Tony Harrison wrote: > In 1841 census living in Short Street was a Elizabeth Birt ( did > the enumerator decide Betty was an Elizabeth)aged 50 and an > Elizabeth Tucker of the right age to be her granddaughter but both > born in County. It's quite possible the enumerator did consider Betty as a pet name for Elizabeth and so enumerated her but Betty was a name in its own right as well. I have a cousin whose name was Patty and she's been incorrectly "corrected" to Martha which lead me to look for an extra child that didn't exist. Patty is a pet form of Martha. > > Betty Birt b 1778 d 1850 certificate showed her to be 71 the right > age for my Betty living 11 Short Street but described as the Widow > of John Birt a Commercial Traveller the informant was not a family > member (Her daughter had died} > > Given the inconsistencies would you consider that I have found my > Joseph and Betty. I think you have your Joseph all right. I'm not so sure about Betty but given the informant was someone who apparently didn't know the couple that could account for John being given instead of Joseph. I think overall I'd cautiously accept Betty's death as being right. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton and Greinton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk