Genealogy Chat
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
Problems with 1891 - HELP please!!
Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
---|---|---|---|
|
Janet | Report | 5 Sep 2003 14:16 |
Thanks, Gen, and yes, the John next door in 1881 is the oldest son. I know Sarah Maria is the mother, because I have her name on my grandfather's birth certificate - signed with an X - her mark. I haven't managed to find John in 1891 yet (nor any of his family), but I'll keep looking, as long as my subscription lasts. Think I'll have to pay for another session on 1901 now, I have a long list of names to search, so it will be worth it. Jan. |
|||
|
Gen | Report | 5 Sep 2003 00:14 |
It does not help you find Sarah Maria but did you click on the next household when on the 1881 census, There is a John Forster age 29, his wife Ann aged 25 from Plumstead and their daughter Sarah aged 2. I wondered if this was another son and because he is 9 years older could you be searching for a marriage in the wrong year. Maybe Sarah Maria was a visitor in another part of Kent or even the country or even a patient in hospital. Hope you find your answers. Gen |
|||
|
Janet | Report | 3 Sep 2003 13:54 |
Thank you SO much, Andy, I thought someone on here would be able to help me. I had tried Foster using Soundex, which I thought would be enough, but obviously I missed them. The sad thing is that William G is shown as a widower. His wife was missing from the 1881 Census, he was shown as married, but I haven't been able to trace her, don't know where she was born, and now I might never know. I'd hoped the 1891 would give me that information. Thanks again, Jan. |
|||
|
Andy | Report | 3 Sep 2003 13:41 |
Hi Jan, Think I may have some good news for you. After using the 1881 census for guidance, I think I've located the family (well, some of them) on the 1891 census. William G.FORSTER, Head, Widower, 63, Arsenal Pensioner (Carpenter), born Kent Bexley Heath Emily FORSTER, Daughter, Single, 22, Housekeeper to father, Kent Bexley Heath Henry J.FORSTER, Son, Single, 17, Arsenal labourer (General), Kent Plumstead I found them in the index under 'FORETER'. The writing of Forster was pretty lousy on the form. Living at 45 Park Road, Plumstead Andy. |
|||
|
Janet | Report | 3 Sep 2003 11:53 |
After trying many many times to find any of my mother's family, all of whom I know were in the London area in 1891, I have at last found her maternal grandparents. Their name was GOBEL, I used a Soundex search and found them indexed as GABEL. I am now trying to find her paternal grandparents, FORSTER or FOSTER. He was William (52 in 1881 census), she was Sarah Maria, and they had children Frederick, Emily, Arthur and Henry Joseph. All but Henry were born in Bexley Heath, Kent. Henry was born in Plumstead. They would probably be living in either Plumstead or Bow. If anyone could help me find them, I'd be extremely grateful. I just don't know what else to do. Jan. |