Trying to trace George Voce born 1823

[marnie15]

I am trying to find my Great-great grandfather, George Voce. According to the 1861 census, he was born in Birmingham, Warwickshire around 1823. He married Hannah Hughes in 1850 in Manchester and had 3 children. They all lived in Salford, Lancashire.

By the 1871 census 2 more children had been born but George does not appear on that census. In 1872, Hannah married James Culpen in Rochdale and her son was a witness.

George must have died between fathering his last child, who was born in 1865 and the 1871 census but I cannot find a death record or birth record for him.

Can anyone help, please?

[Kerrywood]

Hi Marnie15, and welcome to the forums :seeya:

Have you ruled out this death for George?

Deaths
Sep Qtr 1869
VOCE George age 40
Salford 8d 54

Granted his age is about 5 years out compared to the 1861 census, but the district seems to be right. Perhaps worth a look at the certificate if you haven't already tried it?

[marnie15]

Hi Kerrywood,

Thanks for that!
It certainly seems promising. All I need to find now are his birth details then I would have his mother's name.

[marnie15]

Hi again, Kerrywood,

I've tried putting in the details you sent me for George Voce's death in Ancestry.com but I don't seem to be able to find it.

[Kerrywood]

All I need to find now are his birth details then I would have his mother's name.
Civil registration began in 1837, so I'm afraid you won't find a birth registration for him.

Your best bet will be to look for a baptism in the parish registers. If you're lucky it may include a date of birth, but unlike a birth certificate it won't give you his mother's maiden name. For that, you'll need to look for the marriage of his parents.

But first things first. Do you have George's father's name/occupation from his marriage certificate? That may help you find him in an earlier census. Perhaps he was still at home with both his parents in 1841?

[Kerrywood]

I've tried putting in the details you sent me for George Voce's death in Ancestry.com but I don't seem to be able to find it.
Ancestry have mistranscribed him as George VODE. The GRO index page clearly shows VOCE.

It's usually better to use FreeBMD for events up to about 1915. Ancestry's database is supposedly the same up to this date, but it has some keying errors, like the above.

[Waitabit]

MArnie15, have you tried Warwickshire Online Parish Clerks?

[Raffaele]

From the IGI

GEORGE VOCE
Birth: 25 NOV 1816
Christening: 26 DEC 1816 Saint Phillips, Birmingham, Warwick
Father: EDWARD VOCE
Mother: ELIZABETH
Batch C041796

As Kerrywood said about the death record she found, don't rely too much on the accuracy of Census ages
This looks like him but a little older but just right with the Death record.

[Waitabit]

Nicely Raffaele, I tried it with only 2 yrs either side. (slap wrist)

[marnie15]

Thank you so much to you all. I hadn't realised that census ages could be so inaccurate. What site did you find George's birth and christening details on, Raffaele?

[Raffaele]

The International Genealogical Index - Chruch of the Latter Day Saints

http://www.familysearch.org/ENG/search/igi/search_igi.asp

You can also access by parish and batch number through the Hugh Wallis site

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hughwallis/

[Karen Newman]

I may perhaps be stating the obvious but if he dies aged 40 in 1869, then he would have been born around 1829, not 1816, so the baptism is only a possible.

In 1861, he is born c1823.

Cannot find George & Hannah in 1851, but in 1841, there is a George VOCE aged 17 in Manchester, NOT born in County. The adults of the family (possibly the parents) are JOHN & ELIZABETH VOCE. But this is, of course, only a suggestion that it is the right George.

You really need George's marriage cert to establish his father's name.

[Karen Newman]

George and Hannah are on the 1851, I believe, at HO107; Piece: 2226; Folio: 363; Page: 12. Incorrectly indexed by Ancestry as George & Hannah VOICE THOMAS (Thomas being the name of the Household in which they are lodging).

George is shown as aged 24, and a schoolmaster, which does not seem to reconcile with his occupation on the 1861.

[Raffaele]

There is also this one before the age was added to the death record

Deaths Jun 1857
Voce George Henry Manchester 8d 63

The baptism record is correct by the census report of his birthplace. Not always right.

Census ages are notoriously wrong because of rounding, a lack of numeracy meant people did not know their age or date of birth and of course sometimes they fibbed. Death ages are even worse because it is the age the person reported the death believes they were.

Karen is right though, every piece of information you can get about the person adds to the authenticity, however with George Voce if you choose deaths on Freebmd and do not select a date, there are not that many to choose from.

[marnie15]

Thanks everyone! I realise that I need his marriage certificate in order to get any further.

[marnie15]

I've just obtained a copy of the marriage certificate between George Voce (my great-great grandfather) and Hannah Hughes. (The marriage took place in Manchester in 1850. It lists his father as John Voce a Mechanic. I am still confused as the marriage certificate gave George's occupation as Schoolmaster which also ties in with his occupation on the 1851. However, in the 1861 census his occupation is listed as a Clerk in a Cotton Mill!

I don't understand the discrepancy between his marriage certificate and census 11 years later. Would a Schoolmaster become a Clerk?

In the 1841 census George is listed with his parents, John and Elizabeth along with his siblings, William, Edward, Harry and Elizabeth. They are living in Garratt Street, Manchester and listed as being born 'Out of County'.

[gasser]

Have you found him on the 1851 census? What was his occupation then?

[Peter Goodey]

What is shown on his children's birth certificates?

[pattenwalsh]

Yes but on the 1861 census George is shown as head b.1843 age 18 married and Hannah is shown as wife b.1829 age 32 married

[Peter Goodey]

George is shown as head b.1843 age 18

It is badly written but I believe his age is shown as 38

[marnie15]

In the 1851 census he is down as a Schoolmaster. The census lists him as George Voice Thomas. He and his wife were lodging with the Thomas family. I, too, believe that his age on the 1861 census has been badly written. In the 10 years between the 1851 and 1861 census his occupation had changed from Schoolmaster to Clerk in a Cotton Mill. He died in 1869.

Unfortunately I haven't got copies of his children's birth certificates.

[Thomasin]

Could I suggest that in 1861 George's occupation has been accidentally omitted by the enumerator, and Hannah's occupation entered in its place? After all, in 1871 Hannah was a 'Weaver Cotton Mill'. The 1861 entry doesn't say 'Clerk in Cotton Mill', only ' ... In Cotton Mill'. The contentious word looks like 'C' and another letter - maybe an 'l' - but why shorten Clerk when there's plenty of space?

By the way, in 1851 FMP calls them George and Hannah Void (ignoring the ditto under Thomas).

[marnie15]

It is possible that George's occupation has been accidentally left off the 1851 census and his wife's put in its place. I had accepted the information on the census!

[Kerrywood]

Could I suggest that in 1861 George's occupation has been accidentally omitted by the enumerator, and Hannah's occupation entered in its place? After all, in 1871 Hannah was a 'Weaver Cotton Mill'. The 1861 entry doesn't say 'Clerk in Cotton Mill', only ' ... In Cotton Mill'. The contentious word looks like 'C' and another letter - maybe an 'l' - but why shorten Clerk when there's plenty of space?
These things are somewhat in the eye of the beholder, and Thomasin may well have a point. But to me it looks like Cl, and it does seem to belong alongside the other words in this line.

RG9; Piece: 2925; Folio: 40; Page: 24 (reference to record held by TNA)

Cl was a standard abbreviation for Clerk, and this enumerator uses it elsewhere in this notebook -- e.g. folio 43 page 29, six lines up from the bottom, where Charles BRIGHTMAN(?) is a Railway Cl (presumably Railway Clerk).

To be honest, I don't necessarily see a problem in George VOCE being a schoolmaster in 1850/1851 and a clerk in 1861. Both jobs require a certain level of education, and he may well have been paid more working in a thriving manufacturing industry than in education.

Just my view, and others may see it differently. :smile5:

[marnie15]

That's a good point Kerrywood. As you say, both jobs demonstrate a need for a certain amount of education. What surprised me was that on his marriage certificate his 'signature' was in the same handwriting as the rest of the certificate. Assuming a certain level of education, would he not have signed his marriage certificate himself?

[Kerrywood]

What surprised me was that on his marriage certificate his 'signature' was in the same handwriting as the rest of the certificate. Assuming a certain level of education, would he not have signed his marriage certificate himself?

The certificate that you have, presuming it is from the GRO, is a copy of a copy and doesn't show original signatures. Sorry.

[Ajwyorks]

From the IGI it looks as if John and Elizabeth had all their children baptised together in Manchester
26 Feb 1837 Manchester Cathedral
Edward, George, Elizabeth Cecelia, Valentine Harry and William.
Unfortunately no dates of birth are given
There are records for Cecelia Voces in Birmingham on the census and the IGI so there might be a connection.

[marnie15]

Thanks for the information about the GRO certificate Kerrywood. I hadn't realised that the marriage certificate, because it is a copy of a copy, wouldn't show original signatures.

[marnie15]

Thanks for that Ajwyorks!

[colashbury]

Hi Marnie. How you gettin on with all your research. On the 1861 G.R census records it deff shows his age as 18 and born in 1843 and states that he is a clerk in a cotton mill. The G.R records show the original census plus a printout of all details.......Colin

[marnie15]

Thanks Colin. Research going well, thanks.
Marnie

[colashbury]

Found an Elizabeth as a niece right age, living on the isle of Thanet, Margate with a William and Elizabeth looks like Coweler. Maybe this is the original area that Parents were from. Does this mean anything to you.....

[marnie15]

No, it doesn't mean anything at the moment. All I've got is that famly were from Manchester area.

[marnie15]

As I now know that George Voce's parents were John Voce (born abt 1791 in Manchester) and Elizabeth (born abt 1785), is there any way I can discover what Elizabeth's maiden name was?

[colashbury]

Hi Marnie. Not sure if yer have seen the one on the GRO index but I will throw it at yer anyway and see what yer think.
John born approx 1797 Grantham Lincolnshire though
Father Thomas
Mother Sarah
Spouse Elizabeth Jackson born approx 1801

Children to John and Elizabeth
Sarah Dorothy 1824
John 1827
James 1830
Elizabeth 1832
Robert 1834...............Colin

[Karen Newman]

As I now know that George Voce's parents were John Voce (born abt 1791 in Manchester) and Elizabeth (born abt 1785), is there any way I can discover what Elizabeth's maiden name was?

Looks like you need to find the marriage, not an easy task.

Some (all?) of the children were born in Birmingham from those I have found on the censuses. So I would make that my starting point. Is their daughter Elizabeth in Kent in 1851, with William and Elizabeth CAVELER? She is shown as their niece. But they are from 'down south. Not sure what the connection is there.

Have you looked for John & Elizabeth in 1851? I could not find them. They could have died, or one died and the other remarried. It would be nice to find them so that you had an idea of their place of birth. Not sure John was born in Manchester, he says 'not in county' in 1841.

[marnie15]

Thanks, Colin.

Unfortunately it isn't the right John Voce as the list of children is different to the one I have.

Marnie

[marnie15]

Thanks Karen.

I've found death records in the 4th Qtr 1847 - Manchester for John Voce and Elizabeth Voce which explains why I could not find them, on the 1851 census.

As you say, finding their marriage is not easy!

Regarding the CAVELER's, I assume if Elizabeth is shown as a niece then William or Elizabeth Caveler could be Elizabeth's parents siblings but I have not found a link yet.

Marnie