Looking for specific area in a census?

[canadianbeth]

Is it possible to search a census for the names of everyone in a particular area of London? My grandmother was sent out to service at the age of 16 to an area called Woodford. Can I look at the 1901 and 1911 census' for people, especially the males, living in just that district? She would have been there around 1907-08.

 

[At home in NZ]

My grandmother was sent out to service at the age of 16 to an area called Woodford. Can I look at the 1901 and 1911 census' for people, especially the males, living in just that district? She would have been there around 1907-08.

Woodford was in Essex in those days. The nearest censuses for those years are 1901 and 1911.
It is possible to do what you want, in Ancestry:
go to the 1901 census page enter Woodford, Essex, England in the 'Lived in' field, enter Male in the Gender Field and press Search.
You will get this result you can see the last column is the place of residence.
You can do the same with the 1911 census search here

Good luck.

 

[canadianbeth]

Thanks. That is a huge list for 1901; I shall have to pare it down somewhat, and then see if I can find the same names in 1911. Hopefully, the same family were in both and I can then try a search in Ancestry. When I enter Woodford into the DNA page, I get a long list and do recognize many names, one of which is that very high cM who will not reply to my messages.

ETA: Strange, I get no matches for 1911. I think there are just too many pages in the 1901 to be of much help.

 

[Bob Spiers]

ETA:

What does "Estimated time of Arrival" have to do with your add on? (sorry I hate acronyms)

 

[At home in NZ]

Strange, I get no matches for 1911

That's because it's not recognising Woodford as a search factor.
I get results for other places but not for Woodford. I find it quite peculiar! I think it has something to do with a change of name somewhere but I can't work it out, sorry.

 

[Bob Spiers]

That's because it's not recognising Woodford as a search factor.

I'm not really addressing canadian beth's actual search problem, but merely responding to how one can side step when a search fails to find a given place. This has happened to me a fair few times, and I have learned the easiest way to overcome the problem is to follow this procedure.

I use Family Tree Maker and go to 'Places' - but a Google map will serve just as well. If a search fails (and FTM rarely does even if Ancestry and sometimes FMP do) and you are not sure of its location you will need to check it out with an online Gazeteer, or again Google often serves as well. What you need to do is to locate the nearest town or large village likely to be nearest Registration area - possibly Parish - to the place you are seeking. You may need to zoom the map to reveal nearby places. Now substitute this place for the search location and you may like me be rewarded with finding not just the newly entered location, but a high probability the very place you originally tried to find. You may need to try more than one Registration place before this brings results.

Interestingly FTM for Woodford found Woodford, Essex (plus Woodford Bridge, Wooldford Green, Woodford Wells) and Woodford in Cheshire, Cornwall, Gloucestershire & Devon not to mention 2 Woodfords in Ireland and a Woodford Halse in Northamptonshire. Hence you must first of all know a likely county or town area. As ahinZ says, areas thought of as London often come under one of the 'Home' counties adjacent to Lodon, which allows you to rule out those further afield. It's worth a try at any rate and certainly improves your geographical knowledge.

 

[canadianbeth]

ETA: Edited to add

As for which particular Woodford, I am thinking it would have been in the London area, just because of the information from Barnardo Homes regarding my grandmother. "At the age of sixteen the mother was sent to service at Woodford where she became acquainted with the putative father - name, whereabouts, etc., not known. John? was born in Queen Charlotte's Hospital" But obviously Woodford was much larger than I expected, with thousands of male names in the 1901 census.

 

[At home in NZ]

At the age of sixteen the mother was sent to service at Woodford

What a shame they did not tell you which Woodford it was, are you able to ask them?

 

[canadianbeth]

What a shame they did not tell you which Woodford it was, are you able to ask them

No, it has been many years now since I received even that much information from them. It took me more than one letter, since I originally asked about him with the name he used here in Canada. It was not until Peter told me that illegitimate children were registered with their mother's name that I was able to learn that much and find his birth registration.

 

[At home in NZ]

It took me more than one letter, since I originally asked about him with the name he used here in Canada. It was not until Peter told me that illegitimate children were registered with their mother's name that I was able to learn that much and find his birth registration.

Sorry canadianbeth but I am a little confused. If you have his birth registration and know the name he was given at birth it seems to me that you should be looking for him using that name.
Or, am I being thick and missing something?

 

[canadianbeth]

I am looking for his (unknown) father. He had to have been someone living in that household in Woodford, where my grandmother was sent to work.

 

[Susan48]

In 1911 Woodford comes under the parish of Wanstead in the registration district of West Ham.
I did a search on Findmypast on the 1901 census for males in the parish of Woodford born 1885 +/- 5 years, and narrowed it down to those with the first name John on the assumption the child was named after its father. Excluding those results where the household had no domestic servant there were 9 possible hits. (I've jotted down the references.) Of course these parameters may be too narrow, but they give a manageable set of results to start with. It was when I tried looking for the same names in 1911 that I discovered the parish was now Wanstead.

 

[canadianbeth]

Actually, my Dad's name was Jack, according to the birth registration and what he was always called. Barnardo Homes called him John; he was John in the 1911 census and when my aunt emigrated to Canada, she listed him as John as her next of kin in England. He is Jack on his gravestone. I do not think that he was ever called John here in Canada. (but then he did not use his birth name of Joyce either; he was Roberts in Canada) I tried using Jackson in the Ancestry DNA search and only got one good result, and she is connected to the Riches (maternal) branch. Johnson was even less useful, as was Roberts.

 

[At home in NZ]

Actually, my Dad's name was Jack, according to the birth registration and what he was always called. Barnardo Homes called him John

Believe it or not Jack was short for John so that's why Barnardo's would have used John.
I had an uncle John but everybody called him Jack, I remember hearing my grandmother call him Jacky or is it Jackie.

 

[Bob Spiers]

Believe it or not Jack was short for John so that's why Barnardo's would have used John.

Absolutely, lost count of how Jack and John get interchanged. I even worked for a John Perkins, know as Jack to close friends and family. I often have had to modify searches when one name gets no result, I try the other or use a wild card. Exactly the same in my paternal family where two surname strains merged and had sons called 'Henry Francis'. They majority ended up being referred to as Harry (like Henry VIII often referred to as King Harry) although one or two preferred their given name of Henry. In the case of my paternal Grandmother, she ignored both Henry & Harry and called her husband Francis.

 

[At home in NZ]

and called her husband Francis.

Which is also an interchangeable name, with Frank.