Hello Bob yes it is indeed possible that they could be husband and wife and they are isted as married on the census (ok not necessarily to each other) but does look like they were.: Hi Linda and Tony can you tell me if there are two people listed as boarders in a dwelling could they be man and wife and both be listed as boarders. I have in the 1901 a James WATERS listed as a boarder and also there is a Dinah WATERS listed as a boarder. Now James wife Lydia died in 1894 in the workhouse so he may have remarried and this could be his wife. However I cannot find a marriage for them. Just some food for though there are usually 3 marriages to a page and the Portsmouth marriages for Sept 1/4 1900 only has 2 so maybe Dinah was one of the missing partners on that marriage block for BMD? Might be worth visiting Portsmouth Record Office or possibly if you e-mail them they might be prepared to check for you. Alternatively, you could go onto 1837 and check from 1894 until March 1/4 1901 to see if you can find a marriage match. Could there have been an alternative spelling for the marriage surname of WATERS? A few thoughts... Take care,Linda & Tony
Thanks L&T all I have to do now is find the marriage UGH ----- Original Message ----- From: <Knightroots@aol.com> To: <HAMPSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 1:22 PM Subject: [Ham] Boarders > Hello Bob yes it is indeed possible that they could be husband and wife > and > they are isted as married on the census (ok not necessarily to each other) > but > does look like they were.: > > Hi Linda and Tony can you tell me if there are two people listed as > boarders > in a dwelling could they be man and wife and both be listed as boarders. > I > have in the 1901 a James WATERS listed as a boarder and also there is a > Dinah WATERS listed as a boarder. Now James wife Lydia died in 1894 in > the > workhouse so he may have remarried and this could be his wife. However I > cannot find a marriage for them. > Just some food for though there are usually 3 marriages to a page and the > Portsmouth marriages for Sept 1/4 1900 only has 2 so maybe Dinah was one > of the > missing partners on that marriage block for BMD? > Might be worth visiting Portsmouth Record Office or possibly if you e-mail > them they might be prepared to check for you. > Alternatively, you could go onto 1837 and check from 1894 until March 1/4 > 1901 to see if you can find a marriage match. > Could there have been an alternative spelling for the marriage surname of > WATERS? > A few thoughts... > Take care,Linda & Tony > > > > > > > > > ==== HAMPSHIRE Mailing List ==== > If all our ancestors were in a tree what a BIG tree -house that would be! >