Hi Robina
Would you post the 1861 and 1871 file refs so that I can take a look at the original records
thanks
Results 11 to 16 of 16
Thread: Thomas LUCAS and Louisa COOPER
-
26-07-2005, 1:55 PM #11Ken BoyceGuest
-
26-07-2005, 11:30 PM #12robinadexterGuest
Here you go Ken:1861:RG9/132 p.26; 1871: RG10/267 f.32 p.57; 1881: RG11/0278/71 p.42; 1891: RG12/146 p.26
Death of Thomas: 19 Jun 1891 (I have DC). 1901 (Louisa & others, inc. my gran, Amy and her future husband James BALLS): RG13/164/43 p.48
Please do not feel that you need to spend much time on this.
Thanks for the interest.
Robina
-
27-07-2005, 5:54 PM #13Ken BoyceGuest
Hi Robina
I took a look at the facsimiles of the census records and came up with the following
(BTW it is better to quote the folio number of a page in a Piece as the Page Number sequence repeats for each Enumeration District)
RG9/132 Folio 76
Islington – All Saints
Thomas snr age 44 Traveller born Glamorganshire
Louisa age 22 born Portsmouth
Thomas jnr age 2 born Clerkenwell
Edward age 9 months born Clerkenwell
RG10/267 Folio 32
Islington – St Matthew
33 Charles St
Thomas snr 53 Comhercial Clerk born Wales
Louisa 30 born Isle of Wight
Thomas jnr 12 born Middlesex Islington
Edward 10 born Middlesex Islington
Emily 7 born Middlesex Islington
Florence 5 born Middlesex Islington
Ernest 4 born Middlesex Islington
Sydney 2 born Middlesex Islington
My 1861 image is quite clear and shows Thomas jnr and Edward both born in Clerkenwell
FreeBDM lists a birth registered Islington Sept Qtr 1860 for an Edward Lucas which matches the census entry except for the location
It is conceivable, ignoring the Civil Registration District boundaries, that there were geographical locations around what is today’s Finsbury area which could have been loosely referred to as either Clerkenwell or Islington likely tied to the ecclesiastical parishes. In which case I would consider the two quoted birth places to be referring to the same general location. Someone more knowledgably of the area may care to comment on this.
Differences of 2 years in the various quoted ages is to be expected and is not of concern
What does appear to be inconsistent is Louisa’s Birthplace
To be Con't
-
27-07-2005, 6:24 PM #14Ken BoyceGuest
Part 2
Following along on the trail of Louisa's birthplace the following are the LDS transcript of th 1881 and my transcript of the 1891 for which my CD image is fairly clear
Dwelling: 30 Hanley Rd W
Census Place: Islington, London, Middlesex, England
Source: FHL Film 1341060 PRO Ref RG11 Piece 0278 Folio 71 Page 42
Marr Age Sex Birthplace
Thomas LUCAS M 62 M Montgomery, Wales
Rel: Head
Occ: Billiard Room Keeper
Louisa LUCAS M 40 F Isle of Wight, Hampshire, England
Rel: Wife
Ernest LUCAS 13 M St Marys Islington
Rel: Son
Sydney LUCAS 11 M St Marys Islington
Rel: Son
Minnie LUCAS 8 F St Marys Islington
Rel: Daur
Albert LUCAS 8 M St Marys Islington
Rel: Son
Winefred LUCAS 6 F St Marys Islington
Rel: Daur
Edith LUCAS 4 F St Marys Islington
Rel: Daur
Amy LUCAS 3 F St Marys Islington
Rel: Daur
Grace LUCAS 1 F St Marys Islington
Rel: Daur
RG12/146 Folio 62
Islington – St Mary
8 Cottinham Terrace
Thomas snr 64 Retired Grocer born Wales Llangurig
Louisa 50 born Hampshire Ryde
Florence Cheesewright 24 Daughter Wid born London Islington
Sydney H age 21 Apprentice Compositor born Middlesex Islington
Minnie18 Domestic Help born Middlesex Islington
Winifred 16 Tie Maker born Middlesex Islington
Albert 18 Baker born Middlesex Islington
Edith U Scholar 14 born Middlesex Islington
We see that Louisa birthplace is given as Portsmouth, I of W, I of W, and Ryde all of these places are in Hampshire and presumably all in the Hampshire Civil Registration County coverage. However, Portsmouth is the odd man out as it is geographically located on the Mainland and not on the I o W
I'm not familiar with the genealogy of this part of the UK to comment on the significance of this discrepancy.
Regards
-
27-07-2005, 11:53 PM #15robinadexterGuest
Ken, As you have seen, Louisa's place and date is consistently given as IoW or, more specifically Ryde and 1841 apart from 1861 census which puts her on the mainland opposite the island and has her born two years earlier. COOPER is an extremely common name on IoW, but there are no births of a Louisa anywhere around that time or place/county that could be her. Researchers on the Island have found no baptisim. I have found an unnamed female COOPER born in Ryde in 1839, but have no reason to 'adopt' her as Louisa unless I can discover whether the parents tally. Without a marriage this is not possible.
Place is easier for Thomas, but dates are too variable to make sense. I have two or three candidates which, without knowing the parents of the Thomas who married Louisa, I cannot differentiate between. Even if I find a Thomas LUCAS and a Louisa COOPER in 1841 and 1851 (and there are candidates lining up), without each other and without a marriage/knowledge of parents names, how will I know that they are the right Thomas/Louisa? No marriage, no progress. None found in IoW, Hampshire, Montgomeryshire or Islington (where I have scoured the parish records). Mind you, they seem to have been pretty haphazard about baptising or registering their offspring, so why should I think that they ever did actually marry?!
Cheers. Robina
-
09-08-2005, 11:50 PM #16robinadexterGuest
Cracked it!
Thanks again to Ken and anyone who showed an interest in helping me trace the antecedents of Louisa and Thomas and here's the good news (for me, anyway) from which lessons might be usefully learnt: I tried a bit of lateral thinking and sent at great cost for the birth certificates of every child of theirs for whom I could find a reference. On just one of these did I find that Louisa had not only the second name Frances (appearing only one other time, on my Gran's BC) but a third: Annie. IGI reveals a Louisa Frances Ann COOPER christened on 01 May 1842 in Portsmouth. Parents: Michael and Ann. (They also had a son christened in 1827). Balance of probablities says that this is my girl. Where the Isle of Wight comes in.....search me! Off to the Hampshire forum to see if anyone can help with the parents, though I think that I have found their marriage myself.
I shall also post Montogmeryshire (only Montgom. ....don't panic!) to see if anyone can look at parish records with an emphasis on Thomas's second name.
If at first, second and third you don't succeed, check the fine detail of lateral family - even if it means SPENDING MONEY....it is worth every penny!
Cheers Robina
Helping you trace your British Family History & British Genealogy.
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:40 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5
Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.
Bookmarks