Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11

    Default

    I have this info.
    william Paulett, mariner, died 1856.

  2. #12
    Super Moderator - Completely bonkers and will never change.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    9,532

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aithne View Post
    I have this info.
    william Paulett, mariner, died 1856.
    Apologies. When I said search for a burial for a William between October 1823 and 1841 I meant search for a burial for William junior, just to make sure that he was still alive in 1841 and therefore likely to be the one who was ultimately transported.

    Pam
    Vulcan XH558 - ďDon't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.Ē

  3. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pam Downes View Post
    Apologies. When I said search for a burial for a William between October 1823 and 1841 I meant search for a burial for William junior, just to make sure that he was still alive in 1841 and therefore likely to be the one who was ultimately transported.

    Pam
    I havenít been able to find a death for him, not in UK, anyway.

  4. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aithne View Post
    I haven’t been able to find a death for him, not in UK, anyway.
    Also, Llewhellins on 1851 census says Bosherton for James’ birth, and Carew for the other 3. Then the 1861 census has carew for the younger children. I looked up their births but no matches come back unless i cast a wide net and i can’t see any for Carew.

  5. #15
    Super Moderator - Completely bonkers and will never change.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    9,532

    Default

    Firstly, my sincere apologies for the appalling number of typos in post #9. My proof-readng skills were sadly lacking.
    Steynton was consistently spelt in error as Steyton. And Stainton with regard to the parish register entry was mis-spelt as Stainiton. I even managed to spell 'father' as 'gather'.

    I have now gone back and corrected those errors, and if you copied anything please do the same in your records.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aithne View Post
    Also, Llewhellins on 1851 census says Bosherton for James’ birth, and Carew for the other 3. Then the 1861 census has carew for the younger children. I looked up their births but no matches come back unless i cast a wide net and i can’t see any for Carew.
    How is the Llewhellin name transcribed in 1851 and 1861, where are James and Elizabeth living, and what are the names of their children, as I can't easily find them to check anything. (As I've previously said, the actual census reference is by far the easiest way to give details. If you look at the transcript page, the information is there.)

    Pam
    Vulcan XH558 - ďDon't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.Ē

  6. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pam Downes View Post
    Firstly, my sincere apologies for the appalling number of typos in post #9. My proof-readng skills were sadly lacking.
    Steynton was consistently spelt in error as Steyton. And Stainton with regard to the parish register entry was mis-spelt as Stainiton. I even managed to spell 'father' as 'gather'.

    I have now gone back and corrected those errors, and if you copied anything please do the same in your records.


    How is the Llewhellin name transcribed in 1851 and 1861, where are James and Elizabeth living, and what are the names of their children, as I can't easily find them to check anything. (As I've previously said, the actual census reference is by far the easiest way to give details. If you look at the transcript page, the information is there.)

    Pam
    It’s not easy to copy because like i said in a previous comment, i’m posting here from my phone. ancestry is on my laptop.
    Let’s see how this works

    Carew, Pembrokeshire
    HO107/2476 Folio 208, Page number 21.
    James Llewhellin,31, born Bosherston
    Elizabeth Llewhellin, 29, Carew
    William Llewhellin, 4, Carew
    Thomas Llewhellin, 2, Carew

    Safe to say, copying and pasting on a phone doesn’t really work. And there’s no easy way to edit without typing the whole lot.
    Last edited by Pam Downes; 24-05-2021 at 5:00 AM. Reason: Removed copy-and-paste

  7. #17

    Default

    Hmm.., i edited my post to add town and street in 1851 census for James and Elizabeth Llewhellin says Carew Newtown. But thatís disappeared now. Children William and Thomas.

    The 1841 Census that also lists William Pawlett says Haverfordwest. No children.

    1861 census says James and Elizabeth, childre:
    Thomas 12
    Mary 9
    George 7
    James 4
    John looks like 18 months.
    Again, Carew Newton

    Looking for a birth for the children i canít find anything for Carew.

  8. #18
    Super Moderator - Completely bonkers and will never change.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    9,532

    Default

    I am not asking you to copy-and-paste which is in breech of our T&Cs regarding copyright. (Every site has its own way of transcribing records and presenting that transcription, and that is copyright.) I've therefore amended your post.
    On Ancestry if you hover your cursor over 'view record' to the left of the person's name you will see a load of detail, and near the bottom of the entry there's the words piece number, folio, and page. Those are the bits of information that make up the census reference, once they are preceded by the year 'code'.
    1841 and 1851 both use HO107/.
    1861 is RG9/
    1871 is RG10/
    1881 is RG11/
    1891 is RG12/
    1901 is RG12/
    1911 is RG14/
    and I suspect the 1921 census will be RG15.

    So all you needed to type for James and Elizabeth in 1851 is Census reference HO107/2476 folio 208 page 21.
    You could have added that James is 31 so hasn't aged much since 1841 (which is why I couldn't find them in 1851 ).

    Um, in both 1851 and the 1861 census James is 'consistent' with his age (aged 10 years between the two) and his occupation of limestone quarryman and stone quarrier.
    I'm therefore inclined to think that this James is not the one living in Pembroke with William Pawlett in 1841.
    I think this is the 1851/1861 James in 1841 - living in Bosherston, aged 20, servant, surname spelt Llewelen. Census reference given correctly on FMP as HO107/1443/2 folio 7 page 9. Ancestry incorrectly say it's folio 8 page 9.
    Think this is the marriage of the 1851/1861 James and Elizabeth. (Image on FMP's Pembrokeshire marriages dataset.)
    22 February 1846 in Carew. James Llewhellin, labourer, and Elizabeth Lewis.
    There are Llewhellin births with mother's maiden name Lewis in Pembroke registration district on the GRO's own website which match James and Elizabeth's children in the 1851 and 1861 census. Bosherston and Carew are both in Pembroke registration district.

    Pam
    Vulcan XH558 - ďDon't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.Ē

  9. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pam Downes View Post
    I am not asking you to copy-and-paste which is in breech of our T&Cs regarding copyright. (Every site has its own way of transcribing records and presenting that transcription, and that is copyright.) I've therefore amended your post.
    On Ancestry if you hover your cursor over 'view record' to the left of the person's name you will see a load of detail, and near the bottom of the entry there's the words piece number, folio, and page. Those are the bits of information that make up the census reference, once they are preceded by the year 'code'.
    1841 and 1851 both use HO107/.
    1861 is RG9/
    1871 is RG10/
    1881 is RG11/
    1891 is RG12/
    1901 is RG12/
    1911 is RG14/
    and I suspect the 1921 census will be RG15.

    So all you needed to type for James and Elizabeth in 1851 is Census reference HO107/2476 folio 208 page 21.
    You could have added that James is 31 so hasn't aged much since 1841 (which is why I couldn't find them in 1851 ).

    Um, in both 1851 and the 1861 census James is 'consistent' with his age (aged 10 years between the two) and his occupation of limestone quarryman and stone quarrier.
    I'm therefore inclined to think that this James is not the one living in Pembroke with William Pawlett in 1841.
    I think this is the 1851/1861 James in 1841 - living in Bosherston, aged 20, servant, surname spelt Llewelen. Census reference given correctly on FMP as HO107/1443/2 folio 7 page 9. Ancestry incorrectly say it's folio 8 page 9.
    Think this is the marriage of the 1851/1861 James and Elizabeth. (Image on FMP's Pembrokeshire marriages dataset.)
    22 February 1846 in Carew. James Llewhellin, labourer, and Elizabeth Lewis.
    There are Llewhellin births with mother's maiden name Lewis in Pembroke registration district on the GRO's own website which match James and Elizabeth's children in the 1851 and 1861 census. Bosherston and Carew are both in Pembroke registration district.

    Pam
    Thanks for the help but iím just going to give up.
    I donít need snobbery when i already explained to you more than once that i canít access the info youíre asking me for on my phone. So i gave you what i could and thatís still wrong. 🙄
    Iím not sure what 1901 etc census has to do with anything because my family werenít in the UK at that time.
    I get that youíre trying to help but do far itís just a repetition of info i already know. My post was more asking if anyone is familiar with this family who knows of a connection. I wasnít asking people to look anything up for me. And now itís become a huge chore when i was mostly just putting it out there for people to contact me in future if they come across it because theyíre connected to these families.
    Anyway, iím done with this.

  10. #20
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    cambridge
    Posts
    1,056

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pam Downes View Post
    Sue, it'll be quicker to just ask you than for me to try to find the entry , but do you mean 1909, or have you made a typo and the date should be 1809?

    Pam
    No Pam it is 1909. There is also a divorce between a John and Emily, but looking closer I see it is in 1905. in Bedford. I guess Pawlett is not such an unusual name as I originally though. But it seems that the original poster has all the details we can all find now.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Select a file: