Re: Opinion Wanted, Please
- From: Graeme Wall <Graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 08:09:55 +0100
In message <2d7883hrge8i5tv99p5fkpsq8tg4b2310j@xxxxxxx>
Charles Ellson <charles@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 20:26:59 +0100, Graeme Wall
In message <6sv7839bpiv2igcdb01mp2nrpubldklelr@xxxxxxx>I've yet to see an entry on the lines of "Occupation X but usually/also
Phil C. <philstoxicwaste@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 17:52:00 +0100, Graeme Wall
In message <4683d5ad$0$12383$426a74cc@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
john <jfu-675h@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
His occupation is "pressman at oilcake mills" so, if he was a
carter a few years later, it is unlikely to be the same person.
Doesn't follow at all, the mill could have closed down, or he was ill
and got sacked. A carter is a relatively unskilled occupation that
he could have picked up in such circumstances.
Or he could have had more than one job. A worker at the oilcake mills
may also have done some carting for them when the need arose?
Of course, but on a census is more likely to give his main occupation.
employed in occupation Y" so it's possibly more accurate to say that the
census shows whatever he was doing for a living during that week if e.g. he
alternated between regular "summer" and "winter" jobs.
Given the census was always the same time of year, you wouldn't be able to
spot seasonal variations unfortunately. Might pick them up from children's
births and marriages.
My genealogy website: