Unconfigured Ad Widget

**Christine in Herts** · 03-11-09, 17:07

There's this one in 1861 - but he's 7, so born a bit early:
RG9/2611 fo15 p24
and his parents were Peter and Martha.

EDIT: I think this one is married to Emma in 1881.

Christine

**angelina** · 03-11-09, 17:10

i have looked on cheshire bmds - several george cookes born 1859 and 1860 and 1861 inb cheshire
on ancestry there is one on 1861 census but his parents are john and anne.
have you tried the IGI pilot and ordinary searches to see if anything comes up on those as if he is cheshire born the igi pilot may have something on him?
good hunting

**Christine in Herts** · 03-11-09, 17:12

I think it might help to have the census refs for the later censuses, so that we have something with which to compare?

Christine

**fortuna** · 03-11-09, 19:04

Thank you all very much for your thoughts. According to his marriage certificate his father is George. I have looked for George Cooke (father) but it is impossible without having a clue as to when he was born or where.
I have searched everywhere I can think of including the IGI Pilot search.
Here are the census references
1881 RG11 3542 133 40
1891 RG12 2850 59 13
1901 RG13 3355 152 1
1911 RG14 21770 RG78 PN1297 RD449 SD1 ED18 SN143

There must be a shorter code for the 1911!

Thanks again,

**Christine in Herts** · 03-11-09, 19:17

You might be wise not to place absolute reliance on the father's name on a marriage certificate.

It is not unknown for men to have fathers named after themselves, rather than risk the embarrassment of having none at all to write in. For example, I have a John STRATFORD, baptised in Tingewick, Bucks in 1920, son of Ann STRATFORD, servant, where the baptism entry says

"This child is said to have been born in this Parish about three years ago. Mother's present residence unknown."

By the time he got married about 24 years later, he had "discovered" that his father was also called "John" and, moreover, was no mere ag lab, but a farmer.

And that doesn't take account of human error:
a] fathers' names transposed between bride and groom, say
b] someone else's father's name being given because the question was not asked directly of the groom, and was misunderstood.
c] ...

Christine

**fortuna** · 03-11-09, 20:07

I agree with you there are so many reasons for not being able to find him. I just had a look at Staffordshire - do you think he and his family were living in Staffordshire ie the birth I found in Wolstanton?
1841
RG107 993 12/13 19
Samuel Cooke 33 - 1808
Ann Cooke 25 - 1816
George 8 - 1833
None born in county
So they could have moved from Cheshire. I'm talking rubbish! He could be anyone. This is my OH's tree which he has never been interested in. Now he is showing interest and I get stuck at his Great, Great Grandfather!!!:madd:
Ain't genealogy frustrating?

**Christine in Herts** · 03-11-09, 21:32

Originally posted by fortuna View Post

....
1911 RG14 21770 RG78 PN1297 RD449 SD1 ED18 SN143

There must be a shorter code for the 1911!

Thanks again,

1911 RG14/21770 RG78/1297 RD449 SD1 ED18 SN143

Not much shorter, but a bit! The main reason it's so long is because, unlike the earlier censuses, we're looking at a more "drilled-down" lot of info - the individual household, rather than the street.

Christine

**fortuna** · 03-11-09, 21:35

Thanks Christine - as you say a bit shorter!

**jean** · 03-11-09, 22:23

according to genuki the registration district for odd rode was Congleton until 1937 when it became Crewe. Congleton is Cheshire East on bmd, only 1 George 1853 Congleton but there are a few Cookes registered - could they be siblings?

**fortuna** · 03-11-09, 22:48

Yes, that's right and all his POB's from '81 through '11 were Congleton. But where was he for the first 21 years of his life?:(

**jean** · 04-11-09, 10:16

on LDS search labs 1861 census there is a George Cooke age 7 congleton but the link sends you to find my past and I don't have subscription with them. I'm sure someone will look for you.

FamilySearch Record Search

**fortuna** · 04-11-09, 10:46

Hi,
Thank you. I do have FMP and have found this before. I checked again to make sure - the parents are Peter and Martha Cooke with family and George in Congleton. I want to get to the bottom of this so do you know how much it would cost when you don't have the reg number? I mean his birth cert!
Thank you again everyone -

**jean** · 04-11-09, 11:38

this might help

England and Wales Certificates - Family Tree Forum

**fortuna** · 07-11-09, 11:21

Thanks Jean. I have looked at the link.

But I am still stuck George, bless him, says 3 out of 4 times that he was born in Hall Green and once in Odd Rode. As far as I can see this should be registered in Congleton. The marriage cert says his age at marriage in 1880 was 21 giving a birth date of 1859 and this age is pretty accurate through the censuses.

So my question is should I just order a birth cert for George Cooke born 1859 Congleton, Cheshire? This would be without the volume and page number. I have always had these for other certs I have ordered and don't really know if what I am asking is possible! Also on the cert is his father's name as George - deceased but that worries me as I cannot find either on the census before1881!

Advice please, anyone,

**Christine in Herts** · 07-11-09, 14:03

The marriage cert says his age at marriage in 1880 was 21 giving a birth date of 1859 and this age is pretty accurate through the censuses.

Don't forget that arithmetic means that he could have been born in 1858, unless the event giving his age fell on 31 December.

For example...
If you're born Jan - Mar in any year, then you'll have just had "this" year's birthday before the census date (generally about 31 Mar / 1 Apr): born January 1851, you'll already be 10 in March 1861; if you're born April 1850, you won't quite have reached your 11th birthday by March 1861, so you'll still appear as aged 10 (infants often have months specified, of course!).

That means that you'd need to ask for at least quarters 2-4 of 1858 to be searched, as well as 1 & 2 of 1859 (assuming that the other events also fall around March/April. If they're at a different time of year, then you can use that to narrow down the possible birthdate range.

Christine

**Christine in Herts** · 07-11-09, 14:19

I'd be inclined to contact the local RO for Congleton, and see if they can help directly. They don't use the GRO refs, anyway, so the lack of the GRO ref isn't a problem. Local ROs are often more accommodating than GRO about vague info. Some people have found them so accommodating that they don't charge at all if they don't find what you want! (Policy varies from office to office.)

Cheshire Births Marriages & Deaths

Congleton Sub-District
Created 1 July 1837. Abolished 1 April 1972. In Congleton Registration District (1837-1937) and Macclesfield Registration District (1937-74).

Biddulph [Staffs] (1837-93), Buglawton, Congleton, Hulme Walfield, Newbold Astbury, Radnor, Somerford, Somerford Booths.

Records now held at Cheshire East.

Cheshire East Family History

Looking at CheshireBMD, I can't see a George in 1858-1860 in the Congleton area...
1858: Henry, Martha Maria, Son Of Edwin (x2, consec. refs - twins?)
1859: Edward, Levi, Mary Jane, Sarah Ann
1860: Arthur, Mary Hannah, Sarah Ellen, Thomas

(also a few no-E COOKs - but no George).

At that stage, registration was still the responsibility of the registrars, rather than the parents, so children did go unregistered.

~~~~~~~~
It also crosses my mind that you should consider whether there was any incentive for hi to lie about his age? My g-g-mother maintained a fiction of being born ca 1858/9 for decades, because she was a lot older than her husband, who was not quite 21 when they married: the lie made her nearer in age. And the Leonard Keith Bennett who appears in Detroit in the 1930s appears to have shed 6 years for direct interaction with government bodies (immigration, social security number application, naturalization), but gave an accurate age for censuses (as did his widow on his behalf at death), and shed another ten years to marry a woman who wasn't 20, and he was claiming to be 34 (instead of 50!).

Christine

**fortuna** · 07-11-09, 16:21

Hi Christine,
Thank you for your help and for taking the time make suggestions about the elusive george!

Now, have I got this right? If he was 22 on the 1881 Apr 7th census and married aged 21 in September 1880 does that make his birthday between September one year and April the next? To have been 22 in '81 but only 21 in the previous September his birthday should be in the Sep1/4 or Dec1/4 of 1859. Of course that is assuming he told the truth on his marriage certificate!

I have just spent ages trying to work this out mental arithimetic was never my strong point! Now looking again I'm not sure.

Do you think it better to phone or write? Very grateful for your advice as I have always ordered through the GRO with good information,
Cheers,

**Christine in Herts** · 07-11-09, 16:38

I used the Date of Birth calculator (lower top-bar) to save brain-power. I'd say that he was born Oct 1858 to Mar 1859...

EDIT: just checked the Wiki for the census dates (http://www.familytreeforum.com/wiki/.../Census_Search). The 1881 census was 3 April, so I'm about to change the date-ranges below...

Sep 1880 age 21 => Oct 1858 - Sep 1859
3 Apr 1881 age 22 => 4 Apr 1858 - 3 Apr 1859

The overlap of those two time-ranges is Oct (or end Sep) 1858 - 3 Apr 1859.

You don't mention the actual date for the marriage but, say it was 15 Sep 1880, then the range is 16 Sep 1858 (i.e. the day-number for the day afterwards) - 3 Apr 1859.

Christine

**fortuna** · 07-11-09, 17:17

I shall write I think as it is easier to explain. Very pleased to learn about the birth calculator I hadn't seen that before. It will take a while but I will let you know if I have any luck,
Fingers crossed,

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Announcement

Cheshire or Staffordshire?

Cheshire or Staffordshire?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment