Hi Ron, If you get on to English Literature you will lose me completely. I think my final School Report said something like " He has no inclination to understand the finer points of the English Language". Regards Ted ----- Original Message ----- From: <snape@cix.co.uk> To: <ENG-BLACK-COUNTRY-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 8:55 AM Subject: RE: [B.C.] stepchildren etc. > And what are we to make of the relationship in this quotation: > > No sooner was her answer dispatched, than Mrs. Dashwood indulged herself > in > the pleasure of announcing to her son-in-law and his wife that she was > provided with a house, and should incommode them no longer than till every > thing were ready for her inhabiting it. They heard her with surprise. Mrs. > John Dashwood said nothing; but her husband civilly hoped that she would > not be settled far from Norland. She had great satisfaction in replying > that she was going into Devonshire.--Edward turned hastily towards her, on > hearing this, and, in a voice of surprise and concern, which required no > explanation to her, repeated, "Devonshire! Are you, indeed, going there? > So > far from hence! And to what part of it?" She explained the situation. It > was within four miles northward of Exeter. > > Jane Austen, Sense and Sensibility > > What was Mrs Dashwood's relationship to her son-in-law's wife? > > Ron S > > > Original Message: > ----------------- > From: snape@cix.co.uk snape@cix.co.uk > Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 02:38:02 -0400 > To: ENG-BLACK-COUNTRY-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: [B.C.] stepchildren etc. > > >> but it is easy to understand the heads of household's > reasoning. . . . Many heads of household just listed the step children > under their own surname and entered "son" or "daughter." > > My understanding of census-taking practice in earlier times is that the > census "forms" (actually books) were not filled in by the households > themselves but were filled in "live" by the census takers on the doorstep. > The terminology would be that of the census taker, although he would, of > course, be dependent for information upon the person standing on the > doorstep (not necessarily the head of household) for information. > > I have come across census entries where one had the strong impression that > the information supplied, particularly with regard to ages, was actually > guess-work (maybe from a neigbour?). > > Ron S > > Original Message: > ----------------- > From: chris edwards05@blueyonder.co.uk > Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:56:17 +0100 > To: ENG-BLACK-COUNTRY-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: [B.C.] stepchildren etc. > > > Hi Ted, Polly and everybody, > Our ancestors when referring to a some relatives in everyday conversation > would have very probably described the relationship rather than use a > single > word definition. For example (just as we do today) they might say "the > wife's brother" or "my sister's son" or "my daughter's husband." The > difference being that today if called upon we can use the correct > terminology to define each of our relatives. > Most working class people rarely had cause to write and many signed their > own name with a cross and the only time they had to go through the > inconvenience of coming up with unfamiliar words would be every ten years > for the census. > Like everyone else, I have found that stepchildren were often entered on > the > census as son-in-law or daughter-in-law. This of course was an inaccurate > use of the term but it is easy to understand the heads of household's > reasoning. After all if they knew that the wife's father was the father > in-law and the wife's brother was a brother-in-law then surely the wife's > son was a son-in-law. Many heads of household just listed the step > children > under their own surname and entered "son" or "daughter." > And the uncertainty in applying the correct term did not stop at > stepchildren. In my own tree I have a genuine daughter-in-law simply > listed > as "son's wife" and the grandchildren listed as "son's daughter" or "son's > son." > In the case of another extended family, the son's children are listed > correctly as grandson/granddaughter but in the same household the > daughter's > children have been listed as nephew and niece. > My apologies if the general content of this email arrives twice to the > list. > I did post a very similar message this morning but it seems to have > disappeared. > Best wishes, > Chris > > > > ==== ENG-BLACK-COUNTRY Mailing List ==== > Wherever possible (except for personal messages) > please post replies to the list.Other people can learn from them! > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ . > > > > > ==== ENG-BLACK-COUNTRY Mailing List ==== > The B.C. List Admin is Dave Ogden :- > d.ogden@blueyonder.co.uk > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ . > > > > > ==== ENG-BLACK-COUNTRY Mailing List ==== > The B.C. List Admin is Dave Ogden :- > d.ogden@blueyonder.co.uk > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.5/322 - Release Date: 22/04/2006 >