Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Victim of typhoid but who is present at the death ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Victim of typhoid but who is present at the death ?

    I have a relative THOMAS CLARE who died on 9th November 1862 of "typhoid fever 12 days certified" aged just 54 in Chesterton, Cambridgeshire. I understand that around that time, death by typhoid was not uncommon and that, in some cases, victims were locked up in isolation wards, mainly to protect those who were free of the disease.

    Anyway, Thomas died and even though he had a wife and a number of children over 16, none of them were described on the death certificate as being present at the death. The person named was a MARION PRATT. Who is she ? I have no trace of her being a relative. Was Thomas in an institution and she was a nurse or similar ? The death certificate doesn't give an address for the place of death other than "Chesterton". Does "certified" on the death certificate mean anything more than signed off by a doctor .... but there is no doctor's name ?

    I have searched the 1861 census and there are just two Marion Pratt's neither of whom look right - one is a 33 year old needlewoman from Westminster in London and the other the 72 year old wife of a poulterer in Tiverton, Devon. The 1871 census on the surface provides more hits but when you look there are none who jump out, even the two Marion Pratt's in Cambridge who would have been aged 53 and 48.

    Can anyone shed any light on who this person present at the death of a typhoid victim might be ?
    Simon

    "You've got to ask yourself one question. Do I feel lucky ? " (Dirty Harry) - Be lucky; the facts are out there somewhere

    http://www.thebirdtree.co.uk

  • #2
    In the 1860s Marion was a fairly uncommon name - just under 3,000 listed in the whole of the England & Wales.
    Have you thought about searching for a Mary Ann Pratt?
    Elaine







    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Elaine ..Spain View Post
      In the 1860s Marion was a fairly uncommon name - just under 3,000 listed in the whole of the England & Wales.
      Have you thought about searching for a Mary Ann Pratt?
      Good idea but ....... there are no Mary Ann Pratt's at all in either 1861 or 1871.

      I use Find My Past for the 1861 census. Have done a quick search on Ancestry and although I can't access the detail there is a Marion Pratt born 1809 resident in Cambridgeshire and also a Marion D Pratt born 1847. Is there anyone who can look for me ? Why don't they come up on FMP ?
      Simon

      "You've got to ask yourself one question. Do I feel lucky ? " (Dirty Harry) - Be lucky; the facts are out there somewhere

      http://www.thebirdtree.co.uk

      Comment


      • #4
        in the 1861 census there is a Marion Pratt in Victoria Rd, Chesteron RG9/1021/101/36
        Mike in Droitwich

        My family tree is on
        http://mjfisher.tribalpages.com

        Comment


        • #5
          She's bom Scotland age 59 and married to a shoemaker, the other Marion is her daughter. They are in Victoria Road.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Mike Fisher View Post
            in the 1861 census there is a Marion Pratt in Victoria Rd, Chesteron RG9/1021/101/36
            Well done Mike. Victoria Road was the main road in Chesterton and my CLARE's lived in Albert Street which was a road off Victoria Road. Don't know why she doesn't feature on the FMP census but looks like she was possibly a friend / neighbour of Thomas. Doesn't explain why there were no family members present though !

            Thanks again.
            Simon

            "You've got to ask yourself one question. Do I feel lucky ? " (Dirty Harry) - Be lucky; the facts are out there somewhere

            http://www.thebirdtree.co.uk

            Comment


            • #7
              A possible answer to my own question as to why there were no other family members present ....... as typhoid was a pretty virulent disease, presumably there would have been a good chance that THOMAS was not the only family member who had caught it. Perhaps they were too ill to report his death ? But why would Marion risk being present ? She was still alive in 1871 so she didn't die from it .... quite the opposite, as amazingly she was shown as being 62 years old having aged just 3 years in those 10 but the rest of her family had aged the full 10 years !
              Simon

              "You've got to ask yourself one question. Do I feel lucky ? " (Dirty Harry) - Be lucky; the facts are out there somewhere

              http://www.thebirdtree.co.uk

              Comment

              Working...
              X