No, there is no number and no indication that John Pye was an employer, although the evidence from other sources might suggest that. All it says on the form is: Blacksmith. Labourer. One of his sons is Blacksmith Labourer without the point or full stop and another is Whitesmith Labourer. On the page before there is a "Mason - Labourer". A couple of pages back there are three "Labourer Railwayman" and a "Labourer Farm Servant". The three railway labourers were in the same household as a 'railway servant' - which I take to mean a clerk. The column is headed "Rank, Profession, or OCCUPATION". My reading of all this is that the enumerator was just being a little officious in his form filling - his aim was to make it clear that the men were doing manual work. In some cases there is a dash between the word labourer and the other part of the occupation, in others there is nothing and in this one case there is a full stop. Just a quirk of notation. Judy On 5 Sep 2006, at 22:43, Charani wrote: > and the entry should have read "Blacksmith. > 1 labourer" and not "Blacksmith's labourer".