1851 Census Glasgow .....

[Caroline]

I've found what looks to be one of my relatives in Govan on the 1851 census. Unfortunately though there is no image available and I was wondering if someone who has access to the CD index or even the actual census could give me more details as it might be a while before it's online.

His name is Thomas Maikle (71) and the reference is 646/15/59

Caroline

[Jack]

Hi Caroline,
This from the useful 1851 Glasgow index on CD by the GWSFHS - http://www.gwsfhs.org.uk/
(which only has names)
You'll notice that, although it is Govan Parish, Thomas & family were living in the Partick area.
(Govan at that time included a large area which was on the north side of the River Clyde)
--
1851 cens 646 (626) Ed 9 pp 59-60 (Govan - Partick)
Thomas MEIKLE, 71
John MEIKLE, 31
Jane MEIKLE, 48
Jane MEIKLE, 14
--
Was it a wee typo with the ref number of 646/15/59?
There is no Enumeration District 15 - highest in Govan is 12.
Jack

[Caroline]

Hi Jack,

Thanks very much for that - still not sure if he's mine or not though!

However ScotlandsPeople definitely had it indexed as 646/00 015/00 059, so looks like they've made a mistake. They also had him indexed under MAIKLE.

Caroline

[Jack]

Hi Caroline,
Always a chance that there's a mis-transcription on the CD index,
and that the name actually is MAIKLE.
When i get the chance i'll have a look at it.
Anything in particular that could confirm this Thomas is "yours"?
Jack

[AndrewP]

Was it a wee typo with the ref number of 646/15/59?
There is no Enumeration District 15 - highest in Govan is 12.

However ScotlandsPeople definitely had it indexed as 646/00 015/00 059, so looks like they've made a mistake.

The Govan, Lanarkshire EDs may only go up to 12, but there is a second series of Govan RDs across the county boundary in Renfrewshire, where there were EDs 1-3. So it depends what GROS has done to index the RDs with more than one series of EDs within. Have they added one series on to the end of the other, and continued numbering upwards?

All the best,

Andrew Paterson

[Caroline]

.
Anything in particular that could confirm this Thomas is "yours"?

Hi Jack

I'm pretty sure that this is him in 1841.

Civil Parish: Gorbals Ecclesiastical Parish, Village or Island: -
Folio: 57 Page: 16
Address: Portugal Stree


MEIKLE Thomas M 60 Cotton Yarn Warper Lanarkshire
MEIKLE Agnes F 50 Outside Census County (1841)
MEIKLE Robert M 20 Bookbinder Journeyman Lanarkshire

I realise that Partick is nowhere near Portugal St. but I thought he might be living with one of his children.

Caroline

[Jack]

Hi Caroline,
These look like the same family, and in 1841 the mother seems to be an English born JANE.
So a different Thomas from what you have in 1841 at Portugal St.
--
1841 cens 646 Ed 9 p 24 (Govan - Partick)
Shand Place.
Thomas MEIKLE, 60, power loom dresser, b LKS
Jane MEIKLE, 59, -------------------------b England
John MEIKLE, 20, bleacher, b LKS
/ Elizabeth EWING, 24, female servant, b LKS
George TAYLOR, 19, bleacher, b LKS
--
1851 cens 646 (626) Ed 9-1 pp 59-60 (Govan - Partick)
Castlebank Street.
Thomas MEIKLE, head, widower, 71, rtd. power loom dresser, b Glasgow, LKS
John MEIKLE, son, u/m 31, iron shipbuilders labourer, b Blantyre, LKS
Jane MEIKLE, daur MARR, 48, --------------------------------b Glasgow, LKS
Jane MEIKLE, gr-daur, 14, cotton power loom weaver, b Campsie, STI
--
There is a Robert MEIKLE [32] in 1851 at 396 Parliamentary Rd - but he's a fishmonger, though he does have a son Thomas.
(family all as born Glasgow)
They are wife Margaret 27, Thomas 6, Cecilia 4, James 2, Henry M. 2mos. Also with is a Mary Murphy 12 houseservant.
(this family are in Blythswood 1861, but now with another two children - Robt junr 8 & Janet 4)

Unless the Robert [20] bookbinder in 1841 is now a fishmonger then he could be anywhere in 1851 if his parents had died.
--
Just sorry i've been unable to help any.
Jack

[Jack]

Hi Andrew,
You'll have noticed the "correct" 1851 census number for the MEIKLEs in my just previous reply to Caroline.
So what have GROS done?! I know it shouldn't affect anyone looking up the SP index and downloading a census page image.
But if they have altered some numbers to suit them it would make life very difficult for someone that only needs a number to look up the film roll at the library.
(eg - me for a start!).

If i'd found the MEIKLEs on SP indexed as 646 Ed 15 p 59 i'd never be able to go straight to the correct page.
It's only because of the census CD i'd know to look up 646 Ed 9 p 59 instead.
Even though it should be Ed 9-1, i'd still find it easy enough as the only other Ed 9 in 646 is an Ed 9-2.
(so it would be one or tother)

But at some point i'd like to look at some 1851 Stirlingshire censuses for which i have no CD index,
so i'll be downloading the nos. from SP (the Mitchell is bit by bit buying in census films etc for areas outwith Strathclyde).
I just hope the GROS/SP nos. will tally with what's on the film. Time may tell!
Moans & groans now over.
Jack
ps, i know it's not your fault and my thanks to you for neatly explaining the numbering problems of 1851 earlier on.

[AndrewP]

Hi Jack,

I think the methods used over 150 years ago to make the census happen, having to be fitted into a system that evolved over 150-ish years has set a challenge to GROS's and SP's people to fit into an index system that is computer logical. I guess the means required to make that work will become more apparent to us as we use the system for the 1851 census and see the questions that end out on TalkingScot.

All the best,

Andrew Paterson

[Caroline]

.
Just sorry i've been unable to help any.
Jack

Thanks for all the work you put into this Jack. I guess my Thomas and his wife had died before 1851. At least the query highlighted the differences in the indexing systems!

Caroline