*Arc tbc* --1871 Census for Great Hill, Dudley

[Tonibunny]

Hi chaps,

As I'm entering all my data into the BCC, I'm adding sources too and I've been going back and checking the original census images to make sure that I put everything in exactly as it is written. I've been collecting census data since the late 1980s (when I used to go and sit in the basement at the PRO in Chancery Lane and work through the microfilm - I was an odd teenager!) and haven't actually found some of my families online before.

I'm currently having real trouble finding the census image for Great Hill, Dudley, in 1871. According to the 1871 Census street index at http://yourarchives.nationalarchives.go ... _Index_G-I, the images for Great Hill are at RG3012 Folio 132-134. However, Ancestry.com won't display these for me - their RG3012 only goes up to Folio 131 and then it stops. The next images are for RG3013.

This is the family that I'm trying to find:

17 Great Hill, Dudley
Mary Ann WOODALL, head, widowed, 52
Paul WOODALL, son, unmarried, 29, miner
Sarah WOODALL, dau, 26
Samuel WOODALL, son, 19, miner
Hannah RICHARDS, lodger, 35, charwoman
Sarah Jane RICHARDS, lodger, 11

18 Great Hill, Dudley
Joseph HICKMAN, head, miner
Elizabeth HICKMAN, wife, 22, nailer
Paul HICKMAN, son, 2
(all born in Dudley)


None of the above can be found via a name search of the 1871 census either.

Can anyone tell me if this is just a blip, or is Ancestry really missing the final pages of 3012? I don't want to add what I have to the BCC without checking it, especially as I'm missing Joseph's age. I'm very careful about sources but this family would have been one of the first ones I ever looked up in the census, probably in about 1987, so the data would have been stored in various notebooks and been transcribed repeatedly until I started putting everything on computer in 1997.

Cheers

Toni xx

[MarkCDodd]

You are not imagining things.

The entry you want is RG10 Piece 3012 Folio 133 Page 32

Registration District Dudley. Sub District Dudley EnumerationDistrict 20 Civil Parish Dudley Municipal Borough Dudley County Staffordshire.

On Ancestry they do not have Dudley as a Civil Parish under Staffordshire.

They have it under Worcestershire but the if you do to enumeration District 20 it does no have a page 32.....

FInd My Ancestor gets it wrong as well.

They have placed Mary Ann Woodall by herself.

The Genealogist got it right for both households. That is why I subscribe to them. They are far more accurate than Ancestry or Find My Past.

[Tonibunny]

Thanks loads! Sorry to be cheeky but when you get a spare moment could you possibly transcribe this household for me please?

Cheers,
Toni xx

[Maths girl]

Tonibunny

This is Find my Past's transcription - I can't get to the original as I am on the wrong computer but it might help you until Mark has time to check for you

WOODALL, Mary Ann Head F 52 1819 Worcestershire
WOODALL, Paul Son M 29 1842 Worcestershire
WOODALL, Sarah Daughter F 26 1845 Worcestershire
WOODALL, Samuel Son M 19 1852 Worcestershire
RICHARDS, Hannah Lodger F 35 1836 Worcestershire
RICHARDS, Sarah Jane Lodger F 11 1860 Worcestershire
HICKMAN, Joseph Head M 22 1849 Worcestershire
HICKMAN, Elizabeth Wife F 22 1849 Worcestershire
HICKMAN, Paul Son M 2 1869 Worcestershire

[MarkCDodd]

17 Great Hill, Dudley

Woodall Mary Ann 52 Head Dudley, Worcestershire
Woodall Paul 29 Son Minor Dudley, Worcestershire
Woodall Sarah 26 Daughter Dudley, Worcestershire
Woodall Samuel 19 Son Minor Dudley, Worcestershire
Pillham Hannah 35 Lodger Charwoman Dudley, Worcestershire
Richard Mary Jane 11 Lodger Dudley, Worcestershire

and

18 Great Hill, Dudley

Hickman Joseph 22 Head Minor Dudley, Worcestershire
Hickman Elizabeth 22 Wife Mailer Dudley, Worcestershire
Hickman Paul 2 Son Dudley, Worcestershire

[Tonibunny]

Thanks Mark (and Maths Girl)! Do the names appear surname first in the actual census images, or is this info from an index or transcription? Also, does it give the marital status of each person?

I'm so frustrated that I can't see the census images!

[MarkCDodd]

That is the way they transcribe.

Marital status....

Mary Ann is a Widow and the rest unmarried at No 17.

Joseph and ELizabeth married (to each other of course) and little Paul is unmarried (thank goodness) at No 18.

I hope you put in a complaint t Ancestry,

There is no excuse to have holes in their census coverage.

I just found a marriage not in their index, even though it is in FreeBMD and they are supposed to be using the FreeBMD index.

[Northern Lass]

Ok does that help then Tonibunny?

are you done with this thread?
if so will archive

[Tonibunny]

Yes that''s great thanks, I'd ideally like to transcribe it myself from the originals rather than an index but it can wait. Thanks for your help everyone :