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
Problem - can anyone advise!
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Tracey | Report | 22 Sep 2003 22:06 |
|
I've had help off some lovely people with the 1891 census with regards to my Cartlidge family. My problem is that when i've come to find them on the 1901, half of them were missing! Both parents were gone, i thought maybe they were dead but after a bit more searching i found some under the name of Cartlidge and some under the name of Crullidge all in the same household!! But - i've still got a gap in regards to person ID's. I've got Edith aged 20, then Alice aged 19 and there's someone missing in between the two (if your all still with me. lol!) Any suggestions as to what happened ? Tracey, Bolton |
|||
|
Bob | Report | 22 Sep 2003 22:30 |
|
You do not say if the missing person is male or female. If female could she have married? in either case at this age he or she cou;d be working and living away. This could be anywhere in the country. |
|||
|
Tracey | Report | 22 Sep 2003 22:38 |
|
Hi Robert, I don't know if the missing person was male or female. I just thought that all person ID numbers would follow on throughout the household (with regards to who was in the house at the time of census). If someone was working away at the time of the census then they wouldn't have been recorded in that household would they? Tracey |
|||
|
Janet | Report | 23 Sep 2003 10:00 |
|
Perhaps they had a lodger, or one of the in-laws staying with them? Janet |
|||