Re: James William UNDERWOOD
- From: eve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:42:24 -0000
Unfortunately, it's only the 1911 Census images that indicate I've
been barking up the wrong tree for four years or so - including
building a large chunk of 'my' family tree on the erroneous
assumption.
If all your previous research has tied together, then it may be wise to
distrust this 1911 entry.
1. The form may have been filled in by the wife, who assumed her
husband was from Bristol because he talked a lot about it/grew up
there
2. James himself may have forgotten where he was born because they
left it when he was small
3. Less probably, James wished to conceal where he was actually
born to avoid being traced/ Not very likely, since even the police didn't
do cross-district, joined up thinking then.
Could be something in railway emplyee records. BWR is about the
best covered company. (Kew)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: James William UNDERWOOD
- From: Paul U
- Re: James William UNDERWOOD
- References:
- Re: James William UNDERWOOD
- From: Paul U
- Re: James William UNDERWOOD
- Prev by Date: Re: 1891 Census image - name clarification please
- Next by Date: Re: WAS 1891 Census image - Loxdale punishment
- Previous by thread: Re: James William UNDERWOOD
- Next by thread: Re: James William UNDERWOOD
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|