I have been concentrating on my father's mother's side of the family recently and in looking at the census records for my Gt Gt Grandfather in 1891 thought I'd come across some severe mistranscription. However on checking 1901 it appears not but I'd apprecate it if somebody could check the references just to confirm that I haven't gone mad and that I am seeing identical info on both censuses! - It looks as if I have "an orginal dirty old man" as a gt gt grandfather :D.
In the 1891 info I thought that the lady should be down as Dau - as his daughter with exacty the same name had been with him since 1841 and I thought that the boy would be grandson but 1901 blows that out of the water as does a birth in the 2Q 1885 Greenwich 1d 1012!
I await the birth cert with interest to see which of the two marriages that I've narrowed it down to it is!
1891 RG12 Piece 522 Folio 67 p13 - Henry S Richardson Retired Bookseller
1901 RG13 Piece 554 Folio 115 p7
In the 1891 info I thought that the lady should be down as Dau - as his daughter with exacty the same name had been with him since 1841 and I thought that the boy would be grandson but 1901 blows that out of the water as does a birth in the 2Q 1885 Greenwich 1d 1012!
I await the birth cert with interest to see which of the two marriages that I've narrowed it down to it is!
1891 RG12 Piece 522 Folio 67 p13 - Henry S Richardson Retired Bookseller
1901 RG13 Piece 554 Folio 115 p7
Comment