Census Query

elaine w · Post by **elaine w** » Wed Aug 13, 2008 4:40 pm

Hi folks,

Can anyone help me please? I'm confused - yet again!!

On the 1841 census it shows my ancestor Robert Scott as aged 55yrs and his wife Elizabeth aged 50yrs.

On the 1851 census it shows Robert as aged 77yrs and Elizabeth as aged 64yrs. There is 22yrs difference on Robert and 14 yrs difference on Elizabeth. I've been told that emunerators usually round it up to the nearest 5 years but this is much greater and now I'm confused as to the correct date of births for both Rob and Eliz. It's definately the correct family on both censuses.

Can anyone clarify this for me please??

Thanks

Elaine.

LesleyB · Post by **LesleyB** » Wed Aug 13, 2008 7:31 pm

Hi Elaine

On the 1851 census it shows Robert as aged 77yrs and Elizabeth as aged 64yrs. There is 22yrs difference on Robert and 14 yrs difference on Elizabeth. I've been told that emunerators usually round it up to the nearest 5 years

Enumerators were instructed to round ages down to the nearest 5 in 1841 only, and only for those persons over 15years. See the census link at the top of this page for more info on what instructions were given to enumerators for each censsu date.

Best wishes
Lesley

Russell · Post by **Russell** » Wed Aug 13, 2008 7:32 pm

Hi Elaine

Enunerators for the 1841 Census were instructed to Round Down ages not up. They were supposed to record the correct age of children up to the age of 15. It is possible that Robert would be somewhere between the age of 55 and 59. Elizabeth might be 50 or up to 54.
In some parishes the Enumerators recorded actual ages. I suppose if you were the schoolteacher and knew the true age of the person it would be easy to ignore the instructions given.
There was no such stricture for the 1851 Census and it should give an accuste age but even today some folk think it rude to ask a woman -Sorry, Lady - her age and I'm sure there was a hint of massageing of ages on some entries.
Another factor could be the level of literacy and numeracy of the folk giving the information. On a couple of mine I think a number was just plucked out of the air

I just hope that they lasted another four years so that they fell into the Statutory registration of Deaths. Even then the accuracy of the information varied according to the level of knowledge of the person reporting the death.

Russell

LesleyB · Post by **LesleyB** » Wed Aug 13, 2008 7:39 pm

Hi Elaine
I see Jean's given you some help with this one here:
http://www.british-genealogy.com/forums ... hp?t=33278

Did you check out the death Jean suggested for 1861? Jean's advice is usually spot-on, so it's worth having at that death, I think.
Did you hear any more on the death for Elizabeth that Jean found as well? That might be worth waiting for too if you do not have it already, before continuing, perhaps just getting in more of a muddle!

Best wishes
Lesley

Russell · Post by **Russell** » Wed Aug 13, 2008 7:56 pm

Snap Lesley

I took longer because I talk/write too much

Russell

elaine w · Post by **elaine w** » Wed Aug 13, 2008 8:10 pm

Hi Lesley,

Yes, I will check it out now. Just had tea and been busy so will sit down and check things out. I have probably got everyone running around helping me on this site and the english one!! I need all the help I can get at the moment. This genealogy business has got right under my skin and I am addicted!

I have already found a death cert for Elizabeth Scott, widow of Robert Scott. It states her parents were John Duncan and Helen Sherif (can't read maiden name properly). It's just Robert I'm having real difficulty with. I've even been in touch with Angus Archives and Montrose Library to see if they can help. Just waiting for replies.

Right will check out the death for Rob and get back to everyone.

Thanks folks for your help.
Elaine.

LesleyB · Post by **LesleyB** » Wed Aug 13, 2008 8:21 pm

Hi Elaine

I have probably got everyone running around helping me on this site and the english one!! I need all the help I can get at the moment.

It is easy to get in a muddle with research, as the info tends to come in rushes, with gaps inbetween....you need to take "time out" frequently to digest the new info you have and assess where to go from there, and have what you know already clear in your head, before moving off again into the next phase.

It is always a good idea to give us the bigger picture of what you already know from your own research and from what has already been suggested, both here and on other forums, as that helps us to help you more effectively. Otherwise you not only have "eveyone running around" as you say, but they are all repeating the same tasks, so not being as helpful or productive as they might otherwise be!

Best wishes
Lesley

elaine w · Post by **elaine w** » Wed Aug 13, 2008 8:33 pm

Hi Lesley,

Yes, I DO APOLOGISE for everyone running after me. I was just trying to get as much help as possible, but obviously not explaining myself too well!

Well, I can't believe it!! Jean looks like she has come up trumps and yet I and other friends on my english site have searched and were unable to find a death cert for Rob Scott. I thought, (and so did other people) that Robert had died before 1855 as we were unable to trace his death, I still have not come up with a birth certificate yet!! Plus the fact, that after 1851 census there was no trace of him, he just seemed to vanish.

Well, I could kiss Jean!!

I will go on the other forum and send her a thread.

Thanks everyone for your invaluable help. You're all wonderful

Best wishes

Elaine.

LesleyB · Post by **LesleyB** » Wed Aug 13, 2008 9:49 pm

Hi Elaine
Glad you got a result with the death.
Jean is very, very good at what she does... if Jean suggests a lead, it is generally well worth checking it out.

I'm sure she will be very appreciative of your thanks for her hard work - jist dinnae kiss her too hard!

Best wishes
Lesley