This discussion has been closed.
Posted by docjoyce (U2115297) on Tuesday, 18th October 2005
Is there anyone that is able to post the details of the 1861 census from the following census reference number for me please:
RG9 68 folio 30
London
William Cox
Thank you
Joyce
William Bushill abt 1835 Birmingham, Warwickshire, England Lodger St Marylebone Middlesex
Annie Caulcker abt 1860 Marylebone, Middlesex, England Daughter St Marylebone Middlesex
Fanny Caulcker abt 1860 Marylebone, Middlesex, England Daughter St Marylebone Middlesex
James Caulcker abt 1833 Haverfordwest, Glamorgan, Wales Lodger St Marylebone Middlesex
Sophia Caulcker abt 1837 Marylebone, Middlesex, England Wife St Marylebone Middlesex
William Cox abt 1834 Birmingham, Warwickshire, England Lodger St Marylebone Middlesex
George Fontain abt 1841 Not Known, Middlesex, England Lodger St Marylebone Middlesex
Thomas Perkins abt 1837 Birmingham, Warwickshire, England Mar St Marylebone Middlesex
Charles John Smith abt 1823 Hindolveston, Norfolk, England Head St Marylebone Middlesex
Charles John Smith abt 1861 St Marylebone, Middlesex, England Son St Marylebone Middlesex
Eliza Ann Smith abt 1859 St Marylebone, Middlesex, England Daughter St Marylebone Middlesex
Julia Ann Smith abt 1832 Honorton, Devon, England Wife St Marylebone Middlesex
Source information: RG9/68
Registration district: Marylebone
Sub-registration district: All Souls
ED, institution, or vessel: 9
Folio: 30
Page: 56
Household schedule number: 380
GSU Number: 542567
All at 9 Ridinghouse St (? might be Lane). William's occupation seems to be Silver Plate; Perkins and Bushill who are also from Birmingham are electroplate workers. The other men are tailors. William is married.
William Cox appears to be a Lodger, born abt 1834 in Birmingham, Warks.
Living in ?Ridinghouse St? in Parish of St Marylebone.
Occupation - Silver Plate.
Hope this helps.
Is there anyone that is able to post the details of the 1861 census from the following census reference number for me please:
RG9 68 folio 30
London
William Cox
Thank you
Joyce
Μύ
aninsel and ros
Many many thanks for the reply and hard work.
I was hoping that William Cox was unmarried, the bithyear could do with being a bit later by a about 4/5 years, but I know that sometimes this information was a little out sometimes.
If not too much trouble would you be able just to confirm that William was married, if he was he was obviously away from his wife when the census was taken.
Thanks once again.
Joyce
William is definitely married. I had to look closely because the writing is a little 'extravagant'and there are a lot of later markings, but the four lodgers are listed together. Perkins is 'Mar', Cox and Bushill below him are 'do' and Fontain 'Unm' which looks very different. The age, 27, is unmistakeable due to the form of the 7 which takes up 2 lines.
Hi anisel
Thanks for getting back, that's a shame I was hoping that person wasn't going to be married on the 1871 census. I suppose I'll have to see if that marriage ended. The ancestor I am looking for was married in 1877 and stated as a bachelor on his marriage certificate.
Thanks again
Joyce
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Μύto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.