What happened to Great Aunt Flo & Great Uncle Peter in 1911?

[Bob Spiers]

I don't normally worry about missing ancestors in Censuses, but with two of my Great Ancestors -one of whom (Peter) I knew as a child - I do. It is not so much a brick wall as a mystery and I propose to seek the help of others in the Forum, to see if they have better luck. Here are the facts about the two in question.

Florence Harriet Westbury born S Qtr 1880 (6D/104) (Mother Flynn) Birmingham (Died 1939).
Peter Cunnington born 17 Jan 1879 (Mother Richardson) Birmingham (Died 1954)

Fact: Florence was bloodline (my grandmother's sister) and she married Peter 4th Dec 1909 -Bordesley, Birmingham. To complicate matters their individual Register references vary: Florence 6D/457 and Peter 6D/157. This error has been picked up by others and there is a postscipt note in FreeBMD. Peter should also be 6D/457. So they became Mr & Mrs Cunnington thereafter.

Note the Cunnington surname is one of my most mis-transcribed names some shown as Cannington or Connington (and shades between) as well as some shown ending up with "ingham" instead of "ington". So beware of those hurdles.

#1: Both appear with their respective Westbury/Cunnington families in Censuses 1881 - 1901 but NEITHER appear in 1911 as a married couple.

#2: In 1912 Peter is shown in an Electoral Roll living at 172 Alcester Street, in Birmingham. Florence is NOT with him. (This address features in all Birmingham Electoral Rolls after 1921 as their marriage home with both residing). Why is she not shown living with him in 1912?

#3: Peter enlists in 1914 in the Worcestershire Regiment, he serves in France & Egypt and survives the war and is demobbed 1919/1920. He returns to Birmingham where he takes up home with Florence at 172 Alcester Street and they appear together in countless Electoral Rolls thereafter.

#4 Florence dies 13 March 1939 and in the 1939 Register Peter still at 172 Alcester Street is shown as a Brush Maker.

#5; Reverting back to Florence in 1911 I am curious about a Florence Westbury (no middle name) aged 35 (1876), MARRIED; shown as a visitor in Rhyll, Wales, born BIRMINGHAM. If one and the same Florence, why use her maiden name and she is older by 4 years (not that Census ages mean a great deal)...perhaps a red herring!

So that is it and it bugs me because I can trace all of the Westbury & Cunnington family members in 1911 except these two. I have fond memories of (Great) Uncle Peter (sadly Florence died before I was born) - who kept the family well supplied with brushes - and listened whilst he recounted many tales about his wife, and likewise when Grandma spoke about her sister. I would just like to find them in the 1911 Census, but all attempts to do so have failed.

Have I missed something?

 

[Helen7]

Yes, it is annoying when you can't find someone in a census. I don't suppose there's any chance Peter and Florence were out of the country on census night?

I looked for 172 Alcester Street in the 1911 census (on FMP) but couldn't find it. All the surrounding numbers are there (both odd and even) but it goes: ...169, 170, 171, 173, 174, 175... with a gap at 172. This seems strange, and I wonder if this 'missing' census could be the answer, but perhaps I'm missing something?

EDIT: And 172 Alcester St doesn't appear on Ancestry either. Could it be that house was unoccupied in 1911?

 

[Helen7]

In 1912 Peter is shown in an Electoral Roll living at 172 Alcester Street, in Birmingham. Florence is NOT with him. (This address features in all Birmingham Electoral Rolls after 1921 as their marriage home with both residing). Why is she not shown living with him in 1912?

In this 1912 electoral register there are NO women listed (not surprisingly, as it was before women had the vote - by 1921 that had all changed of course). For example, Peter's neighbour at no. 171, Albert Wedgbrow, had wife Fanny with him in 1911 but she doesn't appear on the electoral list. So even if Peter and Florence were living together at 172 in 1912, Florence wouldn't have been listed on this electoral roll.

 

[Bob Spiers]

Yes, it is annoying when you can't find someone in a census. I don't suppose there's any chance Peter and Florence were out of the country on census night?

Thanks for your input Helen and on your first point I don't think out of the country applies, and likely not even out of the county, but cannot be certain.

I looked for 172 Alcester Street in the 1911 census (on FMP) but couldn't find it. All the surrounding numbers are there (both odd and even) but it goes: ...169, 170, 171, 173, 174, 175... with a gap at 172. This seems strange, and I wonder if this 'missing' census could be the answer, but perhaps I'm missing something?

Now that is ground I uncovered also with a FMP address search, and agree with your findings; 172 is a 'no- show' and I am guessing the premises were empty. Interestingly, when checking a Birmingham Rate Book entry for 172 Alcester Road, I came across a qualifying address showing alongside (not quite sure in what way it applied). It was a Birmingham 'back-to'back' address (Birmingham being well known for such residences where one street address led to three or four additional residences leading off via a communal courtyard). I recognised the address as belonging to another family member, in fact to Florence's parents and where she was brought up. So likely 172 had been acquired (i.e. municipally or private rented) with her parents acting as guarantors/paying the rent. Unfortunately neither Peter or Florence occupied it at the time of the Census, although the following year (1912) Peter is shown living there,

Footnote: I am aware from my notes recorded in Tribal Pages that Peter's parents ran or help run a Richardson connected Lodging House, and his mother Harriet (formerly) Richardson also ran a second hand clothes shop. However both parents were deceased by the time of the 1911 Census, so, perhaps, just perhaps, Peter & Florence were helping out in one or the other capacity? However even with this knowledge I still have not been able to find them.

 

[Bob Spiers]

In this 1912 electoral register there are NO women listed (not surprisingly, as it was before women had the vote - by 1921 that had all changed of course). For example, Peter's neighbour at no. 171, Albert Wedgbrow, had wife Fanny with him in 1911 but she doesn't appear on the electoral list. So even if Peter and Florence were living together at 172 in 1912, Florence wouldn't have been listed on this electoral roll.

Just picked this up after posting the above, and that is a GOOD point you make. I am aware that the Rate Books apply only to Head of Household (although of course sometimes a woman especially if a widow) but forgot about the female vote emancipation c 1919/20. I am also aware that from 1921 onwards Florence is shown and indeed also a lodger, Florence's brother Henry Francis Westbury. So that just leaves their absence in 1911 to be explained, rather than conjectured.

Thanks again Helen.

 

[Heather]

Bob, in the 1911 census records there was a way of looking at the first pages of the enumerators book with all the addresses listed and the head of each household written against it. It was titled "Description of the Enumeration District" which named all the streets and then the individual houses in each street, maybe Peter can help you with this if it is still available. I have these records from my birthplace printed out in my records. I can feel your frustration at not being able to find Peter and Florence and I think that their address may have been mistranscribed and may be hidden in the records somewhere. If you look at the Alcester St addresses, at the very end there is a number 216 and then it jumps to 567 Alcester Street, looking at the original and it is actually 56 & 57 Alcester Street. In the main listing the numbers go from 55 to 58. So there is still hope

 

[Helen7]

Bob, in the 1911 census records there was a way of looking at the first pages of the enumerators book with all the addresses listed and the head of each household written against it.

You can access the enumerator's summary on FMP by clicking on 'Related Images' (bottom righthand corner of page) when viewing any particular household schedule image. I did this for no. 171 Alcester Street and the summary reveals that no. 172 was indeed uninhabited. Don't know why I didn't think to check this before.

There are several other numbers on Alcester St also uninhabited, e.g. nos. 156, 161 and 162.

 

[Bob Spiers]

Thanks both Heather & Helen, will pursue this and see if anything turns up.

 

[Bob Spiers]

After returning to investigate the apparent disappearance of Peter & Florence in 1911 - having satisfied myself with finding Florence's siblings (and Peter's for that matter) - I now discover I had been similarly baffled in trying to find Florence's mother (a widow) Bridget Westbury, nee Flynn in the same Census; and that research dated back at least 5 years and was never satisfactorily explained. Much as it now seems to be the case with her daughter Florence, now Florence Cunnington.

Bridget Westbury nee Flynn was my Irish Great Grandmother born in Galway. She came over to England with her parents and they settled in Birmingham c 1852. Bridget's birth year was 1844 - not that she ever owned to that as she seemed to falsify her birth year with every Census. Also showing aged 27 when she married Henry Francis Westbury in 1879 (1852), and when she died in 1927, at an estimated aged of 74 (1853).

Henry Francis died in January 1911 missing out on the Census, leaving Bridget a widow, with her children married or elsewhere. The family address was 2 back of 127 High Street Bordesley (Birmingham) which I can reveal was the 'related' address shown against Peter & Florence's 172 Alcester Street address in the same Census.

Now we come up to date and I can reveal that using the Enumerators 1911 List covering High Street Bordesley, I find that 2 back of 127 was uninhabited; just as her daughter's 172 Alcester Steet was. How strange?

Perhaps after all they did 'up sticks' after Henry's death but where, as I cannot find them in Ireland in 1911? (The thought did occur to me that Bridget might have paid a return visit to Ireland which she hadn't seen since she was around 8, accompanied, perhaps by her son in law and daughter. But apparently not). Besides I know Peter & Florence were back in Birmingham by 1912 but no trace of Bridget before her death in 1927 in Birmingham.

I am not quite sure where that leaves me and likely may need to wait for the 1921 Census to see what that reveals. Bridget just disappears from records after 1901. I know she, like husband Henry, were both interred in Witton Cemetery, Birmingham. He in 1911 and she 1927 (albeit with an estimated birth year of 1853 (aged 74)

I relate this addition information merely to emphasise the mystery goes deeper than just Peter & Florence.