tmelport1979
23-09-2008, 19:05
Any idea why i can't find Margaret Cook???
Searched through the census and the 1901 gives her as Margaret Barker born Wentworth abt1877 (she married in 1900 to Arthur Edward Barker)
But going through the earlier census records(pre-wedding) she.s gone???
Very confused:help:
RiffRaff
23-09-2008, 19:15
Any idea why i can't find Margaret Cook???
Searched through the census and the 1901 gives her as Margaret Barker born Wentworth abt1877 (she married in 1900 to Arthur Edward Barker)
But going through the earlier census records(pre-wedding) she.s gone???
Very confused:help:
I've come across a family where a child was "missing" too....except it transpired that she was away visiting an aunt on the night of the census - don't forget it's a record of the people actually in whichever property on that particular date.
In my case she showed up on the aunt's census record as "a visitor".
tmelport1979
23-09-2008, 19:24
She doesn't show up in 1891 or 1881 which is the strange part!
Would it show up as born in Wentworth on any census she was on or does this tend to differ?
RiffRaff
23-09-2008, 19:48
She doesn't show up in 1891 or 1881 which is the strange part!
Would it show up as born in Wentworth on any census she was on or does this tend to differ?
Yes...but you don't know where she was!
For example, she may well have been staying with relatives/friends in a completely different area, miles away.
Don't also overlook the possibility of a cock-up on the part of the enumerator, or even her parents!
The 1881 census gives a Margaret Cooke 5 at Hood hill Wentworth, a very large family.
Father Edward a miner born Hood hill Wentworth.
The 1881 census gives a Margaret Cooke 5 at Hood hill Wentworth, a very large family.
Father Edward a miner born Hood hill Wentworth.
The Free BMD site on Rootsweb confirms that the birth of Margaret Cook was registered in the Rotherham area (includes Wentworth) in the 3rd Quarter of 1875
She is on the 1891 census as COOKE.
Tuppie
tmelport1979
24-09-2008, 07:24
Thankyou all
I never thought to check cooke with an E on the end, on the other census its showing without it!
RiffRaff
24-09-2008, 07:42
Thankyou all
I never thought to check cooke with an E on the end, on the other census its showing without it!
Like I wrote before, don't overlook the possibility of a cock-up on the part of the enumerator!