Find Ancestors
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
George Garnham, IPSWICH
Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
---|---|---|---|
|
Brenda | Report | 5 Nov 2010 22:23 |
This is just an idea. My Uncle was George born in Ipswich Suffolk England in 1908-1979 |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
JaneyCanuck | Report | 26 Aug 2010 17:42 |
Please do not accuse me of attacking, as I have not. |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
Caroline | Report | 26 Aug 2010 00:06 |
Census returns mentioned on thread, and I don't feel that I have anything to justify, but do feel the need to explain the reason for my lack of adherance to protocol, and for that I do apologise. |
|||
|
JaneyCanuck | Report | 25 Aug 2010 23:45 |
Sorry, an apology is fine, claiming to have more problems than other people to justify things isn't. You don't know that, and in fact you don't have more problems than many people who help here have. Our time is valuable too. The fact that we enjoy researching these things doesn't mean we have nothing else to do. |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
Caroline | Report | 25 Aug 2010 22:09 |
See original posting re 1901 and 1911 census results. Please remember that some people who are trying to find out their family history are NOT experts. I really do appreciate all help and all suggestions, and I have found some input invaluable, and the community very supportive. My interest is genuine. However, having two autistic and challenging young people to care for, as well as elderly parents and a teenage daughter, I do not always have the time and / or concentration that other folk are fortunate enough to enjoy. |
|||
|
Caroline | Report | 25 Aug 2010 21:57 |
Hadn't considered the grandson connection, although had considered the strong possibility of his being illegitimate. On the 1911 census when he is shown as being married to Annie Garnham is tantalising, as Annie has written her birth address as place of birth, although it is partially crossed out, and so not redable - even when inverted. Believe they were living as man and wife as status of marriage says married 5 years, no children. |
|||
|
JaneyCanuck | Report | 25 Aug 2010 18:45 |
Lydia was 42 in 1881 with youngest child 12. One might wonder at her having another child after that. |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
JaneyCanuck | Report | 25 Aug 2010 18:34 |
If you check the 81 and 91 censuses, George Garnhams litter the landscape in Suffolk. ;) |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
jax | Report | 25 Aug 2010 18:32 |
1881 |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
Choccy | Report | 25 Aug 2010 18:24 |
|
|||
|
JaneyCanuck | Report | 25 Aug 2010 18:19 |
If you had already found the 1911 George I posted, why not dislose that, instead of having people hunt for him? |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
JaneyCanuck | Report | 25 Aug 2010 18:18 |
You've only established no prior marriage if you've established that his name was actually George Frederick Garnham -- which we don't seem to have done! |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
JaneyCanuck | Report | 25 Aug 2010 18:16 |
Trial and error in 1911 -- Annie doesn't seem to be wife, sister or servant of George -- I don't pay to see what she is. |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
Caroline | Report | 25 Aug 2010 18:14 |
From marriage certificate, death certificate and from the odd crumb ( no pun intended ) of family knowlege of the gentleman. |
|||
|
Caroline | Report | 25 Aug 2010 18:13 |
Yes, found this one also believed to be him. mm indeed. No prior marriage anyway, have established that, and he was listed as batchelor on his marriage cert, which seems to be true |
|||
|
JaneyCanuck | Report | 25 Aug 2010 18:13 |
Does your knowledge of his occupation come from his marriage certificate / his children's birth certificates? i.e. not just from the census records you are assuming to be him. |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
jax | Report | 25 Aug 2010 18:13 |
1911 census - household transcription |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
Caroline | Report | 25 Aug 2010 18:11 |
Yes, this is their marriage |
|||
|
Caroline | Report | 25 Aug 2010 18:09 |
Have enquired previously via a contact on Ancestry, who couldn't find him despite having a very good knowledge of Garnhams. In 1901 he was shown as age 29 rather than 19, and working as a baker in London's East End, with only fellow employees detailed ( no relatives shown ) |
|||
|
JaneyCanuck | Report | 25 Aug 2010 18:09 |
This one in 1911 answers to a search for occupation "cook" and born in Ipswich: |
|||
Researching: |