Find Ancestors

Following up earlier request - please may I ask for information on a James Thomas Long born between 1840 and 1846 - believe he dropped James at some stage - this is him in 1881 with wife and family listed as age 40 which would indicate that he was born 1840

1881 census Street address: 7 Belgrave Cottages, Finchley
Thomas Long 40
Sarah Long 35
Ada Long 10
James Long 6
William Long 4

But search on BMD currently only has this birth for a James Long in 1846 but without middle name Thomas

Births Jun 1846 (98%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Long James Barnet 6 489

Thank you

Dennis

He may not have a birth cert as registration was not compulsory until 1875ish.

Jill

Dennis

From the census i gave you before and you post exactly where James Thomas was born

Er ... if he was 40 in 1881 he may have been born in 1841 ...

Jill

1881 & 1871 had him born in Hackney

there is this one in 1851

James T Long
Age: 10
Estimated Birth Year: abt 1841
Relation: Son
Father's Name: John J
Gender: Male
Where born: St Luke, Middlesex, England

Civil parish: St Luke Old Street
Ecclesiastical parish: St Barnabas
County/Island: Middlesex
Country: England

Street address:

Occupation:

Condition as to marriage:

Disability: View Image

Registration district: St Luke
Sub-registration district: City Road
ED, institution, or vessel: 1
Neighbors: View others on page
Household schedule number: 158
Household Members: Name Age
John J Long 31
James T Long 10
Thomas R Long 5
Maria Long 63


You'll need M/C for dads name to know if this is correct
_____________

1861

James Tho Long
Age: 20
Estimated Birth Year: abt 1841
Relation: Son
Father's Name: John Thos
Mother's Name: Emma
Gender: Male
Where born: St Lukes

Civil parish: St Luke
County/Island: Middlesex
Country: England

Street address:

Occupation:

Condition as to marriage: View Image

Registration district: St Luke
Sub-registration district: City Road
ED, institution, or vessel: 1
Neighbors: View others on page
Household schedule number: 187
Household Members: Name Age
John Thos Long 42
Emma Long 28
James Tho Long 20
Thomas Hy Long 15
John Fk Long 7
Ellen Jane Long 5
George Morrington Long 4
William A S Long 2
Walter Long 8 Mo
___________

The birth to go with the above

Births Jun 1841 (>99%)

Long James Thomas St Luke 2 238

________________

You'll ONLY know it this is correct when you get his M/C
Detail of which you already have

poss
Surname First name(s) District Vol Page

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marriages Jun 1869 (>99%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


LONG Thomas Bradford Yorks 9b 88

PEDLEY Sarah Bradford Yk 9b 88

Is this another lunch time postings...as you do need to hang for a bit as questions are asked & your not here to answer

Thought I would try working backwards but got stuck at 1871:
1871 census
Primrose Cottage, Finchley, Middlesex
Thomas Long, head, 28, labourer carman, born Hackney
Sarah A., 28, born Frien Barnet
Ada M.A., dau, 2 months, born Finchley

Birh
James Thomas Long 1841 St Luke AMJ 2 238

Not sure where St Luke is but it sounds if it is in the London area

Dear All

Many thanks for the assistance - it is another lunch-time posting but I am around checking other leads and up-dating details - I apologise for any delay in getting back to you. I have had so many instances of ages being inaccurate on census returns that I do not hold them as proof of age until at least 3 show the same approximate year - I have one family group I'm researching where names, ages and places of birth changed every census from 1851 to 1891.

Julie, I've just re-checked your previous research (which I'm grateful for) and I'm afraid there isn't a mention of where Thomas was born as you helped out with Sarah, his wife, born Finchley, and their daughter Ada born Finchley - all references for Thomas just had name and age - sorry.

Best wishes

Dennis

Ok have deleted this info on seeing Dennis's reply below

Hi Julie

Thanks for the additional research but Prince is Sarah's first husband's name - she was born Sarah Ann South in 1843, Barnet. She married Wiliam Prince 1863, he died and then she married James Long in 1869.

Regards

Dennis

PS signing off now - in future I will try to give approx time I will check replies

Dennisssssss come back

If you do a name search on here the is a Leonard that has James & Sarah in his tree & he has James born in 1841 St Lukes

So the 1851 & 61 i have put on could well be your man

Julie

Hi Julie

Couldn't resist another peek. Leonard is indeed the one who instigated this research - I have a family group where I have no idea of what happened to three of seven siblings. It was only Leonard putting details on Sarah South on the site that helped with one of these missing people. He is situated in Australia and his tree (and mine) on this side of the family is sparce, hence my enquiries. The other two I'm missing, or have vague details on, are John South b1855 (have him on 1871 census - may have emigrated or died as does not appear again) and Frederick South b1859 - This may well be him in 1881

1881 census
Frederick SOUTH Head M Male 24 Friarn Barnet, Middlesex, England Labourer
Annie SOUTH Wife M Female 23 Carnell
Folinacelett SOUTH Daughter Female 6 m Finchley, Middlesex, England
Charles DURBEY Lodger U Male 24 ... Laborer

Is this Frederick's death?
Deaths Dec 1886
________________________________________
South, Frederick John aged 26 Hackney 1b 361

I have put feelers out on these two previously but all searches are so far inconclusive - daughter called Folinacelett you would expect to be able to find with name like that but nowhere to be found (probably mistranscribed).

Best wishes

Dennis

This is probably Folinacelett

Births Dec 1880 (>99%)
SOUTH Florence Ethel Barnet 3a 193

HI Julie

You could well be right - I'll have to get the cert - but how could they mistranscribe so wrong?

Regards

Dennis

Signing off again until about 5.15

The writing on the 1881 is very slanted

Im off to do dinner but leave this and i'll have another look later

But just to say i can't see any of them in the 1891 so wonder is they all went off