Hi Jenny: It's been a while since you sent me the data for 1851. Since then, thanks to Gale's Library Week freebie, I was able to download a lot of 1871 and later census images that I am going through, and thought these might be related to what you found: (Context: George GILES as father of Sarah Jemima GILES b. 1830 St. Albans Herts, married William Robert WILLCOCKS St. Mary's Portsea 22 Mar 1858 (second wife.)) In 1881, Portsea, RG11/1146/F126/P21/S109 at 3 Whites Road? George GILES Head Mar 75 Navy Pensioner, Berkshire Newbury Maria Do. Wife Do. 60 Hants, Portsmouth Daniel JOHNSON Br-in-Law 49 " " In 1871, Portsea, RG10/1131/F??/P18/S110 at 28 Whites Row George GILES Head Mar 64 Pensioner (Naval) Berks, Reading Maria Do. Wife Mar 50 Hants Portsmouth Elizabeth WILLIAMS Vstr Unm 18 Domestic Servant Do. Do. Mary CRUPPS Do. Unm 18 (no occ or birthplace given, squished above on same line:) William NORTHOVER Do. Unm 50 Labourer Isle of Wight Susan BURLEY Do. Unm 38 Laundress Do. These seem to be the same family, but ages don't coincide with George 50 and Maria 35 in 1851, though they are 15 years apart. Also George here would be 44/5 in 1851 and 35 in 1841. He is old enough to have had a dau. in 1830, at age 24, though five years younger than the George of 1851 you found. If George was born in Reading/Newbury, and Maria is a Portsmouth native, this would explain his being in Portsea, as would his Navy role. Could he have been a Navy office clerk? This would have to be a second marriage and from her age in 1871 probably was later than 1841 and definitely not Sarah's mother. The children from William's marriage were named Evelina Jemima, Robert George, William Charles and Edward Herbert. Evelina must have been an important family name as Evelina's daughters included Evelina Emma Roach, and Edward's included a Marion Sarah (after mother & grandmother), and Grace Evelina Annie. So I suspect George's first wife was possibly Evelina. Or perhaps his mother. A new piece of evidence turned up today, though, from a descendant of William Robert WILLCOCKS - his marriage cert. It shows as a witness Elizabeth GILES. This would suggest a marriage to an Elizabeth, in around 1828, to account for Sarah's birth in abt. 1830. She was DEFINITELY 28 at marriage to William in 1858! If George is the 64/75 age man he was born in about 1806/7. So an 1828 marriage would be about right. There is one: George GILES m. Elizabeth BLAKE at West Tytherly, Hampshire, on 15 Dec 1828. A George GILES was b. 13 Feb 1807, chr. 15 Feb 1807 at Letcombe Regis, Berks parents Francis and Elizabeth. Elizabeth BLAKE was chr. West Tytherly Hampshire on 12 Jan 1807 parents Augustine and Hannah. A second marriage for George may be: George Giles and Maria Johnson, 16 Oct 1843, St. Thomas Portsmouth, Hampshire She would have been 22 if born in 1821. This name agrees with Daniel JOHNSON as brother-in-law. Could SKS please look this up on the PR, please? Daniel's parents were John and Mary, he was chr. at St. Thomas, but no sign of a Maria in this family! So, in 1841, I would like to see if George, 30 (34), and Elizabeth, 30 (34) are anywhere to be found with a daughter Sarah age 10-11 and possibly other family, of course with no address to go on! He may have had a job in St. Albans, Herts earlier but who knows when he moved to Hampshire? But Elizabeth may have died already if he remarried in 1843. Can anyone find the 1851 census image and/or an 1861 image in Portsea for George and Maria? I have made progress on this line, as the relative I mentioned sent me information that confirmed William Robert as a Workhouse Master in Colchester from 1867, and also have found him in 1861 as a Parish Pay Clerk in Shoreditch (probably a Workhouse staff job?) Regards Martin Willcocks Taylorsville, UT, USA. P.S. re my request for a lookup of William Robert's second marriage, could the witness name be BLAKE rather than LUKE, or was she really GILES? If the latter, possibly a sister of Sarah, since her mother must have died before 1843! Regards Martin Willcocks Taylorsville, UT USA. Jenny Lucy wrote: > Hi Martin, > I had a quick look at the 1851 Index today > There is a George Giles age 50 and a Maria age 35 she was born in > Hants he was not both in same page bundle so possibly living together > Only Sarah J was aged 7 living with Sarah 31 and Ann age5 all born > elsewhere (not Hants) > Also James Giles age 49 not living with another Giles it seems > I do not have access to the addresses - maybe someone can help with > place of birth otherwise can check it out when I get back to library > > This is full detailsGiles Vol 46 > Maria 35 002 71 > Elizabeth 4 001 233 > > Volume 47 (born elsewhere) > Henry 28 555 478 > Ann 5 D03 492 > George 50 555 71 > Sarah 31 T75 492 > Sarah J 7 804 492 > > Volume 47 Born Hampshire > Lydia 69 242 134 > Margaret 1 115 492 > William 3 449 492 > > under Gill (born elsewhere) > George 32 H02 228 > Sarah 24 R29 252 > > Volume 44 > James Giles 49 P06 530 > > Volume 43 Ref HO 107 1657 > Eliza 40 001 246 > Eliza 22 001 246 > Jane 10 001 246 > > Volume 45 under Gile > William 59 002 736 > Ann 36 001 698 > George 3 002 698 > > the index shows name, then age, then number for place of birth, then > bundle page no > eg 71 for George and Maria indicates could be living together or > could be on the same page. > > Hope this helps. Regards Jenny > >> Well, thanks for that insight, John, I guess I hadn't thought of it >> that way! I have several other relatives that were clerks, too. A >> solicitor's clerk, a colliery clerk, a shipowner's clerk, among others. >> >> Was he in the 1851 census, anyone? I'm told that by 1861 he had gone >> from 17 Butcher St., but not where he was then. George GILES, office >> clerk, father of Sarah J. Giles, who would be 20 or 21 in 1851. So >> George might be between 40 and up. >> >> Rita, thanks for the (negative) lookup in 1849. The directories I >> found (on www.historicaldirectories.org) included Slaters 1852 and >> 1853 directories of Hampshire, covering Portsea, and listed both >> George and James GILES. >> >> Regards >> Martin Willcocks >> Taylorsville, UT, USA. >> ======= >> John wrote: >> Why should a directory not mention a mere office clerk? In 1858 he >> would have been in an occupation that formed the basis for the >> emerging lower middle classes. By this stage of the Industrial >> Revolution there were several new regular occupations that had either >> not existed before or had developed from other jobs. For instance the >> role of business manager was now developing as a distinct role as the >> capitalist industrial owners delegated responsibility for the day to >> day running of what were now becoming major concerns - a far cry from >> the smaller cottage industries of 25 to 50 years earlier. The >> position of office clerk was not inconsiderable - whilst it may not >> be that sexy in today's world it was a significant role then. Why? >> This person had to be literate and numerate; in a population that >> still had a high rate of illiteracy. He was a trusted person since >> his role would have exposed him to confidential information and >> possibly cash transactions. His status was therefore above the >> 'blue-collar' worker and a 'respectable' person albeit probably >> working for very little money. Charles Dickens' Bob Cratchit is a >> splendid example of the type of job we are discussing here. >> >> >> ==== ENG-HAM-PORTSMOUTH-GOSPORT Mailing List ==== >> Spring clean your tree and see if you can dust off some new rellies >