Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

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

Confused by Ireland Census 1911 form

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Heather

Heather Report 1 Jul 2009 10:18

Hello,
I was wondering if someone could take a look at my relative's 1911 census form for me - I'm struggling a little to understand it!
The form is available free here (view census images, household return form A):
http://www.census.nationalarchives.ie/pages/1911/Antrim/Clifton/Louisa_Street/184418/

The details for the 4 young children and their parents, Thomas and Mary, are as I expected. But I had started delving back further on the basis that James and Elizabeth were Thomas' parents (and not getting very far with that line), and then looked at it again and saw that it said that Thomas was listed as the 'brother' of the head of the household, not the son. But there is 23 years betwen them and Mary is listed as 'daughter-in-law'.
So I thought it was probably an error, and Thomas is more likely to be the son than the brother of James. But then I looked at column 9 (particulars as to marriage) and its a bit of a mess for Mary and I can't quite work out what it says.

I'd really appreciate any thoughts - I was just starting to think I was making progress with this line of the family, but I'm not so sure now!

Many thanks,
Heather

Jlove

Jlove Report 1 Jul 2009 10:51

It is a bit of a mess!

It looks to me that 'wife' 'single' and 'married' were written in column 9. I have had problems with the 1911 census as well - its listed 2 children which my family has never heard of and I can find no record of other than the census!

Did a bit of digging for you - hope it helps!

I have found a James Kirkwood married Elizabeth McAllister 18 June 1870 in St Anne's, Belfast

A Thomas Kirkwood was born to Hugh and Agnes 18 Nov 1867 in Belfast.

(both of the above are from emeraldancestors.com - dates would be correct but can't see any others at the moment)

Ancestryireland.com gives a William Gibson Kirkwood born 1903 to a James and an Elizabeth Magee Kirkwood born 1904 to a Thomas. These would be correct years for 2 of the children on the census but not sure if these are the right people - if they are it might mean they were brothers living in the same house with their wives and children??

The certificates from ancestryireland.com can be purchased for £4 for non-members and £2 for members.

The other option is to try pilot.familysearch.org and then order certificates from gro. You need James and Thomas' birth certs to sort the mess out!

Good luck!

Heather

Heather Report 1 Jul 2009 11:06

Thank you so much - I really appreciate your help.

It does look like at least three words were written in column 9. Strange they found it so difficult to know what to write there... I wonder why.

As for your digging, thank you.

The marriage between James Kirkwood and Elizabeth McAllister 18 June 1870 in St Anne's, Belfast sounds feasible to me.

And the birth info for Thomas Kirkwood looks right - but you're right, I'll have to get the certs for both Thomas and James to be able to confirm if they are brothers.

The Ancestryireland info isn't quite what I expected though. William is my grandfather and his death certificate lists him as William John 1902, and hid parents were Thomas and Mary Mulligan. So not the William Gibson you found. But Elizabeth sounds more hopeful, and my grandfather often mentioned his sisters Elizabeth and Mary, so I don't think they were cousins. But I had never heard of a brother before seeing this Census form - so perhaps Thomas is the cousin.

Thank you once again - this gives me several new lines to follow.