• Only registered members can see all the forums - if you've received an invitation to join (it'll be on your My Summary page) please register NOW!

  • If you're looking for the LostCousins site please click the logo in the top left corner - these forums are for existing LostCousins members only.
  • This is the LostCousins Forum. If you were looking for the LostCousins website simply click the logo at the top left.
  • It's easier than ever before to check your entries from the 1881 Census - more details here

Alone in 1911

Pauline

Pauline

LostCousins Megastar
I've just come across a seemingly sad entry for a relative in the 1911 census. It appears he was widowed just a few months before the census and in the relationship column, instead of writing "Head" he has written "Alone".

I guess he was feeling it.
 
How terribly sad. That's why the 1911 census is so interesting, because the information is filled in by the main house holder, rather than the interpretation of an enumerator.
 
Very sad, Pauline - I'd be interested in including this in my newsletter since, as Carla points out, it's things like this that make the 1911 Census extra special.
 
peter said:
I'd be interested in including this in my newsletter since, as Carla points out, it's things like this that make the 1911 Census extra special.
Click to expand...
OK - he was a Thomas Pettyfer living in Putney - RG14 2440 Sch 171. I haven't seen a death certificate, but from the GRO indexes I think the death of his wife Louisa was registered in Dec Qtr 1910, Wandsworth RD.
 
An interesting point as these days many of us hate filling in forms but perhaps in 1911 it was a still a point of pride for anyone who could read write and follow instructions. At the same time it does make the plight of those who were institutionalised in workhouses etc at the time even more tragic because they were likely lucky if their names were spelled correctly let alone have other details recorded with a degree of accuracy.
 
It doesn't really follow here but...

..the other day I was looking in an earlier census (1861 I think, but I can't quote chapter and verse). I was startled, not to say shocked to find a 7 year old girl with the occupation 'miner and scholar'. I knew children worked in the mines but this really brought it home
 
Liberty said:
It doesn't really follow here but...

..the other day I was looking in an earlier census (1861 I think, but I can't quote chapter and verse). I was startled, not to say shocked to find a 7 year old girl with the occupation 'miner and scholar'. I knew children worked in the mines but this really brought it home
Click to expand...

Hmmm...spelling error(minor)
 
Tim said:
It depends if they were in a mining area or not?
Click to expand...
Aargh I'd have to track down the entry again (and I don't think it was actually my family - I was just passing by)

It certainly didn't strike me with 'how on earth would she be a miner there.' so quite likely it was a mining area. (I do have relatives/ancestors in my Northumberland ancestry who were miners, so I was probably looking for one of them)
And the comment (it was on FreeCen) was transcribed into the 'occupation' column - and I don't think anyone would put there that someone was under 21. (Although they do sometimes solemnly put down that tiny children are single)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top