by Lulu » Mon Sep 24, 2012 10:15 am
This is driving me slightly round the bend now.
1871 Samuel and Jane have a 9 year old Lidia living with them. Funny spelling, doesn't look as if it is Lois but the writing is a bit iffy.
So I look for a Lydia Smart, yes there is one registered as a birth in the same first quarter of 1862 as Lois, in the Dudley area.
Looked for a Baptism and here we have from the LDS site
Lydia Smart
baptism/christening date: 02 Feb 1862
baptism/christening place: SAINT THOMAS,DUDLEY,WORCESTER,ENGLAND
birth date: 07 Jan 1862
father's name: Joseph Smart
mother's name: Lydia
indexing project (batch) number: C04014-7
system origin: England-ODM
source film number: 378778, 378779, 378780
We have a baptism for Lois Smart, also from the LDS site
name: Lois Smart
baptism/christening date: 23 Feb 1862
baptism/christening place: SAINT THOMAS,DUDLEY,WORCESTER,ENGLAND
birth date: 04 Feb 1862
birthplace:
father's name: Samuel Smart
father's birthplace:
father's age:
mother's name: Jane
indexing project (batch) number: C04014-7
system origin: England-ODM
source film number: 378778, 378779, 378780
So it is now looking possible that the death of a Lois Smart in the mid 80's, yet not registered until 1870, has been assigned to Samuel's daughter by family researchers, under the assumption that Lois had died, as she doesn't appear on the 1871 Census. However, they do have a daughter, born in 1862 with a christian name starting with L. There isn't another Lydia Smart coming up as a birth in 1862, or 63. So, Is Samuel's daughter really Lois? The one he had baptised? Is Lidia a mistake on the Census, or maybe a pet name, to avoid confusion in the family, as she has an Aunt Lois?
I hope the answer will be on Lois's marriage record. If her father is down as Samuel, we might have cracked the mystery.
Just because you're Paranoid, it doesn't mean to say they're not out to get you.