"Lynda Minarzick" <minarzick@sympatico.ca> > Ridiculous practice!!!! Didn't they think that in years to come it would > cause us all problems??? > > Lynda in Montreal > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Marilyn Maybury" <m.maybury@blueyonder.co.uk> > To: <ENG-YKS-BRADFORD-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 1:36 PM > Subject: Re: [ BRAD] Ages on 1841 census > > > > Hi Tim, > > > > The correct age was given up to the age of 15 but from 16 onwards the age > > was rounded down to the nearest five. > > So, the child was aged 5 but William PICKARD was aged between 25 and 29.< I TRUST you said that very much tongue in cheek! Yes, I am sure you did. Sadly, our ancestors never seem to have thought about us, their descendants, when they carried out census enumerations and made entries in parish registers - most unreasonable of them, of course! The only one who appears to have been gifted with some vision was the Rev William Dade, the man who lent his name to Dade Registers (parish registers which gave more detail than normal, and for a fuller account of what Dade Registers were see my numerous messages in the rootsweb archives of YORKSGEN and WEST-RIDING). Roy Stockdill (Editor, Journal of One-Name Studies) Guild of One-Name Studies:- www.one-name.org Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History:- www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does he will tell you, if he does not why humiliate him? - Canon Sydney Smith