1911 census

[Carla]

This is just a random question and if I should have put it somewhere else I apologise, but I am curious.

During my research over the last few days I have been adding to my family tree and also collating census information to start up adding more 'lost cousins'. I have found the 1911 census to have been of particular interest because I have certainly found that some of my ancestors didnt have a clue how to fill in the details. Today I found one where the head of the household added everyone in his family whether dead or alive and there was a lot of crossing out and scribbles.

This got me thinking about how I filled in the last census we had in England. I will admit to being so excited, as I firmly believe I was having an active part in our history for future generations of my family (hopefully). I know it may sound daft but I was determined to do it all nice and correctly. So, not only did I fill in the census information on line, but I also filled in the paper copy for me to keep safe....and I made my father do the same. I made sure I used my best handwriting and made no mistakes! . In fact I think I drove my father mad with the constant " make sure you don't forget" and nagging him about how it would be done. There is a strong possibilty that I came across as slightly obsessive but hey ho.

So I just wondered if anyone else has noticed how varied the 1911 census information was filled in by the head of the household, and also how did you fill in the last census?

 

[Tim]

I always find the 1911 census very interesting. Not only do you get to see their handwriting, but what gets crossed out I find is invaluable.
The husband is widowed or living alone but he puts in the number of children, great information, even though its crossed out.

I filled the last census in because that's the law. But, do you really think you need to keep a copy? We're all spending a lot of time gathering information and creating family trees. Are you not adding bits about your self into the tree?
I know it would be nice for them to see our handwriting I guess, but is the document going to survive the next 3 or 4 generations?

 

[Carla]

I filled the last census in because that's the law. But, do you really think you need to keep a copy?

I am afraid I am old school, Tim. I like books not Kindles, and still sew buttons on clothes if they fall off instead of throwing them away, . What happens if the documents get lost in the archives? Stranger things have happened. It's also going in my memory box so family can physically see the information. It's interesting to note that pretty much everything on line, however up to date, tends to have an option to download and print a copy. I have the original census now and I really hope that will be of interest to someone as passionate as me about our family line. I keep thinking about the old film The Time Machine.....all those books and paperwork gone forever. There is nothing like the feel of history in your hands.....

 

[Britjan]

I think in a former life I might have been related to a Luddite because I love paper records as well. One of the must see places when I travel is a local library both in big cities and tiny communities. What is current on paper and in other media and what has been treasured always fascinates me. I agree with Carla about the 1911 census images they are worth examining closely.
On the subject of the census I was among the paid employees who went door to door in Toronto Canada for the last (2011) census to try to encourage those who hadn't returned their census to do so. Sometimes I answered questions or helped people fill the census in and I was surprised that it was about 50:50 when it came to the question making information available to future generations in 2103. My straw poll result strongly mirrors a 2005 pretest and I will check to see what actually happened but I think it proves Carla to be correct. "There is nothing like the feel of history in your hands".

 

[Margery]

This is just a random question and if I should have put it somewhere else I apologise, but I am curious.

During my research over the last few days I have been adding to my family tree and also collating census information to start up adding more 'lost cousins'. I have found the 1911 census to have been of particular interest because I have certainly found that some of my ancestors didnt have a clue how to fill in the details. Today I found one where the head of the household added everyone in his family whether dead or alive and there was a lot of crossing out and scribbles.

This got me thinking about how I filled in the last census we had in England. I will admit to being so excited, as I firmly believe I was having an active part in our history for future generations of my family (hopefully). I know it may sound daft but I was determined to do it all nice and correctly. So, not only did I fill in the census information on line, but I also filled in the paper copy for me to keep safe....and I made my father do the same. I made sure I used my best handwriting and made no mistakes! . In fact I think I drove my father mad with the constant " make sure you don't forget" and nagging him about how it would be done. There is a strong possibilty that I came across as slightly obsessive but hey ho.

So I just wondered if anyone else has noticed how varied the 1911 census information was filled in by the head of the household, and also how did you fill in the last census?

I must say that I received a pleasant surprise when I saw my grandfather's well-formed hand and signature on the carefully completed 1911 census form. Coming from a large family of mainly ag.labs I don't imagine that formal schooling featured greatly in his younger days. I have printed the image to put with my other precious documents.

 

[Liberty]

I always find the 1911 census very interesting. Not only do you get to see their handwriting, but what gets crossed out I find is invaluable.
The husband is widowed or living alone but he puts in the number of children, great information, even though its crossed out.

I absolutely agree that the crossed out bits are great sources of info. I found cases where all the grown children were listed and then some crossed out. You can just imagine the census man sighing impatiently ('Well, was she actually HERE that night?') but it's great for me.
Margery, I supect your grandfather's schooling had great emphasis on handwriting. Useful information, maybe not, but handwriting for sure.

Re current censuses. Having lived abroad for 15 years, I missed out on the 2001 and 2011 censuses. But, I have been aware for years how misleading this 10 year snapshot can be. In 1981 we were living in central Aberdeen, and in 1991 in an outer suburb of the same city. Nothing from the censuses would indicate that in the intervening 10 years we had lived in Australia, the Netherlands and England.

 

[Alexander Bisset]

Yes but 150 years ago the degree of mobility was substantially less so two successive census at same city there's a fairly high likelihood that they were there in intervening years too.

 

[Emma]

I must say that I received a pleasant surprise when I saw my grandfather's well-formed hand and signature on the carefully completed 1911 census form. Coming from a large family of mainly ag.labs I don't imagine that formal schooling featured greatly in his younger days. I have printed the image to put with my other precious documents.

I agree that most of the hand-writing is really good - although school as such didn't always play a big role I think Sunday school did and was possibly where they were taught "a good hand".
Had a piece of extra information on one ancestor's 1911 census form - the married daughter and baby were living with parents and the enumerator added at the foot of the sheet ..."Mrs ..... husband is in Australia." Wish I knew what he was doing there!

 

[Tim]

Would his job have taken him there?

 

[Margery]

I agree that most of the hand-writing is really good - although school as such didn't always play a big role I think Sunday school did and was possibly where they were taught "a good hand".
Had a piece of extra information on one ancestor's 1911 census form - the married daughter and baby were living with parents and the enumerator added at the foot of the sheet ..."Mrs ..... husband is in Australia." Wish I knew what he was doing there!

I can visualise the Sunday School children labouring over their slates copying "worthy" biblical quotations, though I wonder just how much writing my grandfather would have done in his adult life?
And Emma, have you looked at shipping lists to Australia? If you could find where he disembarked there might be a clue. Have you any idea of his previous employment?

 

[Tim]

And Emma, have you looked at shipping lists to Australia? If you could find where he disembarked there might be a clue.

Good idea.

 

[Liberty]

Yes but 150 years ago the degree of mobility was substantially less so two successive census at same city there's a fairly high likelihood that they were there in intervening years too.

I was going to concede that people were unlikely to have been to Australia and back - then I read Emma's post. On a smaller scale, though, one of the very first contacts I made when I started on my family tree was with someone whose 'uncle' married my 'aunt' (in both cases the sibling of a gg gf). He was puzzled how his chap, who according to censuses had never left Hinton Martell in Doreset, had met my aunt and married her in Banningham in Norfolk (where the first baby was also born). I don't suppose we'll ever know if his uncle had travelled to Norfolk, my aunt to Dorset or if they met somewhere else entirely.

 

[trebor]

and married her in Banningham in Norfolk (where the first baby was also born). I don't suppose we'll ever know if his uncle had travelled to Norfolk, my aunt to Dorset or if they met somewhere else entirely.

Obviously it is difficult from the available records to determine some of this information but I have found several occasions where the first born is recorded at the mother's parents home even though previous and subsequent records have placed her elsewhere. The birth certificate also often records a different address for the child's mother or father. Maybe it is the comfort of a parent's support at this new and important event that is the reason for this. My elder siblings births were both recorded at the address of my grandparents.

 

[Margery]

Obviously it is difficult from the available records to determine some of this information but I have found several occasions where the first born is recorded at the mother's parents home even though previous and subsequent records have placed her elsewhere. The birth certificate also often records a different address for the child's mother or father. Maybe it is the comfort of a parent's support at this new and important event that is the reason for this. My elder siblings births were both recorded at the address of my grandparents.

My mother-in-law went to her parent's home for my husband's birth. It was the 6 December and the extended family then went away for their annual Christmas camping holiday, new baby and all. Apparently he cried the whole time - can you just imagine all the aunts and cousins fussing over him - there obviously wasn't a thought to forergo the holiday and have a quiet time at home to settle in.

 

[Liberty]

Obviously it is difficult from the available records to determine some of this information but I have found several occasions where the first born is recorded at the mother's parents home even though previous and subsequent records have placed her elsewhere. The birth certificate also often records a different address for the child's mother or father. Maybe it is the comfort of a parent's support at this new and important event that is the reason for this. My elder siblings births were both recorded at the address of my grandparents.

It seems to have been quite common in the days when home births were the norm for the mother to go to HER mother's for the birth of the first baby (and who can blame her). However, for me and my 'cousin' the unanswered question is whether the young couple were living in Norfolk for a few years between censuses, or if they went there to get married AND the wife went back to have the first baby. I think Dorset to Norfolk would be quite a haul in the 1850s. (I don't think I'd fancy doing it by public transport in late pregnancy today.)

 

[Liberty]

It was the 6 December and the extended family then went away for their annual Christmas camping holiday, new baby and all.

Margery, please confirm you live in Australia, or somewhere else where a December camping holiday is more enjoyable than it would be in the UK.

 

[Margery]

Margery, please confirm you live in Australia, or somewhere else where a December camping holiday is more enjoyable than it would be in the UK.

Yes, Liberty, I am in Australia, born to English parents who, as single travellers, met on board ship en route to this country and eventually married. They did return home, very briefly, prior to my birth. Apparently they decided that Oz was the lucky country and never returned to UK. I was their only child and there were no other family members here.
Actually, camping in December would be rather hot - I would prefer Spring.

 

[Heather]

Actually, camping in December would be rather hot - I would prefer Spring.

Yes Margery, totally agree with you, we are in Australia also and prefer to camp before or after the school holidays, much more peaceful.

 

[Bee]

I've mentioned this before in reply to one of Peter's newsletters but my husband and I are included in the 2011 censuses of both UK and Australia. The census dates being different.

 

[Jennie]

Yes but 150 years ago the degree of mobility was substantially less so two successive census at same city there's a fairly high likelihood that they were there in intervening years too.

Not quite 150 years but I always check in all available military records, emigration and travel records etc as I have been surprised with the migration some of my forebears have achieved in between Censuses.

I found one of my agricultural labourers (born in a very rural Lincolnshire village in 1874 and who previously I had labelled - "Least-likely to Travel") had in between the 1891 and 1911 Censuses he nipped off to the Sudan, (1884–85) as a soldier in the British mission to relieve Major-General Charles George Gordon at Khartoum, Sudan. For his valour, James CADE was awarded two medals. He then served with the Army in India until 1902 and I found him again in the 1911 Census with his occupation simply detailed as “foundry labourer”.

I have just added a source, Where, Why and How Our Forebears Travelled, in No Boundaries/Migration and Travel which I find easy and fascinating reading.