What might be going on here? (Odd census res)

[Araminta]

Hello

I haven;t posted on here for a while, but have a little puzzle over residences in the 1841 census which it would be great to get some ideas on before going to the record office, in case there's something extra I should look up.

My g-g-grandfather, aged 6, is shown as being of independent means [Ind] and staying with a family of Ag Labs aged 30, 35, 25 and 20 (incidentally they are also in a town). I do not yet know if the Ag Labs are related to him; their surname is unfamiliar
His father (aged 35), meanwhile, is living round the corner at or near his brewery with one female servant and another woman aged 22 of a different surname who appears to be marked as Indt (extra t).

By 1851 it appears that gg grandfather had gone away to sea and ggg grandfather was living by the brewery with his second wife, their daughter and a servant. He probably did well for himself as his widow went on to live to a ripe old age with their spinster daughter in one of the best addresses in town.

These censuses did leave me wondering if my gg grandfather was the brewer's son in the first place. But an announcement in the local paper of his marriage (which took place elsewhere to a woman also from the town) specifically mentions that he is his son.

If ggg grandfather's wife was visiting relatives, or had perhaps even recently died, why was the son staying round the corner with people of an apparently different social background? Could the servant or the female relative of independent means not look after the little boy? (Which is what I'd expect from novels of the period).

[valg]

Hello

I haven;t posted on here for a while, but have a little puzzle over residences in the 1841 census which it would be great to get some ideas on before going to the record office, in case there's something extra I should look up.

My g-g-grandfather, aged 6, is shown as being of independent means [Ind] and staying with a family of Ag Labs aged 30, 35, 25 and 20 (incidentally they are also in a town). I do not yet know if the Ag Labs are related to him; their surname is unfamiliar
His father (aged 35), meanwhile, is living round the corner at or near his brewery with one female servant and another woman aged 22 of a different surname who appears to be marked as Indt (extra t).

By 1851 it appears that gg grandfather had gone away to sea and ggg grandfather was living by the brewery with his second wife, their daughter and a servant. He probably did well for himself as his widow went on to live to a ripe old age with their spinster daughter in one of the best addresses in town.

These censuses did leave me wondering if my gg grandfather was the brewer's son in the first place. But an announcement in the local paper of his marriage (which took place elsewhere to a woman also from the town) specifically mentions that he is his son.

If ggg grandfather's wife was visiting relatives, or had perhaps even recently died, why was the son staying round the corner with people of an apparently different social background? Could the servant or the female relative of independent means not look after the little boy? (Which is what I'd expect from novels of the period).

Would be helpful if you could post info to help pinpoint the persons..names...dates..census info

[David Annis]

By the sound of it, the first thing you have to sort out is who the son's mother is. Is it his first wife's child or a little un-expected gift from elswhere.
Cheers
Dave.

[DorothySandra]

At that time, it was not rare for a child to live with a nurse (rather than the nurse coming to live with the family) if the mother had died.

The mother of the family where he was living might have been a former servant, or a relation. Describing a child as "of independent means" just means that the family were being paid to look after him - perhaps by trustees looking after his mother's estate, if she had died, or perhaps from a fund set up by his father if he was illegitimate.

As David Annis suggests, the first thing is to search parish registers and so on, and see what you can find about his mother.

[Araminta]

Thanks very much, DorothySandra and DavidAnnis. I will be following these suggestions up and let you know what I find - may be a week or two - and it's interesting to know that the family could well have been paid to look after the boy.

[Araminta]

After a long break, I went back to this line. The father's marriage certificate from 1846 says he's a widower. But very unhelpfully, it doesn't give his father's name or occupation - the first one I've seen like that. Perhaps these were considered unnecessary for a widower. Trade directories indicate he may have taken over a family business, so perhaps not a dead end. His age is only given as "full" but at least I have the death cert.

Next step: trying to determine who the first wife is amongst a number of women with the right surname who died 1835-41, that looks like a slog.

[Megan Roberts]

If there is no father's name it means that he did not know who his father was and was therefore probably illegitimate.

[Araminta]

Ah. Thank you. I didn't think of that as he could write (unlike several other ancestors from the same period) and had a good business. But then illegitimacy didn't necessarily mean no financial support or education.
So the son is legitimate after all, but dad may not be.
Once the parish records come online I will see if I can find his first marriage, (and/or birth) which will presumably confirm this if no father is given again. In the meantime the only thing that looks doable is finding the death cert of the first wife, if it was 1837 or after.