Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

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.

Boards

Quick Search

Single word search

Tools

Findmypast DNA Banner

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Help with Interpretation of 1891 please

Login to Add Reply Watch This
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Rosi

Rosi Report 31 Aug 2003 20:28

Andrew thanks for the look-up - and for taking the interest to reply. What a household- all for one woman and a baby! And no indication of to whom the babe belonged! Am pleased you read it that way too! Thanks again - Rosi

Andy

Andy Report 31 Aug 2003 16:46

I've just had a look and I see what you mean. It looks as if the two residences belong to the same complex. Letitia is head of one and her niece is head of the other. That's the only way I can interpret it.

Rosi

Rosi Report 31 Aug 2003 16:08

So sorry for the delay in replying Ann - yes it is - by 1891 she were a widow woman - and apparently a well to do one - but praps I've read it all wrong! Thanks for your help and interest Rosi

Annie

Annie Report 30 Aug 2003 17:29

what was the full address Rosi? Is this the one that was in Wanstead in 1881 married to William? A

Rosi

Rosi Report 30 Aug 2003 17:06

I've found my rellies widow, (she was wife No 2), Letitia Kearnes aged 49, living with her 2 month old grandson and what seems like far too many servants (I had to go to the next page to findthem all!) But have I interpreted it correctly? The next house, no 18, doesn't appear to have a 'head' and lists occupants as niece, governess, visitors, etc. and carries on as if they were also no 17's people; but I am not at all sure I have got this right. Would a more experienced reader have a look please - I would be most grateful Rosi Colch.ESS