I think it was boarders who would be included with the main family, but lodgers had separate schedules (or should have). Multiple dwellings in the same building where, of course, not unusual and enumerators did not always follow a logical (to us) route - so tracing addresses from census books is always a very hit and miss affair. Phil -----Original Message----- From: berkshire-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:berkshire-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Nivard Ovington Sent: 18 October 2009 13:38 To: "baldrick"; berkshire@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [BRK] Fish St Wallingford 1851 Census Entry Each schedule is for each house/dwelling or part thereof Generally one per family unit including anyone living with them (including lodgers & borders, if they were in a separate room/part of the building they should have their own schedule but like a lot of things, people misunderstood so entered everyone in the building on one schedule on occasion Rules were only as good as the interpretation of them For enumerators instructions see :- <http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~framland/census/directions. htm> In 1851 there should be a line after each household drawn across the page, in your example schedules 49 & 50 are two schedules in one dwelling You can sometimes work out the house numbers by checking other census years that may be marked with them comparing the families to see if people stayed in the same area Its sometimes worth checking the enumeration description as house number runs are sometimes noted but not in this case Also worth checking for landmarks like Pubs, Churches etc (if enumerated) and comparing to other census years In the case of those living over shops the shop part is rarely enumerated (as they were not inhabited) so its hard to tell those that are Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > No I do not know the house number. All it says on census HO107 piece > 1690 folio 270 page 14 are the "schedule no's" and has one family per > "schedule". Does each of these "schedules" represent a separate house, > room or are they all piled into the same room like you often see on > Who do you think that you are? > > Thanks ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BERKSHIRE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Phill As I said previously, it depended upon the interpretation of the parties involved The instructions are clear enough The head of household should include *all* who resided in his/her household at 12 midnight on census day, that included all boarders or lodgers and servants etc If there was a separate or subdivided part of the same building (as in this particular case) there should be a separate schedule However as in all things people misunderstood and entered everyone on one schedule or in other cases entered a lodger as being separate when in fact he was living in the same household So in the case of "rooms" rented out to separate families there should be one per room, in the case of lodgers/boarders living in the same household they should all be on one with the family they are living with Its worth restating the difference between a lodger and boarder Boarder = 1. a. One who boards, or has his food, or food and lodging, at the house of another for compensation; one who lives in a boarding-house or with a family as one of its members, at a fixed rate Lodger = c. One who resides as an inmate in another person's house, paying a certain sum periodically for the accommodation. Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) >I think it was boarders who would be included with the main family, but > lodgers had separate schedules (or should have). > Multiple dwellings in the same building where, of course, not unusual and > enumerators did not always follow a logical (to us) route - so tracing > addresses from census books is always a very hit and miss affair. > Phil