Re: 1891 census lookup please - Furness


"Brad Rogers" <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.09.29.12.50.23.459604@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 12:55:00 +0100, Steven Gibbs wrote:
>
>> I would think that "James"="Jane", and that someone has misread the
>> name, then wrongly deduced the sex. (But, in which census?)
>
> Ancestry's BMD data gives a James born at the right time, but not a Jane:
>
> Name: FURNESS, James
> Record Type: Births
> Quarter: March
> Year: 1886
> District: Cardiff (1837-1974)
> County: Glamorgan Monmouthshire
> Volume: 11a
> Page: 351
>
> FreeBMD's coverage chart show thta quarter to be 100% transcribed. So,
> barring transcription error, looks like they gave birth to a James, not a
> Jane. Of course, the only way to be 100% sure is order that cert. :-)

I have the 1901 RG13/1623.f6.p3. It is clearly Jane, the age is entered
into the female column, and 'sister-in-law' is dittoed. My money is on Jane
at the moment, but she/he isn't my main quarry so I'll have to leave it.

Many thanks for your interest.

>
> --
> Regards _
> / ) "The blindingly obvious is
> / _)rad never immediately apparent"


.

Relevant Pages