Enumeration forms were distributed to all households a couple of days before census night and the complete forms were collected the next day. ... All of the details from the individual forms were later sorted and copied into enumerators' books, which are the records we can view images of today. The original householder's schedules from 1841 to 1901 were destroyed."
At the time of collection, the enumerator checked the form, and made clarifications and corrected errors and omissions, even completing the whole census form if necessary (e.g., no literate person in h/h).

This is quite amusing.
http://www.wirksworth.org.uk/A20-1901.htm

EDIT....Echoing Det above.....I'm a slow typer :-D

Just a small point...

The householder completed a household schedule that had been left by the Enumerator. If they were unable to complete the form for any reason then they were expected to get a family member, friend or someone else to complete it on their behalf. It was rarely the Enumerator as they really didn't have the time.

The Enumerator then collected the schedules and entered them into the Census Enumerators Books (CEB) and it is those we see and with anything that is transcribed errors can occur . So unless Mary really isn't Emma then it could just be a copying mistake.

If only the original householders schedules for censuses 1901 and before had been kept it might have helped solve problems like this.

Of course in 1911 it was all changed as there were no CEBs and we see the actual householders schedules.

Interesting listening about the the subject...
http://media.nationalarchives.gov.uk/index.php/behind-the-scenes-two-centuries-of-census-taking/

http://media.nationalarchives.gov.uk/index.php/counting-the-people/

Chris

1901 census was the eleventh census of population. As always, it was taken on a Sunday - traditionally the day of least population movement. In the run-up to census night, enumerators visited every house in their area distributing forms, which each householder was instructed to complete, recording the details of every person resident on census night. From the following Monday, the enumerator collected and checked the forms, asking for details to fill in any obvious gaps or inconsistencies. The information was then copied into census enumerator's books, before being sent to the Census Office in London.
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/census/events/census1.htm

I haven't been able to view the image, but suspect an error was made copying into the enumerators books. Then as now handwriting can be problematic + there was still a %age if the population who were illiterate. In those instances, the visiting enumerator could have asked who else was there and been given duff information. For all we know, they may have asked a neighbour who got it wrong!

If the individual household sheets weren't collated correctly, they could have been wrongly copied over.

Within my own research I've people listed at different residencies. It's possible that at least one form was complete in advance with the assumption they would be there.