Find Ancestors

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Please help me pin down Gx3 Grandad.

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Joe

Joe Report 21 Jun 2011 05:29

Is it possible that these two John Morris’s are one and the same?

1841 Census.
John Morris, Cordwainer, aged 45, of Morris Court, Salford Union , Regent Road, born lancs 1796.
Wife Betsy, 45
Samuel – Son – 15
Rachel –– 10
Hannah – - 15
Hugh – 2.

1851 Census.
John Morris, Cordwainer , aged 55, of 25 Broster St, Salford, Greengate. Born Wrixam, Wales, 1796.
Hannah Morris – Daughter – 18 – Hank Winder, born Lancs
Hugh Morris – Son-aged 12
Margaret Morris – Daught – aged 8.
Betsy Gorton – Servant – aged 56.

Samuel in the first one fits as my GX3 grandad, as do Hugh and Hannah names, but Hugh’s age is right and Hannah’s is way off, John Morris ‘s age is right but birth place is different , yet his job (Cordwainer) is right.
We know Betsy, wife in the 1841 census, died. John married the new Betsy Gorton in Dec 1851.
Depsite the discrepancies, could these be the same John Morris?

Thanks for any help in solving this missing piece of my jigsaw.

TootyFruity

TootyFruity Report 21 Jun 2011 07:34

I think they are:

TootyFruity

TootyFruity Report 21 Jun 2011 07:59

Possible death for Betsy


Deaths Mar 1850   (>99%)
  
MORRIS Betsy Manchester 20 468  

Joe

Joe Report 21 Jun 2011 08:58

Thanks Toots,
But why would John give his birthplace as Lancs in 1841 and then Wales in 1851? And how can Hannah be 15 in 1841 then 18 in 1851?
I have a hunch it's him, but I really need to understand what might be going on here.
Thank you, that's two possible deaths we have now for Betsy. I suppose her age at death would be a great help as we know she was also born around 1796.

Dea

Dea Report 21 Jun 2011 09:17

Lancs BMD site often gives ages.

There were two on there but both were babies so the 1850 death is not 'your' Betsy!

Lancashire Death indexes for the years: 1850
Surname Forename(s) Age Sub-District Registers At Reference

MORRIS Betsy 0 Little Bolton Bolton LB/13/69
MORRIS Betsy 0 London Road Manchester LRD/29/96

Dea x

Joe

Joe Report 21 Jun 2011 10:14

Thanks Dea, seems Betsy was a very common name too.

Mike *

Mike * Report 21 Jun 2011 19:45

Looks like Betsy (2) was either married previously or had a stepfather with a different surname as her marriage to John Morris was recorded under two surnames.


Lancashire Marriage indexes for the years: 1851

MORRIS * John GORTON Elizabeth
Manchester Cathedral (formerly Manchester Collegiate Church)

* See explanation at the end of the page.

AINSWORTH Elizabeth - MORRIS John -
GORTON Elizabeth - MORRIS John -
MORRIS John - AINSWORTH Elizabeth -
MORRIS John - GORTON Elizabeth
-----------------------------------

The marriage cert will hopfully tell you his father


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marriages Dec 1851 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GORTON Elizabeth - Manchester 20 550
MORRIS John - Manchester 20 550

Mike *

Mike * Report 21 Jun 2011 21:58

In 1841 census the adult ages were rounded down.
John may be up to 4 yrs older than stated.
Also in 1841 there was just a Yes/No answer required for " Born in County"
It may have just been easier to put yes to everybody on the list.

Far more likely that the 1851 is correct with Wrexham as birthplace

lancashireAnn

lancashireAnn Report 22 Jun 2011 00:04

it is probable that Hannah's age has been mistranscribed in 1841 as she is listed between an age 10 & age 2 and children are usually listed in order of age

again Joe this would have been better on your original thread so that all the information you have on one family is kept together - it saves duplication of research and confusion

eg - I only found this one by accident and it has the 1851 I was asking for on your other thread

Madmeg

Madmeg Report 22 Jun 2011 01:07

I don't join in threads where there are previous threads on the same family.

Joe

Joe Report 22 Jun 2011 08:27

Mike, really helpful post, thank you. All it took was some knowledge of the way that census worked and it made it clear.

Ann, thanks, I was hoping it was a mistake, because most of the rest seemed to fit.
Sorry for the double posting, I made the mistake in my mind of thinking it was a different angle and so needed a new post, but I can see how it is confusing and will be careful not to do it again.

Did you get my personal message in your inbox?

By the way, you guys are brilliant, thank you.