Genealogy 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
Is this the right man?
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
angelas ashes | Report | 20 Mar 2007 22:52 |
|
I have got the same problem in my search as well.I have a Thomas Rowbotham down as father but Head is John Goulden wife Sarah Goulden and children Williams in 1891 census for Chorlton.Cannot find any connection for him to the family but then again cant find the family anywhere else for that matter!Wanda.x |
|||
|
Sam | Report | 20 Mar 2007 22:25 |
|
I hope so, I can't find him anywhere else in 1881 and eveything else fits! I will just assume that the enumerator made a mistake. Thanks for looking Sam x |
|||
|
KathleenBell | Report | 20 Mar 2007 21:20 |
|
He certainly seems to fit with age and place of birth. However if the census return is to be believed, he is down as father to the head of house - Robert Russell - but that can't be right as Robert is too old to be Richard's son. If Susannah is his daughter, it should have him down as father-in-law. Are you certain he didn't have a daughter called something like Susannah - Hannah, Susan, etc. Have you fund the Russell family on another census, to see what the names are? UPDATE - I've had a look at the family in 1891 and the name is definitely Susannah. I notice that they have another widow as a boarder. Do you think the enumerator just made a mistake and Richard should have been described as 'Boarder' and not 'father'? Kath. x |
|||
|
Sam | Report | 20 Mar 2007 21:02 |
|
I am looking for my ancestor, Richard Kent in 1881. He was born in 1828 in Wolstanton, Staffs and in 1851-1871, can be found on the census in Burslem, Staffs. In 1881, I have found a Richard Kent of the right age and occupation, with correct birthplace, living in Durham. (Class: RG11; Piece: 5003; Folio: 64; Page: 58). The only thing that is confusing me is that he is listed as 'father'. The family he is living with are all called Russell and were all born in the North East. The 'lady of the house' is called Susannah and as far as I know, he didn't have a daughter called Susannah, so that isn't it. Why would he be listed as father and do you think this is my man? He died back in Burslem in 1889. Sam x |
|||
|
Sam | Report | 20 Mar 2007 21:01 |
|
See below: |
|||