Genealogy Chat

Found Elizabeth in 1901 now too...she also has a sister Jane!

Lou, noticed his sister was a Jane - named after mum, you reckon which is why the name turns up again?

I think I need to dig out BM's mother's marriage and see who is listed as her father on the cert. That way I'll have an idea whether I'm barking up the wrong tree totally with William A Walkden. And if she doesn't list a father then its back to the drawing board! Lou

''By 1901 he's with the Taylor family as an Adopted Son (oooh the irony!) along with sisters Kate aged 13 and Elizabeth aged 2. Can't find a Kate Walkden aged 3 on the 1901 but found a Catherine Walkden so guess that could be her.'' Ahh...So you meant a 3yr old in 1891..not 1901, that's what I couldn't understand. All very interesting Lou

Thanks Peter I think 1909 fits. According to HER husband's death record he was born 1907. May not be an accurate birth year but puts them close enough in age for Alice to be feasible and she's the only one unless she was 20+ years younger than her husband. Lou

Sammy On the 1901 census he's down as an Adopted Son. His sisters are with him Kate and Elizabeth. Now there's no Kate Walkden birth anywhere in the index but there's a Catherine. That's the Catherine I've found in 1891. I assume Catherine has shortened her name to Kate by 1901 Lou

Lou, you've lost me with the Kate/Catherine bit.... I've read through twice, but I am only on my first cuppa!

Here is a VERY loss rule of thumb I uses to work out if a relle fitted in to a date for there birth. Start with a known age (Yours) add 21 (average age of marrages) for evey genaration you go back ( THe more genarations the bigger the error) and then work out the year ( The sum 30+21+21=72 gives you the year 1933) I found there is an error of +- 2 years on average per genaration. So doing this sum dose that put your Alice Mellor 1909 any closer to a fit.

I think discovering that my BM's mother was illigitimate and her father was an Adopted Child will make my chocci need increase to cope with the hypocrisy of it all!

Lou, don't let the addtion of a middle name throw you, I looked for a birth reg recently, found just christian & surname. The person is still living and has aquired 2 middle intials!! Definitely worth looking into, and it'll keep you away from the chocolate;) Sam

I think I've found her 'father' in 1901. William Austin Walkden born 1892 Warrington. By 1901 he's with the Taylor family as an Adopted Son (oooh the irony!) along with sisters Kate aged 13 and Elizabeth aged 2. Can't find a Kate Walkden aged 3 on the 1901 but found a Catherine Walkden so guess that could be her. If so, parents are Francis and Catherine. Catherine dies March Qtr 1901 which might explain the kiddies being with another family. However, also on the 1891 with them is a sister Jane who dies aged 6 in 1894! No sign of father Francis in 1901

I wonder what his mums name was?

I think what made me question it was the middle name, the fact she uses the middle name JANE on BM's birth cert but that's not on the index. There's no guarantee that William Walkden is even her father but I wonder if she was re-registered when Elizabeth and William got married and the Jane was added then, maybe by him. Would that happen?

The fact that she has the mothers surname in her name would seem likely she was born before the marriage, wouldnt it? And then the fathers name added on the end?

I agree with Pat here, I could not Find my grandfathers birth certificate anywhere, or any record of his birth. Then I discovered he was born the month before his parents were married and was therefore Recordrd as Edward Vallins instead of Dennard. In addition My Gt Gt grandfather was Daniel Dennard on my gt grandfathers birth cert but on his marriage cert his father is listed as Edward, whats going on with that lol they sure didnt make it easy for us did they. Tony

I would look into it. There's nothing to say that she wasn't born before her parents married. I think it was much more common than most think. Pat

As a bit of respite from my lot, I’m having a look into my birth family tree but for obvious reasons, have not a lot to go on and no-one to ask, so its going to be a slow process. Advice with this one….I have my BM’s birth cert and her mother is given as Alice Jane Mellor Walkden. I’ve checked births for 1907 to 1920 and there’s no Alice Jane Walkden in the right area. There’s an Alice Mellor (but no middle name of Jane) in 1909 right area. Have then found a marriage in the right area in 1912 for William A Walkden and Elizabeth Mellor. Yes? No? Worth pursuing? Barking up the wrong tree?

.