There are roads missing from the 1861 Census pages for my area of Teddington. They are listed in both 1851 & 1871.I have been told that this is not an error by Ancestry or Find My Past but that they are actually missing from TNA's own records in Kew. Has anyone come across this before & are there duplicate Census originals anywhere I can consult? Keith Atkinson

Audrey Collins of The National Archives wrote a blog post that shows how to check what is known to be missing: http://blog.nationalarchives.gov.uk/blog/new-improved-census-cataloguing/#comments Sue Adams Family Folk Blog: http://familyfolklore.wordpress.com/ On 11/05/2014 11:54, Keith Atkinson wrote: > There are roads missing from the 1861 Census pages for my area of > Teddington. They are listed in both 1851 & 1871.I have been told that > this is not an error by Ancestry or Find My Past but that they are > actually missing from TNA's own records in Kew. > > Has anyone come across this before & are there duplicate Census > originals anywhere I can consult? > > > Keith Atkinson > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

On Sun, 11 May 2014 11:54:34 +0100, Keith Atkinson <kandn.atkinson@gmail.com> wrote: > Has anyone come across this before & are there duplicate Census > originals anywhere I can consult? See <URL:http://www.findmypast.co.uk/articles/world-records/full-list-of-united-kingdom-records/census-land-and-surveys/1861-england-wales-and-scotland-census> which lists the pieces missing from 1861. As there was only one original copy, no, there are no duplicates to be consulted! NB Although commonly listed as 'missing' they are technically (in TNA-speak) 'wanting'. The former means TNA believes they have them but have mis-filed them somehow whereas the latter means TNA never received them. = Malcolm. -- Malcolm Austen <malcolm.austen@weald.org.uk>

I have one area in the 1861 census (Bexwell in Norfolk) where I believe the enumerator never walked a substantial portion of the parish. All the pages are in sequence, and the numbers at the end of the parish all add up. However comprison with the 1851 census and the 1871 lists people and therefore households who are there in both years and not in the 1861. Further, in 1851 and in 1871 the rectory is specifically identified, both as place and occupation of the head of household, but does not appear at all in 1861. So there are other options apart from miscataloguing, and human nature being what it is, examples exist of all of them. It is also possible that odd pages got missed when the microfilm copy was made, and possible that further pages were missed when those microfilm copies were put up on Ancestry and other sites. The known missing pages at TNA can be identified by searching discovery using "RG9" and "missing", as indicated in the relevant TNA guide. This does not include Teddington, It would be worth checking how the streets are missing. Do page numbers of the schedule that should contain them run out of sequence, and the final number of inhabitants not add up? If all looks correct from this perspective (and likewise in the adjacent enumeration districts), it may be the streets were never enumerated. Note that in general, the schedules are copies made at the time by the enumerator from the original householder schedules. These household schedules were collected in and destroyed at some point. For some of the earlier censuses a small portion of such material has survived. I am not aware of anything for the 1861 census - but others may know different. regards Keith Drage On 11/05/2014 12:56, Malcolm Austen wrote: > On Sun, 11 May 2014 11:54:34 +0100, Keith Atkinson > <kandn.atkinson@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Has anyone come across this before & are there duplicate Census >> originals anywhere I can consult? > See > <URL:http://www.findmypast.co.uk/articles/world-records/full-list-of-united-kingdom-records/census-land-and-surveys/1861-england-wales-and-scotland-census> > which lists the pieces missing from 1861. > > As there was only one original copy, no, there are no duplicates to be > consulted! > > NB Although commonly listed as 'missing' they are technically (in > TNA-speak) 'wanting'. The former means TNA believes they have them but > have mis-filed them somehow whereas the latter means TNA never received > them. > > = Malcolm. >

Malcolm The TNA now use both WANTING and MISSING in the catalogue. WANTING is used where the whole piece has gone astray and MISSING where only part is missing. I understand that they have updated the old street indexes that we used to use at the old Family Records Centre and they have now including those that show part of a street to be missing in the catalogue. The street indexes are also available on the TNA website. You can find the street indexes at http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120608115718/http://yourarchives .nationalarchives.gov.uk/index.php?title=Your_Archives:Historical_Streets_Pr oject#Browsing tinyURL http://tinyurl.com/m28vh99 Regards John Hanson Researcher, The Halsted Trust Website - www.halstedresearch.org.uk -----Original Message----- From: sog-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:sog-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Malcolm Austen Sent: 11 May 2014 12:56 To: kandn.atkinson@gmail.com; sog-uk@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] Missing Census pages 1861 On Sun, 11 May 2014 11:54:34 +0100, Keith Atkinson <kandn.atkinson@gmail.com> wrote: > Has anyone come across this before & are there duplicate Census > originals anywhere I can consult? See <URL:http://www.findmypast.co.uk/articles/world-records/full-list-of-united- kingdom-records/census-land-and-surveys/1861-england-wales-and-scotland-cens us> which lists the pieces missing from 1861. As there was only one original copy, no, there are no duplicates to be consulted! NB Although commonly listed as 'missing' they are technically (in TNA-speak) 'wanting'. The former means TNA believes they have them but have mis-filed them somehow whereas the latter means TNA never received them. = Malcolm. -- Malcolm Austen <malcolm.austen@weald.org.uk> ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message