Genealogy Chat

I am researching John Saul (about 1787) and have found him in the 1841 and 1851 , both no trouble.
However in 1861 he is living with his family but there is no "head" shown for this family. The first entry is Catherine Roberts who is shown as "wife" but is a widow.
John is shown as brother in law but to whom?
The 1861 reference is piece 2695 folio 34 page 4
Thanks
James

I am looking at it but, sorry, can't sort it out.

Thanks Joy,
The generations of John's family are clear enough, but the relationship to "head" of household is bugging me.
I am off to bed now will look in again tomorrow afternoon
James

Theoretically Catherine Roberts is the first one listed so she should be the head, even though she's listed as wife. John Saul, then, should be her bro-in-law but he's 74 and she's 32. However John Saul has a 48 yr old wife, Mary. She could be Catherine Roberts' sister making him her bro-in-law.

It may be that "brother-in-law" could mean step-brother in this case.
I think that if John's wife Mary was Catherine's sister then it would say "sister" in the relationship column and not "brother'-in-law's wife".

Kath. x

YES!
ROBERTS, Joseph Marriage
Wife: Catharine FURLONG
Marriage Date: 14 Jun 1835 Recorded in: Liverpool, Lancashire, England
Collection: St Anne
Source: FHL Film 1068946 Dates: 1827 - 1842

SAUL, John Marriage
Wife: Mary Ann FURLONG
Marriage Date: 8 Jan 1833 Recorded in: Liverpool, Lancashire, England
Collection: Church Street, St Peter
Source: FHL Film 1068926 Dates: 1829 - 1836

Well done Margaret - you've proved my theory wrong, lol. At least that solves this problem.

Kath. x

No, it doesn't, Kath, just realized summat's wrong!
According to the 61 census, Catherine was born 1829. She couldn't have married in 1835.
Back to the drawing board.
Margaret
Update, Or could it be that Catherine's age is 52 not 32 on the 61 census?

Oh yes, I hadn't noticed that. As you say......back to the drawing board (unless Catherine's age is wrong on the 1861 census).

I'm off to bed now....good luck with this.

Kath. x

You're right, Libby! I had the wrong one in 1851. I'm going to go and delete it before I confuse the issue.
I got both marriages from the BVRI discs.
Margaret

I think it's a case of lying about her age. Notice in 1861 there's a 36 yr. old boarder in the house but he's not listed at the bottom where boarders usually are. He's second on the list before family members. Methinks he was more than just a boarder and she didn't want him to know that she was older than him.
Oh, I have an evil mind!
Margaret

1841 census
Jones Ct., Liverpool
John Saul, 51, seaman
Mary, 30
James, 7
Louisa, 4
Catherine, 4 wks.
All born in county.

NO, this isn't right, this matches the 1851 family that I deleted because it was the wrong one.
Curious though because it has the same big age difference between husband and wife.
Maybe I'd better go to bed too, but it's only 8:30 here in Canada.
Margaret

So, Libby, that 1851 census that I deleted matched everything!
Ages--1841--1851--1861
John--51--63--74
Mary--30-40--48
James--7--17--26

But the one you posted in 1851 was with the Roberts.
I don't understand.

Libby, I think it's just a case of John Saul being enumerated in 1851 in both places, his home and his place of business.

I'll post the other 1851 again:
Circus St., Martha Court., Liverpool
John Saul, head, 63, pensioner R.N.
Mary, wife, 40
Mary, dau, 13, scholar
James, son, 17, seaman
All born Liverpool.

(If you're looking for this one, John isn't on the transcribed version. Look up the wife or one of the children.)

Well I thought I had it solved back on Page 1 when I found the marriage of Mary Ann Furlong to John Saul and Catherine Furlong to Joseph Roberts but Catherine's age was too far off, unless of course she really, really lied about her age.
No I haven't searched after 1861.

I must thank you all for this information. I am amazed at how long you youngsters stay up or this due to time difference across the world.
A bit more information that I had not included is the fact that John married a Mary Ann Furlong in January 1833 at Liverpool.

Once again lots of thanks and a good New year to all of you
James.

For information
1841 reference is piece 562 book 5 folio 17 page 31

1851 reference is piece 2185 folio 229 page 41/42

James

Bless you James, for calling us youngsters. I'm just filling out the forms to apply for my old-age pension.
Margaret

Margaret You are a youngster I' been drawing my pension for 3 years now.
I started tracing my family and my late wifes family as something to do in the evenings,now that I have completed my City & guilds course on photography.
Most mornings I am out with my camera (my primary hobby).
James
added. Just been looking at the 1841 census again and there is a Robert Shields immediately under Catherine his dob fits the lodger in the 1851. Is this a coincidence?