Find Ancestors
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
1851 Census Look Up Please Goulden
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
ErikaH | Report | 9 Apr 2007 22:58 |
|
Mmmmm........suspected as much. I don't suppose the father was a witness, by any chance? In which month did the marriage occur? And how old was the bride? Reg |
|||
|
ErikaH | Report | 9 Apr 2007 23:06 |
|
So the odds are that she was born in 1892.........nothing for that year on the transcribed records.........I'll have a quick look at the images........ Reg |
|||
|
angelas ashes | Report | 9 Apr 2007 23:06 |
|
She was 21 a spinster and married 21/03/1914.Witnesses were Joseph Sheen and Francis J McDonall.......Wanda.x |
|||
|
angelas ashes | Report | 9 Apr 2007 23:15 |
|
Oh Reg so sorry but will have to go or divorce on the records.Back tmoz And thank you.Wanda.x |
|||
|
ErikaH | Report | 9 Apr 2007 23:16 |
|
No.........nothing. I've checked JFM 1892 to JFM 1893, and there is no Mary Ellen Goulden registered. The snag is, that until you can find out where she was born, you can't really hope to work backwards tracing her antecedents............. Reg |
|||
|
angelas ashes | Report | 10 Apr 2007 21:07 |
|
Back again...I know Reg but as I have been trying to find her for a while thought if I checked out the rest of the Goulden lines then I might be able to eliminate the could be`s.Had a good look and the John Goulden in 1851 is not the same one in 1841 so that is another line of the Goulden family.Thanks for trying anyway,very kind of you.Wanda.x |
|||