Thanks John for the information. Clicking on the registration district is what lead me to all this confusion. I have tried as many combinations I can think of including using as many wildcards as the search engine would allow me without telling me it would take too long for the search. At this point, I think I'll plonk down my money and take a chance on the gentleman from 1863. I did not know about the tailors you mention so will spend some time and do some research. This George DUNN appears to be the last of the tailors for his line as his sons and grandsons appear to move into the printing industry, mainly with Hazell, Watson, and Viney. Thanks again for the help. Sue Ashton Dearborn, MI USA On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 7:18 PM, JFHH <johnfhhgen@uwclub.net> wrote: > Hi Sue, > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Ashton" <suzinmi@gmail.com> >> >> My ignorance of London geography is showing and I'd like to ask for a >> bit of advice. >> > I'm trying to find the death of my third great grandfather, George >> DUNN (born April 1822) a tailor of Aldgate.  I don't find the family >> in the 1861 census as the Minories are part of the missing section.  I >> do know from the birth of his two last children (both births are >> registered in the East London district - one christened on 18 Feb 1861 >> and one christened on 26 Apr 1863) that his address is 8 Vine Street, >> Algdate.  His widow Elizabeth appears to have stayed in the area as I >> find her in the 1871 census at 3 Redgate Court. >> > I've searched FreeBMD and found a possible death for George in Jul >> 1863 and the district is Whitechapel (this is also before ages were >> included so I can't use that to help).  My doubts as to this being the >> correct George come in because his daughter's birth is registered in >> the East London district in the same quarter.  Looking at the >> sub-districts covered by Whitechapel they include Aldgate and St >> Botolph without Aldgate (which is where his daughter is christened ... >> or at least that's the church for the christening). >> > I don't find any George DUNN deaths between 1861 and 1871 registered >> in the East London district. The East London district also covers St >> Botolph with Aldgate also which might be why the children were >> registered there. >> > I check the parish registers for his death and don't find one.  I >> checked the probate calendar and 1863 is one of the missing years ... >> just my luck with this family. ;-) >> > So my question ... I would like to order the certificate and want to >> make sure my guess seems correct based on the geography knowledge of >> someone who is more familiar than I am. >> > Thanks for your advice.> > Sue Ashton> Dearborn, MI  USA >> ************************************** > > Aldgate  lies on the boundary of Middlesex (later London County Council, > later still Greater London) and the City, and has (or parts have) possibly > switched Registration District in the years that have elapsed since 1837. > Clicking on the name of the Registration district at FreeBMD leads you to a > full description of the district and its history. > > That said, East London (IIRC) was the RD for the eastern half of the City > (not the area popularly referred to as East London - i.e. the area lying > *to* the east *of* the City). If a parish (as, from memory, St.Botolph) lay > partly within and partly without the city boundary then each part would fall > in a separate registration district.  The birth is more likely to have been > at home (which may have fallen within the city and thus East London RD) > while the parish church served both parts of the parish. The death on the > other hand, may well have been in hospital, possibly the Royal London > Hospital, (and again from memory) may well have been in Whitechapel RD at > this time. > > Sorry I have not had time to check my memory! There were other hospitals in > the Whitechapel RD. One final point - I assume you have checked for DUNNE > and DONNE as well as DUNN. Incidentally there was a well known tailors in > the last century called DUNNE's - I think with the additional 'E'. > > Regards > John Henley > >