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
Missing Children
Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
---|---|---|---|
|
Peter | Report | 25 Apr 2006 21:14 |
I just thought those of you who so kindly helped out would like to know what happened. You were right about the Rowlings, although I think, looking at the actual page, that the error is in the transcription. It turns out that two people by the name of James Rawlings married in Trowbridge in 1857/8 and unbelievably both married an Eliza. I was making assumptions and had latched on to the wrong couple. Now I have both marriage certificates and still more fun to come. The father of James is listed in both cases as John Rawlings, and both are labourers. However, the 1841 census has turned up the right John I think. Now into the Parish records, a new foray for me. Thanks again. |
|||
|
Peter | Report | 24 Mar 2006 23:40 |
Thanks Merry Monty and Toni, that certainly looks like them. There are a James and Eliza though, living in Yarnhell St in Trowbridge. It looks like I was tracing the wrong ones. Ah well, a bit of re-drawing of the tree is called for. Thanks to all who added ideas. |
|||
|
Toni | Report | 24 Mar 2006 11:48 |
Peter, Found them I think. Surname Rowlings. Source information: RG10/1922 Registration district: Melksham Sub-registration district: Trowbridge ED, institution, or vessel: 12 Folio: 11 Page: 14 (click to see others on page) Household schedule number: 44 GSU Number: 830871 Albert Rowlings abt 1864 Trowbridge, Wiltshire, England Son Trowbridge Wiltshire Annie Rowlings abt 1866 Trowbridge, Wiltshire, England Daughter Trowbridge Wiltshire Eliza Rowlings abt 1823 Trowbridge, Wiltshire, England Wife Trowbridge Wiltshire Henry Rowlings abt 1862 Trowbridge, Wiltshire, England Son Trowbridge Wiltshire James Rowlings abt 1824 Trowbridge, Wiltshire, England Head Trowbridge Wiltshire Toni |
|||
|
Merry | Report | 24 Mar 2006 11:47 |
I can't find a James and Eliza as a couple with no children??? Only the family posted above. James is down as a Local Board Labourer and Eliza a Laundress. Merry |
|||
|
Merry | Report | 24 Mar 2006 11:44 |
1871?? Albert Rowlings abt 1864 Trowbridge, Wiltshire, England Son Trowbridge Wiltshire Annie Rowlings abt 1866 Trowbridge, Wiltshire, England Daughter Trowbridge Wiltshire Eliza Rowlings abt 1823 Trowbridge, Wiltshire, England Wife Trowbridge Wiltshire Henry Rowlings abt 1862 Trowbridge, Wiltshire, England Son Trowbridge Wiltshire James Rowlings abt 1824 Trowbridge, Wiltshire, England Head Trowbridge Wiltshire Merry |
|||
|
Toni | Report | 24 Mar 2006 11:42 |
Peter, Have you looked for incorrect spellings on census or transcriptions ie Rowlings? I've had a few that way. I also think it is a rule for several children to disapear for a census or 2. I had a whole family disappear for one census and then some reappear for the next and others appear for the one after that. Good luck. Toni |
|||
|
Peter | Report | 24 Mar 2006 11:35 |
I'm still at a loss. The children are Henry, Albert and Annie Rawlings, born and residing in Trowbridge. In 1881 they are with their parents James and Eliza and they are 19, 16 and 14. I can find no trace of them in the 1871 census, where they should be 9, 6 and 4. Any clues as to where I'm going wrong would be welcome. Thanks |
|||
|
Chris in Sussex | Report | 22 Mar 2006 23:05 |
Peter Please forgive me if I have misunderstood your reply about the use of initials in Census returns...... Phoenix is suggesting that if the children were in an institution, of some description, they may be registered just by their initials. I must admit that my initial thoughts were the same as Phoenix. Chris |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
Jess Bow Bag | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:57 |
yes, they should do. would you like to give us their name s and see if anyone else can spot them? |
|||
|
Peter | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:41 |
Thanks for the suggestions. I've tried the relatives, including their mother's side, even to her mother's maiden name, with no results. They're not listed just by their initials, because the head count on the census page for their parents is correct. Am I right in assuming that if I enter a name and approx. DOB into the census search via Ancestry that it will come up with the person if they are in some institution ? |
|||
|
Phoenix | Report | 21 Mar 2006 22:47 |
Hi Peter Institutions also form part of the census. It is unlikely that the children would be in a workhouse without their parents, but possible. Sometimes, they are referred to simply by their initials. I think that the only way you might find them is by searching by age and birthplace and hoping it is a village, rather than a city. Have you checked every possible aunt and uncle? It might be more likely that they have been put down with the surname of their carers. |
|||
|
Smiley | Report | 21 Mar 2006 22:44 |
Census records should cover any person residing in England or Wales on census night, be that home, hospital, workhouse, ship, asylums etc... your children should be there somewhere. Unless maybe they had Scottish relatives that they could have been staying with at the time Sam |
|||
|
Jeanette | Report | 21 Mar 2006 22:44 |
if you put names up here and then we can have a look for them Jeanette |
|||
|
Peter | Report | 21 Mar 2006 22:40 |
Can anyone help please? I have found an anomaly in the census records for my family. Two of my ancestors married in 1857 and are shown on the 1861 census as childless, which I believe is correct. However, they are also recorded as a couple in 1871, when I know there were three children. The children re-appear again in1881, aged 19, 16, and 14, so should have been 9, 6, and 4 in 1871. A name search rules out their staying with family or friends. The family were going through a hard time then, being a general labourer and a sorter of rags, so I suppose it could be that the children were being looked after by the parish or some other institution? if so, how can I access these records as the available census records only seem to deal with private houses? Any tips appreciated. Thanks |