Hello List! Thomas Palmer (1817 - 1897) and Ann Moore (1827 - 1902) had a son George Thomas, born abt 1855. Thomas was a butcher who started on Kingsgate Street and then moved to 153 and 167 Drury Lane. They do not appear on the 1861 census for Drury Lane part of which I believe was destroyed, although this is not confirmed on findmyppast. In searching to confirm the birth of George Thomas Palmer,in May 1855, Ancestry has what appears to be the right person (names of parents correct), but the address shown in the register is 29 Great Quebec Street. The christening was at St Mary, Bryanston Square. This is some way from the Drury Lane and Covent Garden area. On findmypast there does not appear to be a number 29! It goes from 28 to 30. I wondered therefore whether it has been transcribed wrongly and should have been Great Queen Street, which *is* near Drury Lane. But number 29 does not show Thomas Palmer. One possibility is that since the address at the time of the christening was as at May 1855, and the census was taken in April 1855, it is possible that Thomas moved to that address after the census was taken. The other possibility is that I have identified the wrong Thomas Palmer on Ancestry altogether, in spite of the parents names being correct. Any suggestions would be very welcome... David Roberts

29 Great Quebec Street existed in 1846. Thomas French, butcher, is listed there in the P.O.L.D. Best wishes, John Townsend Antiquarian Bookseller/Genealogist http://www.johntownsend.demon.co.uk

29 Great Quebec Street existed in 1846. Thomas French, butcher, is listed there in the P.O.L.D. Best wishes, John Townsend Antiquarian Bookseller/Genealogist http://www.johntownsend.demon.co.uk

Hi David Methinks you are getting your dates a little muddled :-( The 1861 census was taken 7th April not 1855 I found the following which I presume are for your family? Bloomsbury St George 1857 Baptized Feb 15 Born Jan 25 Harry son of Thomas & Ann PALMER abode Drury Lane occupation Butcher Robert LONG (Minister) St John the Evangelist Westminster 1859 July 14 1859 baptized Aug 7th Charles Frederick son of Thomas & Ann PALMER abode 152 Drury Lane Occupation Butcher R G MAUL Incumbent Same Church 1864 Baptized March 6 Edward son of Thomas & Ann PALMER abode 165 Drury Lane occupation Butcher R G MAUL Incumbent In 1861 Drury Lane is recorded but there is a small part missing, schedules 369 to 441 which it seems would include 165 Drury Lane, there is damage to the pages before and after the missing part As to Quebec street being an error? I think not 1848 Post Office Directory PALMER Thomas butcher 37 Kingsgate Street Holborn 1856 Post Office Directory PALMER Thomas butcher 29 Great Quebec st Montague sq That is not to say I don't think its the same family but perhaps birth certs would be the way to go A birth in 1855 and for one of the other children will have the same mothers maiden name recorded if the same family All the mentioned addresses are fairly close to one another so I see no reason to discount them Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > Hello List! > > Thomas Palmer (1817 - 1897) and Ann Moore (1827 - 1902) had a son George > Thomas, born abt 1855. > > Thomas was a butcher who started on Kingsgate Street and then moved to 153 > and 167 Drury Lane. > > They do not appear on the 1861 census for Drury Lane part of which I believe > was destroyed, although this is not confirmed on findmyppast. > > In searching to confirm the birth of George Thomas Palmer,in May 1855, > Ancestry has what appears to be the right person (names of parents > correct), but the address shown in the register is 29 Great Quebec Street. > The christening was at St Mary, Bryanston Square. This is some way from the > Drury Lane and Covent Garden area. On findmypast there does not appear to > be a number 29! It goes from 28 to 30. > > I wondered therefore whether it has been transcribed wrongly and should have > been Great Queen Street, which *is* near Drury Lane. But number 29 does not > show Thomas Palmer. One possibility is that since the address at the time > of the christening was as at May 1855, and the census was taken in April > 1855, it is possible that Thomas moved to that address after the census was > taken. > > The other possibility is that I have identified the wrong Thomas Palmer on > Ancestry altogether, in spite of the parents names being correct. > > Any suggestions would be very welcome... > > David Roberts

29 Gt Quebec St appears to be correct 1856 Kelly's street directory has Gt Quebec St (Montagu Sq And 27 York St) 29 Palmer Thomas, butcher There is a butcher there in 1861 but Edwin Saunders RG9; Piece: 79; Folio: 78; Page: 9 It is in Marylebone district and Street Project at http://yourarchives.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ provides Piece etc references I could not see any looking like you family in 1861 - that is father is a butcher Ron Lankshear -Sydney NSW (from London-Shepherds Bush/Chiswick) try my links http://freepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~lankshear/ On 2011-03-28 4:18 AM, David Roberts wrote: > Hello List! > > Thomas Palmer (1817 - 1897) and Ann Moore (1827 - 1902) had a son George > Thomas, born abt 1855. > > Thomas was a butcher who started on Kingsgate Street and then moved to 153 > and 167 Drury Lane. > > They do not appear on the 1861 census for Drury Lane part of which I believe > was destroyed, although this is not confirmed on findmyppast. > > In searching to confirm the birth of George Thomas Palmer,in May 1855, > Ancestry has what appears to be the right person (names of parents > correct), but the address shown in the register is 29 Great Quebec Street. > The christening was at St Mary, Bryanston Square. This is some way from the > Drury Lane and Covent Garden area. On findmypast there does not appear to > be a number 29! It goes from 28 to 30. > > I wondered therefore whether it has been transcribed wrongly and should have > been Great Queen Street, which*is* near Drury Lane. But number 29 does not > show Thomas Palmer. One possibility is that since the address at the time > of the christening was as at May 1855, and the census was taken in April > 1855, it is possible that Thomas moved to that address after the census was > taken. > > The other possibility is that I have identified the wrong Thomas Palmer on > Ancestry altogether, in spite of the parents names being correct. > > Any suggestions would be very welcome... > > David Roberts