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
Tricky 1881 and/or 1891 lookup please anyone ? - C
Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
---|---|---|---|
|
Paul | Report | 24 Apr 2006 22:16 |
Hi Heidi I've emailed you the image - but all credit must go to Glen - he broke it :) Cheers...Paul |
|||
|
newforester | Report | 24 Apr 2006 22:09 |
Glen and Paul. Yes - I do believe you've got them. No wonder they'd disappeared. I shall be having words with my gran ! I'm awaiting a birth cert at the moment to confirm this is the right family as I only had the father's name and 'occupation', but the changing around and leading to the end name of Day-Smith (which I do have in writing already) seems to tie this lot in. I shall of course be requesting more certs.... Thanks very much for all your help - I'd was ready to give up on this line! Cheers Heidi |
|||
|
Glen In Tinsel Knickers | Report | 24 Apr 2006 22:08 |
1881 Thomas abt 1852 is a labourer 1891 and i don't think this is right but anyhow Moses Hart abt 1889 Stepney................... Isaac Hart abt 1851 Head St Giles Henry abt 1883 Son Spitallfields >>>Esther abt 1856 St Giles Wife >>>David abt 1887 Stepney.................. RG12/235 London City St Botolph Folio 53 Pg 11 No relationship for Martha or David,so i had a quick look for a marriage but can't see anything for Isaac Hart to Esther Smith/Day or anything else. Think this one is probably wrong but there you go. Glen |
|||
|
Paul | Report | 24 Apr 2006 22:04 |
Hi Heidi The Names and DOBs are a pretty good match also :) PM me your email and I will send you the image (if you like) Cheers...Paul |
|||
|
newforester | Report | 24 Apr 2006 22:03 |
Paul, Hi - that one looks good....I've been told that Thomas was a Punch and Judy man, and Folkestone is on the coast so ......???!!! |
|||
|
newforester | Report | 24 Apr 2006 22:01 |
Glen, I'll take the possible for David and Esther please! I wasn't expecting them to have just changed names !!! Honestly, that's not helpful is it! |
|||
|
Paul | Report | 24 Apr 2006 22:01 |
Hi Glen What was Thomas' occupation on 1881 ? Cheers...Paul |
|||
|
Glen In Tinsel Knickers | Report | 24 Apr 2006 21:59 |
Think you might have something there Paul, I was looking when Heidi posted the news about the Smith name change. Glen |
|||
|
Paul | Report | 24 Apr 2006 21:57 |
How About These David A Smith abt 1887 London, England Son Folkestone Kent Esther Smith abt 1854 London, England Wife Folkestone Kent George D Smith abt 1881 London, England Son Folkestone Kent Martha Smith abt 1889 London, England Daughter Folkestone Kent Myra E Smith abt 1879 London, England Daughter Folkestone Kent Thomas Smith abt 1853 London, England Head Folkestone Kent Thomas Smith abt 1875 London, England Son Folkestone Kent Thomas' Occupation is 'Showman' Cheers...Paul |
|||
|
Glen In Tinsel Knickers | Report | 24 Apr 2006 21:56 |
Hi I'm looking right now, I have a possible for Esther and David but not under Smith!!The nearest to Myra is a female called Moses(!) abt 1889 Stepney. Neither David or Moses have a relationship to the head. Do you want the details? Glen |
|||
|
newforester | Report | 24 Apr 2006 21:49 |
Glen, WOW......there's actually some wierd surname thing going on in this family... My gran told me her dad changed his name from Day to Day-Smith when he joined the Navy, but I couldn't find any record of his birth in 1907/8, neither could the GRO ! Someone else found him under Day-Smith for me, so his dad must have changed the name after the 1901 census but before having another child in 1901. But if they're using the name Smith in 1881, then reverting back to Day in 1901, then changed to Day-Smith in 1901.... well blimey is all I can say!!! Is there any chance you could look for them under Smith in 1891 please ? |
|||
|
Glen In Tinsel Knickers | Report | 24 Apr 2006 21:27 |
Hmmmnnnnn 1881 The transcription is under the name Smith but Esther Smith abt 1854 Bethnal Green Wife George Smith ----------- Poplar Son Myra Smith abt 1879 Poplar Daur Thomas abt 1852 Bethnal Green Head Labourer Thomas abt 1876 Poplar Son 63 Flint St Poplar Bromley St Leonard RG11/500 Folio 28 Pg 49 Glen |
|||
|
newforester | Report | 24 Apr 2006 21:06 |
1901 census: Emma Day abt 1877 Limehouse, Middlesex, England Wife Leyton Essex John Day abt 1899 Bow, Middlesex, England Son Leyton Essex Thomas Day abt 1898 Bromley, Middlesex, England Son Leyton Essex Thomas W Day abt 1876 Poplar, Middlesex, England Head Leyton Essex - occupation - showman Asuming people on same page are parents: David A Day abt 1886 Stepney, Middlesex, England Son Leyton Essex Esther Day abt 1853 Bethnal Green, Middlesex, England Wife Leyton Essex George H Day abt 1882 Poplar, Middlesex, England Son Leyton Essex Henry Day abt 1891 Plaistow, Middlesex, England Son Leyton Essex John Day abt 1896 Bromley, Middlesex, England Son Leyton Essex Martha E Day abt 1889 Hackney, Middlesex, England Daughter Leyton Essex Myra E Day abt 1879 Poplar, Middlesex, England Daughter Leyton Essex Thomas W Day abt 1851 Bethnal Green, Middlesex, England Head Leyton Essex - showman and exhib Plotted out dates of birth: 1851 Bethnal Green Thomas W Day 1853 Bethnal Green Esther ? 1876 Poplar Thomas W Day 1879 Poplar Myra E Day 1882 Poplar George H Day 1886 Stepney David A Day 1889 Hackney Martha E Day 1891 Plaistow Henry Day 1896 Bromley John Day Can anyone help please? |
|||
|
newforester | Report | 24 Apr 2006 21:04 |
Despite a couple of attempts, helpful people have so far been unsuccessful in finding this family on either the 1881 or 1891 census......(please see below for easy to read info I do have).....please can someone try to find them? |