Find Ancestors

Thanks for the 'encouragement' Sylvia LOL
I think I would have given up ages ago without the help of you lot.
It's very much appreciated.

Having no luck finding the household in 1891 (just to see whether there are any clues -- John James cleverly died the quarter before the census).

No luck. I have a suspicion.

1891 is the year when one of Ancestry's abject stupidities is particularly endemic. If there is a woman identified as "wife" at the top of a household, with her children following, Ancestry's system or transcribers assigns that woman to the nearest preceding male head of household. She and her children are given that man's surname -- despite the clearly recorded surname of their own, the double lines between the households (sometimes the households aren't even adjacent), the different addresses and the different household schedule numbers ... and the fact that the man in question already has a wife. Or two, if the woman is the second "wife" down in the list after him; yes, I've seen that.

If Mary were recently widowed, it's conceivable that she would have described herself (or someone else would) as "wife". And the result could be that she and the kids are hidden away under another surname in an unrelated household.

So the kids would have to be searched for by given names and birth details ...

Yes Evie, I tried all sorts of combinations of spellings for 1891 but came up with nothing. Maybe when I'm not so tired I'll try trawling the whole census, hopefully sometime over the w/e!!
I use ancestry too but findmypast was recommended to me, I registered but not really looked - maybe I should?!?!?
Good night everyone