On 01/02/2015 2:41 AM, Bob Campbell via wrote: > Jenny, > that's a distinct possibility I had not considered. > Age is about right. > I has been a number of years since I accessed Canadian records > especially those for the home children. > Are the arriving passenger lists now available online? > A later marriage for her perhaps? > An entry in the Canada 1921 census as she would then be 19? I couldn't find any likely candidates on Ancestry.ca for a Violet Campbell born in England in the 1921 Canadian census index. Of course the transcribers could have horribly botched her name as they did with one of my families. AW > -----Original Message----- From: Jenny M Benson > Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 11:09 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: looking for a Violet GEARY death after 1969 > > On 30/01/2015 16:15, Bob Campbell via wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Subject: looking for a Violet GEARY death registered in Surrey post >> 1980 to compare birthdates >> >> I am trying to track down the last possible location for a Violet >> GEARY. What I do know about Violet IF she is mine........ born Violet >> CAMPBELL at Woolwich 12th July 1901 Shown in the 1911 census as a 9 >> year old at a Catholic Orphanage at Croydon Surrey. by the process of >> elimination there is a POSSIBLE marriage to Arthur W.C GEARY >> registered in the June 1/4 of 1919 by which time she would be 17 the >> couple had 5 children between 1920 and 1931 all born at Croydon. The >> registration of her husband Arthur William C. GEARY's death in 1969 >> at Surrey S.E. No "most likely death registered for Violet any where >> on FreeBMD after 1969 , and likewise no second marriage. Any help >> would be appreciated >> > Any chance she was the Violet Campbell, aged 11, who was shipped out to > Canada in 1913 aboard the Corsican? The large number of unaccompanied > (ie not with family) children suggests it was taking "British Home > Children" (I think they were called that) to Quebec. A very likely > outcome for a child in orphanage at that time. >
Anne, thanks for looking. So you eliminated the possible Violet Campbell born 1902 who was on the 1921 census shown with no parents or spouse at Winnepeg, Manitoba. I used the search engine only but of course no details came up, the above Violet appeared at the top of the list when I input born in England and her birth year 1902 and the year of arrival 1913. Does the 1921 census say whether a person is Roman Catholic? Back to the drawing board! Cheers from Bob Campbell -----Original Message----- From: Ann Watson Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 2:53 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: looking for a Violet GEARY death after 1969 I couldn't find any likely candidates on Ancestry.ca for a Violet Campbell born in England in the 1921 Canadian census index. Of course the transcribers could have horribly botched her name as they did with one of my families. AW > -----Original Message----- From: Jenny M Benson > Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 11:09 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: looking for a Violet GEARY death after 1969 > > On 30/01/2015 16:15, Bob Campbell via wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Subject: looking for a Violet GEARY death registered in Surrey post >> 1980 to compare birthdates >> >> I am trying to track down the last possible location for a Violet >> GEARY. What I do know about Violet IF she is mine........ born Violet >> CAMPBELL at Woolwich 12th July 1901 Shown in the 1911 census as a 9 >> year old at a Catholic Orphanage at Croydon Surrey. by the process of >> elimination there is a POSSIBLE marriage to Arthur W.C GEARY >> registered in the June 1/4 of 1919 by which time she would be 17 the >> couple had 5 children between 1920 and 1931 all born at Croydon. The >> registration of her husband Arthur William C. GEARY's death in 1969 >> at Surrey S.E. No "most likely death registered for Violet any where >> on FreeBMD after 1969 , and likewise no second marriage. Any help >> would be appreciated >> > Any chance she was the Violet Campbell, aged 11, who was shipped out to > Canada in 1913 aboard the Corsican? The large number of unaccompanied > (ie not with family) children suggests it was taking "British Home > Children" (I think they were called that) to Quebec. A very likely > outcome for a child in orphanage at that time. >