I have been puzzling over an entry in the 1851 census (the actual image) for the two participants in a marriage, Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson. Until I saw it, I had so much evidence as to the parentage of both Jane and Joseph that I had no doubt that I had identified the correct couple. According to Ancestry, Lancashire BMD and Free BMD the said Jane and Joseph were married in Gisburne Oct-Dec 1850 but of course the fathers are not given. I have the Gisburne microfiche for the period but would you believe, although Jane and Joseph are in the index under the same number, that page of 15 entries is missing...aargh! This is the 1851 entry: 1851 Gisburne Cotes Farm Boothman James Head,Widr, 60 Farmer of 80 acres Waddington Jane Dau, 26 unmarried Farmer's Daughter Downham Thomas Son Farmer's Son Downham Hannah Dau, 14 Farmer's Daughter Downham William Son, 11 Gisburne Joseph Son, 7 Gisburne Lawson Joseph Visitor, 26 Farmer's Son Gargrave So here we have an unmarried Jane Boothman being visited by Joseph Lawson a married farmer's son, who I am certain has been her husband since the last quarter of 1850. It seems an unlikely mistake for any of the family to make or maybe whoever gave the information was drunk! As an example of the evidence I have, Jane's mother's maiden name was Hayes and Jane had a younger brother, Thomas Hayes Boothman, and named one of her own sons, William Hayes Lawson. Also Jane and Joseph's eldest daughter Mary Anne Lawson was born at Gisburne Coates in May 1851 (where Jane's widowed father, was still living). There are so many certificates I really need to buy and I don't want to have to spend money on one when I am 99.99% convinced I already have the answers! Can anyone explain this strange census entry? Any thoughts or ideas would be very much appreciated. Cheers Sue

Gosh I am holding a conversation with myself you are probably all in bed. I have looked at the original census and It could be the right one. The father could have given his daughter his surname but it doesn't look like an S after her name it could be M. And I found another Joseph Lawson listed as a married visitor rather than as son-in-law which is another way of describing ones visitor. From your research the marriage is very new less than 3 months duration maybe the father became confused. You might have to buy the certificate to be certain. Another way is for someone to look up Parish records to see if they discover who the father is. I have had a great time accessing marriage, death and birth certificates in Ancestry from someone sharing their family research. Just about paid my subscription (except that I wouldn't have bought them) and I am uploading my certificates so someone else can verify their research. Let us know the outcome now we have become intrigued. Jean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Regan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 1:49 PM Subject: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! >I have been puzzling over an entry in the 1851 census (the actual image) >for > the two participants in a marriage, Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson. > Until > I saw it, I had so much evidence as to the parentage of both Jane and > Joseph > that I had no doubt that I had identified the correct couple. According > to > Ancestry, Lancashire BMD and Free BMD the said Jane and Joseph were > married > in Gisburne Oct-Dec 1850 but of course the fathers are not given. I have > the > Gisburne microfiche for the period but would you believe, although Jane > and > Joseph are in the index under the same number, that page of 15 entries is > missing...aargh! > > > > This is the 1851 entry: > > > > 1851 Gisburne Cotes Farm > > > Boothman James Head,Widr, 60 Farmer of 80 acres Waddington > Jane Dau, 26 unmarried Farmer's Daughter Downham > Thomas Son Farmer's Son Downham > Hannah Dau, 14 Farmer's Daughter Downham > William Son, 11 Gisburne > > > Joseph Son, 7 Gisburne > > > Lawson Joseph Visitor, 26 Farmer's Son Gargrave > > > > > > So here we have an unmarried Jane Boothman being visited by Joseph Lawson > a > married farmer's son, who I am certain has been her husband since the last > quarter of 1850. It seems an unlikely mistake for any of the family to > make > or maybe whoever gave the information was drunk! > > > > As an example of the evidence I have, Jane's mother's maiden name was > Hayes > and Jane had a younger brother, Thomas Hayes Boothman, and named one of > her > own sons, William Hayes Lawson. Also Jane and Joseph's eldest daughter > Mary > Anne Lawson was born at Gisburne Coates in May 1851 (where Jane's widowed > father, was still living). > > > > There are so many certificates I really need to buy and I don't want to > have > to spend money on one when I am 99.99% convinced I already have the > answers! > > > > > Can anyone explain this strange census entry? Any thoughts or ideas would > be very much appreciated. > > > > Cheers > > > > Sue > > > > > > > Some useful websites - > FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ > FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki > http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Maybe one of James Boothman's younger children was filling out the schedule on behalf of their father, if he could not read and write someone else would have to fill the form out. The information on the schedule could only be as good as the knowledge of the either the writer of it or of the person dictating what should be written down. If someone's knowledge was at fault you get errors, maybe the younger child just put Jane down as the eldest child of James and forgot to add her married surname of Lawson. perhaps too the marital status of Jane was left off or unreadable by the enumerator and as she was showm as a Bootman and the dau. of James the enumerator might have assumed she was unmarried. Maybe the enumerator filled out the schedule for James and only asked the names of James's children. James may not have realised it meant giving daughter Jane's married name. Joseph Lawson being put down as a visitor because he had been visiting on that day The 1851 census was taken on the 30th March, and as you say Jane's daughter Mary Anne was born in May 1851 she would have been expecting the baby soon after the census. Maybe Joseph Lawson was just visiting overnight, the 30th March that year was a Sunday. The census wanted to know who spent midnight on census night at what address, it did not ask who permanently lived there. It could be that Jane too was only there for a day a two and by the time the schedule was being filled out she and Joseph Lawson had gone to their own home, but had passed the night of Sunday 30th March at her father's farm. Maybe Jane went back to stay at her father's farm until the baby Mary Ann was born, Joseph might have visited on a Sunday because that was the one day of the week that he had some time off from his farm work. For all you can tell he may not have even spent the night of the census at the Boothman farm but whoever filled out the schedule put him down as having been at the Boothmn farm on the night there by mistake, simply because Joseph visited every Sunday. Perhaps the person filling out the form may not have realised it meant who slept the night there but just who had been present at that farm on 30th March. What is the fiche that you have? is it a fiche of the PRs or just a transcript or Index of them? If it a transcript of Index then you really do need the copy of the entry from the Register itself as the transcript could contain errors. You say the page you need is missing from the Fiche that you have. Would not the CRO holding the original PRs be able to help either by sending you the missing page as a photo copy or a copy of the marriage itself from the parish register, would it not be worth contactin them to ask? at worst they can only say no they can't do that. Otherwise you will have to order a copy of the marriage certificate from one or other of two places. If you go to the FreeBMD entry of that 1850 marriage and then click on the word Clitheroe you go forward to a page where you can click on the word "Here" in the information shown there, this this then brings up a page giving the areas covered at that time by Clitheroe District. Gisburn is amongst those places and to it's right it says that the Gisburn registers were transferred to Settle on 1st april 1937. You can click on the word Settle to go forward to the next page where at the bottom it tells you that the Settle registers. presumably including those for Gisburn, are now held by North Yorkshire District office. If you click on the words North Yorkshire you will get up a page of District office addresses, showing North Yorks to be at Harrogate. You could email them to ask if they can check the marriage to see that Jane's father was indeed James Boothman occ. Farmer. If they are willing to supply a copy of the entry so much the better, but they probably won't take card payment over the internet, only by letter or by telephone call. Otherwise you will need to order a copy from the GRO via their website. They have a space on their order form where you can add checking information, you could add jane's father's name and occupation to be checked against the entry. If the entry matches they will send you a copy at the usual fee. But if the entry does not agree with your info., they will not send a copy but will charge you a checking feem which I believe is about half the cost of a copy certificate. Getting a copy of the entry from one source or another will save you puzzlig for evermore about the 1851 entry, you can just put it down the an error on the part of the person filling out that household schedule back then. Nothing else you can do about it if you want to do a proper job of researching your roots then copy certificates are an important part of that research as proof that you are on the right line. Anyone coming after you who picks up where you left of can see how you came to your conclusions about the family and where they came from and need not go over ground you have covered already. Not sure if you have found this Christening in the IGI already so am mentioning it just in case. Jane Boothman 7th August 1825 Gisburn Yorkshire father James Boothman mother Jane. Batch number P007662 which shows this to be an extracted entry and not a patron submission. Use that batch number.region British Iles and add the parents names James Boothman and Jane in the appropriate boxes you should get up 4 children of these parents, including Jane in 1825. Taking out the batch number but adding the country as England and county as Lancashire brings up more baptism for children with these parents names but whether they are for the same James and Jane Boothman it is hard to tell. These Lancs bapts. are mostly in the Wesleyan Methodist at Clitheroe Lancs. With some at Liverpool which I would think can't possibly be yours. But the Clitheroe ones might belong to you as Gisburn and Clitheroe are close together.perhaps James and Jane changed to the Methodist persusaion, many people seem to have done so around that time. Something else you could maybe do is to order the LDS film of the PRs for Gisbsurn. Follow the Source Call No. link in the above IGI entry for Jane Boothman it will show you that the film contains Marriages for various year spans including one for marraiges 1813-1900 and Banns 1823-1899. There are also burials 1799-1899 and another film contains the baptisms 1558-1900 as well as Marriages and burials for earlier years. Could be worth hiring such film/s at your nearest LDS centre for the small hire fee they charge. You can find the address of your nearest LDS centre by making a search for centre addresses on the famiysearch home page. you would of course have to go to the centre to view the film but as the film will be kept for a month for you you can go there as many times as possible during that month to view your film. Regards Jenny DeAngelis Spain. <<I have been puzzling over an entry in the 1851 census (the actual image) for the two participants in a marriage, Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson. Until I saw it, I had so much evidence as to the parentage of both Jane and Joseph that I had no doubt that I had identified the correct couple. According to Ancestry, Lancashire BMD and Free BMD the said Jane and Joseph were married in Gisburne Oct-Dec 1850 but of course the fathers are not given. I have the Gisburne microfiche for the period but would you believe, although Jane and Joseph are in the index under the same number, that page of 15 entries is missing...aargh! This is the 1851 entry: 1851 Gisburne Cotes Farm Boothman James Head,Widr, 60 Farmer of 80 acres Waddington Jane Dau, 26 unmarried Farmer's Daughter Downham Joseph Son, 7 Gisburne Lawson Joseph Visitor, 26 Farmer's Son Gargrave>>