Census Inconsistencies 1901-1911

Yeah Yeah Yeah

Hi all:

How common is it for errors or inconsistencies to occur between the 1901 and 1911 Census's?

For example:

I am looking for a couple who were aged 72 and 74 in 1911

But, it appears that the same couple were listed as 60 and 57 in 1901, when they should have been 62 and 64.

However all employment details, place of birth are the same.

I cannot find this named couple of those ages (62 and 64) anywhere else in Ireland, either together OR in separate residences.

Is this common? ie: Inconsistencies

The other options are:
1) Not living in Ireland
2) Giving incorrect information
3) Ennumerator filled in form wrong

Thanks for any info

shanew

The enumerator didn't fill in the census unless the head of the household was illiterate. If this was the case the enumerator 'signs' the form on the householder's behalf, and they place their mark beside the signature.

Ages are often inconsistent - mainly because people didn't keep track of birthdays etc the way we do now. You will often see households where ages of adults are inconsistent between the two returns but children, particularly young, have accurate ages. Another factor that can come into play is the introduction of the old age pension in 1908 - some people added a few years to their age to try to qualify.

It's not just census returns that can have inaccurate ages - same applies to other records, particularly death certs.



Shane

Waitsian

Yeah Yeah Yeah wrote: »

Hi all:

How common is it for errors or inconsistencies to occur between the 1901 and 1911 Census's?

For example:

I am looking for a couple who were aged 72 and 74 in 1911

But, it appears that the same couple were listed as 60 and 57 in 1901, when they should have been 62 and 64.

However all employment details, place of birth are the same.

Is this common? ie: Inconsistencies

The other options are:
1) Not living in Ireland
2) Giving incorrect information
3) Ennumerator filled in form wrong

Thanks for any info

If you're looking at ages, then answer 2 is highly likely. Ages given on official records are, in my experience anyway, notoriously incorrect.

To give you an example: my great-grandfather in Bessbrook in the 1901 census was noted as being 50; in 1911 he's 66. He was born in 1840. Go figure.

Why so? In most cases simply a lack of education. They didn't know how old they were, quite frankly. There wasn't the same documentation back then as there is now.

Yeah Yeah Yeah

Thanks for the above...:)

Waitsian

You're welcome.

Hermy

On the subject of inconsistencies, here's one I've found.
This link shows the residents of a house 160 Mount Pleasant Avenue Upper, yet the Thom's directory list William Russell as living in 42 Mount Pleasant Avenue Upper until 1909 when he moved to 57 Ashfield Road. From what I can gather there never was a 160 Mount Pleasant Avenue Upper.
Can anyone clarify this one for me?

Here's a photo of where I think 42 was:

shanew

The numbers on the census returns are not always house-numbers - they can be site numbers used by the enumerator.

On the 1911 return you can check the actual house number on the reverse of the household form. Unfortunately this is not available for the 1901 returns.


Shane

Hermy

I did not know that Shane - thanks for pointing it out.

Yeah Yeah Yeah

Thanks guys...very interesting stuff...traced the GF/GGF and GGGF, all railway men.

GF got involved in Civil war Anti-Treaty side and was shuffled off to England in '23 and didnt return.

Along with this and google maps, was able to trace where they lived and worked and can see present day photos of the signal boxes they manned and the disused rail lines in the areas that they worked.

GGGF must have been about 10 years old during the famine...We don't know we're born..

binxeo

Like what everyone else has said there can be some inconsistencies in the information found. I find that names can be misspelled a lot. Or if some one was named as Esther on the 1901 in 1911 that person might be Essie in 1911 and I have also found these inconsistencies on other records too. Some time the name Catherine will be put on one form and then Katie on another. So it is not just dates that are out names can be too. Glad you found people you were looking for.

Jellybaby1

binxeo wrote: »

Like what everyone else has said there can be some inconsistencies in the information found. I find that names can be misspelled a lot. Or if some one was named as Esther on the 1901 in 1911 that person might be Essie in 1911 and I have also found these inconsistencies on other records too. Some time the name Catherine will be put on one form and then Katie on another. So it is not just dates that are out names can be too. Glad you found people you were looking for.

I get that all the time, but Essie and Katie aren't being misspelled really, it's just people using their pet names instead of their formal names, like Eddie for Edward and Joe for Joseph, those can be worked out without any problem. It's worse of course when the name, or the address, is actually misspelled or wrongly transcribed. It helps to understand how Essie can mean Esther or even how Peggy can be Margaret! Adds to the fun!

Yeah Yeah Yeah

Are variances in signatures common enough?

I have a case where it looks like the son signed his fathers census form, but both were able to write well enough.

(In 1901, 2 different forms for 2 different homsteads BTW, appears to be signed by same hand).

And in 1911 when the father was given as 74, a completely different hand signed that also.

Another glitch is that the handwriting on one form is very scrawly in parts, he worked on the railway, and honest to God it looks like he was on a bumpy train when he filled it in

The transcriber has put a middle name of his wife as "Aghton" which for the life of me I have never heard of. And unfortunatley she had passed away in 1911 so cant check back with that.

What resource/website would you recommend to buy into census search for other years?

Thanks


(Just thinking, :rolleyes: must check other houses on same batch of returns...

shanew

Yeah Yeah Yeah wrote: »

....
What resource/website would you recommend to buy into census search for other years?

1901 and 1911 are the only complete Irish census returns. Only a few fragments of earlier returns survive.



Shane

binxeo

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

I get that all the time, but Essie and Katie aren't being misspelled really, it's just people using their pet names instead of their formal names, like Eddie for Edward and Joe for Joseph, those can be worked out without any problem. It's worse of course when the name, or the address, is actually misspelled or wrongly transcribed. It helps to understand how Essie can mean Esther or even how Peggy can be Margaret! Adds to the fun!

Sorry I meant pet name lol. Didn;t know peggy was a pet name for Margaret lol
It sure does add to the fun alright

Jellybaby1

binxeo wrote: »

Sorry I meant pet name lol. Didn;t know peggy was a pet name for Margaret lol
It sure does add to the fun alright

There are loads of pet names which could trip you up, Margaret might also be Gretta, Kathleen might be spelled Cathleen, Patricia might be Pat, Patty or Trish or as in my family, Tish but Tish can also be Letitia and I also know a Letitia who is known as Lettie. Its a laugh a minute.:D

binxeo

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

There are loads of pet names which could trip you up, Margaret might also be Gretta, Kathleen might be spelled Cathleen, Patricia might be Pat, Patty or Trish or as in my family, Tish but Tish can also be Letitia and I also know a Letitia who is known as Lettie. Its a laugh a minute.:D

Sorry for the thread hijack, but maybe we should start a thread of pet names we have come across that people could reference. You know if you don't know a pet name ie Gretta for Margaret, that we could have that in the thread. Might be helpful to us starting out and getting lost in names lol

Yeah Yeah Yeah

Sounds like a jolly good idea Binxeo But i dont know Boards well enough to know how best to manage it, so I wont start new thread

Seems a bit obvious, but what would the full names for Katie be:

Kathleen (Most likely??)
Kathryn
Catherine
Katherine
Karen
Kathy
Cathy
Kay

Given the day in Ireland I would discount names like

Katia
Katrina
Katarina
Katerina
Katelyn

Some say any name that starts with a "K", but I would start with Kathleen...??

Also: Bit of detective work:

Would you, if you were completing the Census yourself, would you abbreviate your own name and your wifes name:
eg: Instead of putting in Robert, put in "Robt"
Instead of putting in Margaret, put in "Mrgt".

I think a Census form I'm looking at at moment has beeen completed by somebody else, signature is different too in 1901, from the signature in 1911, and greatly so.

Cedrus

1901/1911 Census ages.
I've come across age inconsistencies with older people which could be ascribed to attempts to qualify for the old age pension but I have also found discrepancies in working teenagers ages which I'm assuming to be avoidance of child labour laws.

Other reasons for inaccuracies could be a more casual attitude to paperwork "sure we all know who we are" in a more cloistered world than today, an attitude of non-compliance with authority, and of course they couldn't possibly foresee the interest that we would have in their lives a century later.

pinkypinky

I've said it before, but I'll say it again. Age was just not as important 100 years ago. There was very little you had to present your actual birthcert for so most people were approximating their age. If I analyse all my family's census records for 1901 vs 1911, hardly any are just 10 years older. Many many people are 9 years older, but in most cases this won't be accounted for by the date difference (census held about 2 days apart from 1901 to 1911). I can only think of one person off the top of my head who puts her ages exactly 10 years apart.

In general, the younger the person, the more accurate. My gg grandfather has his daughter's and son-in-laws ages, as well as the number of years married for himself and wife incorrect, but correctly notes his granddaughter as "3 months old". I have to presume his own age and that of his wife are at best a guess.

Neevy1

Hi All

Can any one shed some light please.

Holles street 1911 census house numbers start at 1

Holles Street 1901 census house numbers start at 18

Census site says items missing will be placed on line shortly since the 1901 went up and nothing has happened yet.

My GtGt Gran/Grandad owned 13 and 14 in 1911 I cant find them or the house in 1901.

Thanks in anticipation.

RGM

I found someone who magically aged 36 years between 1901 and 1911. From 30 to 66! Talk about a hard life...

shanew

a couple of points to bear in mind - 1) the numbers used on the census returns are enumerator reference numbers, and not necessarily street numbers. The numbers usually coincide for the 1911 returns. but dont always for the earlier return. For the 1911 returns you check the actual house number by viewing the reverse of the form A.

2) On both census, Holles street was split between two Electoral Districts - one side of the street (18 to 36) was in South City DED, and the others (1 to 17) in Trinity DED.


Shane

shanew

links to the various listings

1901 Holles St, Trinity DED, No. 1-17
1901 Holles St, South City DED, No. 18 to 26

1911 Holles St, Trinity DED, No. 1-17
1911 Holles St, South City DED, No. 18-36

I dont see a property owner listed on the building returns - is your GtGt Grandfather listed as one of the occupants of 13/14 ?

Neevy1

Thanks so much for the links

I did not know if they owned or lived there in the properties in 1901 now having searched they did not.
I know they were tenement buildings in the 1930s and were taken over by D corpo with a compulsory purchase order around 1935/40
as my father was born and lived there.

My Gt Gt Grand mother Jane Vance (widow) is listed at no.14.1 on the 1911 and her spinster sister Sarah Tutty living with her.
So in 1911 my Gt Gt G/father was dec'd, although I don't have a definite date for his demise.
My grand mother remembered him when she was very young as she was born in 1904.

His name was Joseph Vance. (Father Fleming Vance listed as a Weaver)
Joseph worked as a butler in Kilruddery as per their marriage reg cert. (I am assuming Kilruddery house)
Jane Tutty Vance was a nurse (domestic servant) and originally came from Wicklow.
(Possibly in the same employ or circles)due to proximity of Kilruddery and Wicklow)
(Her father was William Tutty listed as a Farmer)

The houses were left to my Grand Mother and her older brother when Jane died in the 1920's. As she was pred'd by both of her daughters (below)
Sarah Vance born Westmeath. MarriedJohn McCormick my gt G/Mother (living in the same houses in 1911)and at Pitt st in 1901.
Laura Vance born dublin Married McMullan
family story he was one of the two brothers who founded the maxol oil company in the 1920s in Dublin
but I cant find any record of their wedding or of her death.

Even with the very uncommon name of Fleming Vance
I can not get further with my search as I don't know where to go next.

Also on my paternal grand mothers side I am stumped as my G Grand fathers name was John McCormick
and all I come up with is Count John McCormick.
I cant find a record of Sarah Vance and John McCormick's Marriage either. He is listed as a servant/butler.

So I am completely at a stand still.:mad:

Any tips or hints would get me started again and would be greatly appreciated.:D

Thanks again
Niamh

shanew

here's Jane on 1901 near Graiguenamanagh, Co. Kilkenny - already a widow at that stage :

Vickers/Doughton/O'Neill/Murphy/Vance household

and Jane in part of number 14 in 1911 for reference

there are a few other Wicklow born people on the 1901 returns that might be related : Vance, born Co. Wicklow


S.

shanew

not sure about some of your timeline, but to try to answer some on our questions...

to find earlier details of Joseph Vance and his father you would have to have some idea of when and where he was born. Assuming his age is similar to Jane, then he would have been born before the start of civil records.

re Sarah jnr and Laura - can you post the details you have for them - i.e. census returns, years of birth and/or possible marriage etc..

update : I see a S Jane Mc Cormack born Monaghan at one of the apartments in 13 Holles St, next door the building where Jane is living - is this your Sarah ?


Shane

Hermy

RGM wrote: »

I found someone who magically aged 36 years between 1901 and 1911. From 30 to 66! Talk about a hard life...

One of my relatives is ten years younger in 1911???

Neevy1

Thanks Shaneu

I am sure its her, due to the religion occupation etc.
but it a about 12/15 years out in age comparing 1911 and 1901

My gran said that Jane and Joseph did not live together in Holles st
she used to be sent to Jane from him with written messages?
so I am not sure she was actually widowed in 1901

The religion bit baffles me though
Do you know what under denominational protestant Marion Hale refers to?

Thanks again your a star.
N

Victor

Hermy wrote: »

On the subject of inconsistencies, here's one I've found.
This link shows the residents of a house 160 Mount Pleasant Avenue Upper, yet the Thom's directory list William Russell as living in 42 Mount Pleasant Avenue Upper until 1909 when he moved to 57 Ashfield Road. From what I can gather there never was a 160 Mount Pleasant Avenue Upper.
Can anyone clarify this one for me?

Here's a photo of where I think 42 was:
http://omg.wthax.org/42_Mountpleasant_Avenue_Upper_Medium.jpg

A few points.

Some streets have been re-numbered over the years. It is possible that Mountpleasant Avenue Upper used the same numbering sequence as the rest of Mountpleasant Avenue. The census lists 1-109 (Mountpleasant Avenue Upper) and 148-164 (Mountpleasant Avenue)

It was common for tenants, especially poorer ones (this may not have been their case), to move quite often.

As mentioned, enumeration number and house number don't necessarily correspond.

shanew

Neevy1 wrote: »

Thanks Shaneu
......
The religion bit baffles me though
Do you know what under denominational protestant Marion Hale refers to?
....

Dont worry about ages being out... quite common. The other details fit.

looks like 'Undenomenational Protestant Marion Hale' - to me, which might relate to some small congregation nearby that she was a member of. Not something I rememember coming across, but I'll have a quick look to see if anything shows up..

The earlier return shows her as Plymouth Brethern, which I've heard of, but dont know much about.


S.

Neevy1

Hi Shanew
Got it right this time.

Yes this Sarah is my maternal G Grand Mother but she was actually christened in Westmeath.
Married to John McCormick (spelled incorrectly with an ack on all documents)

Sarah told everyone she was born in Monaghan as did my grand mother but there is no corroboration just church records of christenings none in Monaghan.
John McCormick is also listed as being from Monaghan.
Both of them died 1914/1916 quite early in life as my gran was placed into miss Carrs home when she was 10/12 years old.

Joseph Vance her hubby may have been from Raw in Fermanagh.
As I did find a Fleming Vance in Griffiths
Its such an unusual name I can only assume its him.

Thanks again
N

Victor

Neevy1 wrote: »

Do you know what under denominational protestant Marion Hale refers to?

Perhaps "Marian Hall"?

shanew

Neevy1 wrote: »

Hi Shanew
....
Yes this Sarah is my maternal G Grand Mother but she was actually christened in Westmeath.
Married to John McCormick (spelled incorrectly with an ack on all documents)

Sarah told everyone she was born in Monaghan as did my grand mother but there is no corroboration just church records of christenings none in Monaghan.
...

possible extracted civil birth for Sarah from FamilySearch :

name: Sarah Vance
birth date: 18 Jan 1875
birthplace: Multyfarnham, Co. Westmeath (sub-district)
parents : Joseph Vance & Jane Tutty
ref : p329 ln455

The matching BMD index details are :

name: Sarah Vance
registration district: Mullingar
event type: Birth
Year: 1875
Volume: 3 / Page : 329


Shane

shanew

three other children for the couple (two unnamed at time of registration) :

Lena Vance / 24 Aug 1876 / "Dublin" / v 12-1 p 705
[Female] Vance / 20 Sep 1878 / "Dublin" / v 2-2 p 575
[Female] Vance / 18 Nov 1880 / Dublin - 43 Kildare St. / v 2-2 p 499

The child born in 1878 seems to have died the same year. In 1880 the Kildare street address is listed as "Kearns' hotel"...



Shane

Neevy1

Ok here goes regards Sarah and Laura Vance.

Sarah
born 18 Jan 1875
christned Multyfarnham Westmeath
record taken from LDS ireland births and baptisms 1620-1881

Laura
born 18 Nov 1880 of 43 Kildare St
Baptised 25th Nov1880 of 43 kildare st.

There were arother couple of children all who died as infants.
Lena, born 24.08.1876 at 5 Fredrick lane ...died July/sept 1876
Emily, born 20.09.1878 Christened on 28.09 1878 no address given
Emily, born 23.12.1882 39 York st.

Joseph Vance of Kilruddery Bray
and
Jane Tutty of 32 St Stephens Green North.
were married on 13.04.1874
both of full age

shanew

The captions on those FamilySearch records are misleading - the details are from extracted civil births (e.g. Sarah), not baptism/christenings.



Shane

Neevy1

Things must have been pretty grim when you realise what actually happened to every family back then.

Neevy1

Thanks Shane
I do realise that things are not wholly as the seem on some sites but when your filling your unemployed time and cant spend what you've not got on paying for access and records it is all you are left with.

I really am bowled over with all of your help you have
to be one of the good guys
and you to Victor I never thought of Hall in stead of Hale.
but would Marion Hall make sense for C of I ?

Niamh

shanew

I was going to suggest that maybe whatever congregation she was part didn't have their own place of worship and hired out the local RC parish hall... but I would have thought she would write down the name of the congregation or maybe their preacher/minister, rather than where they met.

It looks like Hale to me on the return, but Hall is possibly what she meant...



S.

Jellybaby1

I haven't checked your census records regarding 'Marian Hall' but I believe it should be 'Merrion Hall'. See these links:

http://www.preciousseed.org/article_detail.cfm?articleID=1457
http://armstrongfamily.webs.com/ourfamilytestimonies.htm

shanew

I know of the building, but I didn't know it was a non-denominational place of worship.... looking at the return again, maybe the last letter which I thought was an 'e' is a slightly short 'l' ?

It's listed as just 'Merrion Hall' in Thom's 1914 - no clues as to it's function, 1894 lists it as Merrion Hall Church. I think the building is a hotel now.




Shane

Neevy1

You guys are the biz ...

I believe you are correct. Merrion Hall is the one...I have just read the links info and The (Plymouth) Brethren used to worship there.
Have you ever thought about sleuthing for a private investigation company you would be brill...

Thanks so much
N

Hermy

Victor wrote: »

Some streets have been re-numbered over the years. It is possible that Mountpleasant Avenue Upper used the same numbering sequence as the rest of Mountpleasant Avenue. The census lists 1-109 (Mountpleasant Avenue Upper) and 148-164 (Mountpleasant Avenue)

Thanks for the reply Victor but is it not the other way round - 1-109 Mountpleasant Avenue & 148-164 Mountpleasant Avenue Upper?

Jellybaby1

shanew wrote: »

I know of the building, but I didn't know it was a non-denominational place of worship.... looking at the return again, maybe the last letter which I thought was an 'e' is a slightly short 'l' ?

It's listed as just 'Merrion Hall' in Thom's 1914 - no clues as to it's function, 1894 lists it as Merrion Hall Church. I think the building is a hotel now.




Shane

Neevy1 wrote: »

You guys are the biz ...

I believe you are correct. Merrion Hall is the one...I have just read the links info and The (Plymouth) Brethren used to worship there.
Have you ever thought about sleuthing for a private investigation company you would be brill...

Thanks so much
N

To be honest, those who know of Merrion Hall would have immediately read it as Merrion Hall. I unfortunately never attended but I do know some who did. There is no sleuthing required, it's just that those who know, know, and those who don't, don't. Simple as that. Some friends come from Plymouth Brethren roots, which I believe to be quite conservative and strict, but those I know are lovely folk.

Neevy1

Thank you Jellybaby1
Your comments make perfect sense to me, as my grandmother who came directly from this line was to quote her eldest son. " mother was very hard and strict Victorian woman". So this fits perfectly with her upbringing with her own mother Sarah and in the later years with her grandmother Jane (plyms), whom she nursed personally until her death.

A genuine heart felt THANK YOU to all of you.
I am very glad I joined Boards.ie now another mystery solved.

Niamh

Barnbarroch

Given that this is/was a thread about Census inconsistencies - can anyone locate the couple in question, Joseph and Jane, in the 1901 census?

1911 - Holles Street, Trinity Ward, Dublin, but 1901?

Good luck,
Jamie.

Neevy1 wrote: »

Joseph Vance of Kilruddery Bray
and
Jane Tutty of 32 St Stephens Green North.
were married on 13.04.1874
both of full age

shanew

I see Jane in 1911 at Holles Street but not Joseph ?

see : Vance / Tutty / ... household

Jane's a widow in 1911 - what was Joseph's occupation on the marriage cert ?



Shane

shanew

he's a butler, or at least he was in 1874 : Vance / Tutty marriage



S.

shanew

Jane's already a widow in 1901 - see reply #25 in this thread :

Vickers/Doughton/O'Neill/Murphy/Vance household



S.

pedroeibar1

Follow the Plymouth Brethren/Wicklow connection; look at the owners of the addresses given, it possibly will give you a lead or two.

The Plymouth Brethren are an interesting sect dating to the first half of the 1800’s in Ireland and were very popular with landed families Wicklow (Powerscourt) and several in Kerry – I did some research on a family that lost their estate due to long absence on proselytising travels. It is possible that as servants your people travelled with their employers.

The sect’s founder was John Nelson Darby, a Co. Wicklow deacon and former lawyer. Their creed is the forerunner of what is now known as the Christian Right, particularly the evangelical forms of Protestantism seen in the United States. After a bad fall from a horse Darby spent his convalescence studying the Bible, during which time his outlook became fundamentalist. His beliefs were founded in pre-millenarianism - a doctrine which suggests certain events are evidence of God's pre-determined plan to bring about the second coming of Christ. Despite the Jews' rejection of Jesus, Darby believed that they had a dispensation from God and the countdown to the second coming could only begin when the Jews had returned to their homeland. (Hence the huge support by the Right for Israel.)

By 1830, Darby had moved to Britain, and his followers were numerous on its south coast; his pamphlets were published in Plymouth, from which the sect obtained its name.

Barnbarroch

Oh yes, thanks very much.
Jamie

shanew wrote: »

Jane's already a widow in 1901 - see reply #25 in this thread :

Vickers/Doughton/O'Neill/Murphy/Vance household



S.