Genealogy Chat

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

wh

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Charlotte

Charlotte Report 10 Feb 2007 02:52

Yeah 52 LOL Well I think its definately him, he's the only David born in Bilston that comes up in 1891 everything fits other than the Mum/son thing. Thanks again anyway for all your help. I'm going to bed now before my baby decides its time to get up. Kind Regards Charlotte

Georgina

Georgina Report 10 Feb 2007 02:38

I think it's just an enumerator making a mistake, I just added onto my message above saying Margaret would have been about 52 when she gave birth to him. Georgina.

Charlotte

Charlotte Report 10 Feb 2007 02:37

Marjorie? Oh I had Margaret. I dont know. Its down as Margaret on the 1881 census as well. Oh and William isnt with her then either I think he may be up north perhaps in Scotland, so he comes to live with her as well in 1891. She has a husband then and 3 other children.

Charlotte

Charlotte Report 10 Feb 2007 02:35

Thanks Georgina. Do you think its worth researching further or do you think its as simple as that he has just been put down as son and its probably lodger. I do have a copy of the 1891 original census and it definately says son. Well a copy on the computer from findmypast.com Anyway thanks for your time and help much appreciated I think you are probably right though. Kind Regards Charlotte

Georgina

Georgina Report 10 Feb 2007 02:35

Charlotte he is doing the same job as William Cooper in 1891 so maybe he just lodged with his family, I cant see a connection. Just an after thought if David was her son she would have been about 52 when she had him LOL. Georgina.

Georgina

Georgina Report 10 Feb 2007 02:34

This is the 1891 census...I think if this is your David the enumerator has just put down son when he is probably a lodger, He is not with Margaret/Marjorie in 1881. Name: David Hadley Age: 20 Estimated birth year: abt 1871 Relation: Son Mother's name: Marjorie Gender: Male Where born: Belstone, Staffordshire, England Civil parish: Birmingham Ecclesiastical parish: St David Town: Birmingham County/Island: Warwickshire Country: England Street address: Occupation: Condition as to marriage: Education: Employment status: View image Registration district: Birmingham Sub-registration district: St Martin ED, institution, or vessel: 12 Neighbors: View others on page Household Members: Name Age Marjorie Cooper 72 William Cooper 36 David Hadley 20 Georgina.

Charlotte

Charlotte Report 10 Feb 2007 02:17

Thats funny it looks like Mary Davids Wifes mother is living with them Jane Green I didnt get that on my 1901 results I know thats her mother as I have my grandfathers birth certificate and her name is down as Mary Hadley formally Green.

Georgina

Georgina Report 10 Feb 2007 02:16

Charlotte I was looking for a Margaret Cooper & this lady is Marjorie that's why I couldn't find her LOL. Georgina.

Georgina

Georgina Report 10 Feb 2007 02:15

This looks like him married in 1901... Name: David Hadley Age: 29 Estimated birth year: abt 1872 Relation: Head Spouse's name: Mary J Gender: Male Where born: Bilston, Staffordshire, England Civil parish: Birmingham Ecclesiastical parish: Emmanuel County/Island: Warwickshire Country: England Street address: Occupation: Condition as to marriage: Education: Employment status: View image Registration district: Birmingham Sub-registration district: St Martin ED, institution, or vessel: 25 Neighbors: View others on page Household schedule number: 298 Household Members: Name Age Jane Green 62 Dara E Hadley 3 David Hadley 29 Harold Hadley 1 Mary J Hadley 29 Georgina.

Charlotte

Charlotte Report 10 Feb 2007 02:12

Folio 40 page 31 registration district is Birmingham David BORN Bilston Staffs

Georgina

Georgina Report 10 Feb 2007 02:02

Sorry Charlotte I cant see the family you are talking about in 1891 can you post the page & folio numbers. Georgina.

Charlotte

Charlotte Report 10 Feb 2007 02:00

Yes thats him. Wow you all work fast. But he isnt with them in 1891.

Mhairi Queen of Scots

Mhairi Queen of Scots Report 10 Feb 2007 02:00

1881 for ref Charles HADLEY Head M Male 51 Willenhall, Stafford, England Engine Driver Colliery Mary HADLEY Wife M Female 50 Church Aston, Shropshire, England Clara HADLEY Daur U Female 17 Willenhall, Stafford, England Domestic Servant Phoebe HADLEY Daur Female 13 Willenhall, Stafford, England Scholar Harry HADLEY Son Male 11 Bilston, Stafford, England Scholar David HADLEY Son Male 8 Bilston, Stafford, England Scholar Clara DAVIES Niece Female 9 Willenhall, Stafford, England Scholar -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source Information: Dwelling Bridge St Court No 11 No 7 Census Place Bilston, Stafford, England Family History Library Film 1341674 Public Records Office Reference RG11 Piece / Folio 2815 / 47 Page Number 2 Do you have his marriage/birth cert? If you do, what names are given for the father/mother? Mhairi

Charlotte

Charlotte Report 10 Feb 2007 01:57

Hi Georgina. Yes they are he will come up as BORN Bilston Staffs Thanks Charlotte

Georgina

Georgina Report 10 Feb 2007 01:51

Charlotte I cant see a David Hadley living with a cooper family in 1891? Are they in Staffordshire? Georgina.

Charlotte

Charlotte Report 10 Feb 2007 01:37

Sorry new to the tip board should have read Margaret Cooper Head William Cooper Son David Hadley Son How can he be sons to both, I'm sure 99.9% I have the right David Hadley on both census

Charlotte

Charlotte Report 10 Feb 2007 01:35

1881 census Charles Hadley Head Mary Hadley Wife 2 sisters Daughters 1 brother son DAVID HADLEY son 1891 Margaret Cooper William Cooper David Hadley How? 99.9% have the right David Hadley in the 1891 census.

Sam

Sam Report 10 Feb 2007 01:27

I'm so sorry Charlotte, but please post this so it's easier to read...

Charlotte

Charlotte Report 10 Feb 2007 01:22

Please help I'm tracing my family tree and I have a question that seems impossible to answer. My Great Granadad ( David Hadley) was born in circa 1872 in the 1881 census he is living with mum (Mary Hadley) Dad (Charles Hadley) two sisters, one brother and a cousin. His relation to the head (Charles) says SON. In the 1891 census he is living with a Margaret Cooper who is Head and a William Cooper (Son) to head and he (David Hadley) is also down as SON. Now I'm 99.9% sure that I have the correct David. Now before I went back to the 1881 census I thought he perhaps had a different dad but obviously the 1881 census contradicts that as there is a Charles Hadley that comes up as dad but more to the point he can't have two mums. Does anyone have any suggestions as to how he could have two mums, unless he was adopted, I just dont know. Please help? p.s there Also what suggestions do you have for tracing mothers and fathers before the 1837 birth records. Many thanks hope there is someone who can help.