PDA

View Full Version : 1861 1871 1881 1911 census



LaurenS1990
22-09-11, 13:35
Hi all

I am having so much trouble finding an ancestor in the above censuses.

Thomas Arthur Page born 1861 in Buckinghamshire.

In 1890 his marries Alice Louisa Willis b.1865.

I have him in the 1891 census with Alice and 1 child Thomas b1831.

1901 he is again with Alice, and 4 children Thomas, Lilian b.1887, George b.1899 and Albert b.1901.

1911 I have Alice with Lilian, George and 1 more child Alice b.1908. She is listed as married however and not as a widow, but I can't for the life of me find him in the 1911 census.

I also cannot find him in the 1861, 1871 or 1881 census.... I haven't been able to find a baptism record to get the names of his parents... So I have hit a brick wall!!

Can anyone help??

(Hope my post made sense!!!)

maudarby
22-09-11, 13:53
Poss baptism on the LDS pilot site
Thomas Arthur Page bap 3rd Feb 1861 Hillesden Bucks, parents John & Eleanor.
Moggie

Elaine ..Spain
22-09-11, 13:54
I don't know if you have the marriage certificate for Thomas Page and Alice Wills - but if not it is available on Ancestry.
Gives Thomas' father as Thomas, occ. labourer (deceased). Not a lot of help!

maudarby
22-09-11, 13:55
He also shows up on the pilot site re 1911 census living
Banbury, Swalcliffe,Wroxton, Oxfordshire.
Moggie

LaurenS1990
22-09-11, 13:58
Poss baptism on the LDS pilot site
Thomas Arthur Page bap 3rd Feb 1861 Hillesden Bucks, parents John & Eleanor.
Moggie

There is another Thomas Page born in 1861 in Bucks... this is him. I have followed him throughout the census and he is not my Thomas unfortunately.

LaurenS1990
22-09-11, 13:58
I don't know if you have the marriage certificate for Thomas Page and Alice Wills - but if not it is available on Ancestry.
Gives Thomas' father as Thomas, occ. labourer (deceased). Not a lot of help!

Thanks Elaine, I hadn't seen this no!! This is more info than I've had before though!

Elaine ..Spain
22-09-11, 13:58
Poss baptism on the LDS pilot site
Thomas Arthur Page bap 3rd Feb 1861 Hillesden Bucks, parents John & Eleanor.
Moggie
That one can be followed on the census right through to 1891, still living at home.

Elaine ..Spain
22-09-11, 13:59
Thanks Elaine, I hadn't seen this no!! This is more info than I've had before though!

Here's the link
http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&rank=0&f8=thomas&f10=page&sx=&rg_81004011__date=&rs_81004011__date=0&rg_f51__date=1891&rs_f51__date=10&f37=&f47=&f53=&f23=&f24=&f18=alice&f19=&f28=&f29=&gskw=&prox=1&db=lmamarriages&ti=5538&ti.si=0&gss=angs-d&pcat=34&fh=8&h=3378511&recoff=6+7+26+27+38

maudarby
22-09-11, 14:08
Just checked out the one living Banbury 1911 & it's not him, sorry.
Moggie

Elaine ..Spain
22-09-11, 14:17
There is a Thomas Page born c 1854 Great Hampden in the 1861 census - parents Thomas (ag. lab) and Emilia.
I wonder if he knocked a few years off his age!
Having problem following this one through the census though.

1861 census
http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=uki1861&indiv=try&h=11248309


1871 census - same family but Thomas not there
http://search.ancestry.co.uk/cgi-bin/sse.dll?indiv=1&rank=0&gsfn=jane&gsln=&sx=&f1=&f2=&f4=&f18__n=&f12__n=&rg_81004011__date=1859&rs_81004011__date=2&f27=&f14=buck*&f15=&_8000C002=&_80008002=&_80018002=&f7=&f8=&f9=&gskw=hampden&prox=1&db=uki1871&ti=5538&ti.si=0&gss=angs-d&pcat=UKICEN&fh=0&h=13022995&recoff=

LaurenS1990
22-09-11, 14:22
How strange, I was just looking at the same family in 1881.
I don't know how I can determine if it is definitely him? So annoying.

Elaine ..Spain
22-09-11, 14:40
Just following through with the parents from that census - Thomas & Amelia.
From freeBMD looks as if they died in 1883 and 1885 respectively, Wycombe registration district.
- so at least that Thomas fits in with being deceased by the time Thomas and Alice married in 1891 - although it still doesn't mean it's the right one!

dicole
22-09-11, 23:08
I have also researched a Thomas Page, one born in "America" in 1838.

His family were back in Warwickshire by 1841 and remained there. It was reasonably easy to find him in all the census because of his birthplace, but was once transcribed as PAYE and his brother is listed as PUGH, but I think that was because he was just a lodger.

PAGE is such a hard name to google !!!

Di