Take the 2-minute tour ×
Genealogy & Family History Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for expert genealogists and people interested in genealogy or family history. It's 100% free, no registration required.

All information below was obtained through ancestry.co.uk

My Great Grandfather, Thomas White was one of 6 children born to Baldwin White, b1862 in Salcombe, Devon & Rachel Arminia Fox, b1864 in Wayland, Norfolk. They were married in Falcombe, Cornwall in 1896.

On the 1901 census (Ref: RG/13/4962), Baldwyn (Baldwin) White and Rachel A. White (Nee Fox) had 4 Children:

  1. Baldwyn (Baldwin) White, 4yrs
  2. Beatrice White, 2yrs
  3. John White, 1yr
  4. Thomas White, 3 weeks

According to the 1911 census (Ref: RG 14/13895/129) Baldwin White and Rachel A. White had given birth to 6 children, but only 3 survived:

  1. John White, 11yrs
  2. Thomas White, 10yrs
  3. Jane White, 7yrs

Some connected family trees on Ancestry.co.uk have John as being one of the 3 infant deaths, but seeing as he appears on the 1911 census I dont believe this to be true.

My Great Grandfather, as far as I am aware, only ever spoke of his younger sister Jane.

I have run into a bit of a brick wall, I know that Baldwin Jr and Beatrice were definatly two of the 3 deaths. They appear on the BMD death index for Newport, Monmouthshire, but I can't find any reference to John White after 1911 that I can be certain is my Great Grand Uncle & have found no reference at all to the 6th (as yet unknown) child who I assume was born and died at some point between 1901 & 1911.

If it helps at all, the BMD Birth index for John White is: Qtr Jan-Feb-Mar 1900 District - Newport County - Monmouthshire Vol - 11a Page - 223

I know that the family was raised in Newport and, due to ill health on the fathers part, moved to Falmouth in Cornwall in 1908.

share|improve this question
    
Have edited the information about the 1911 census to clarify which children were reported in the census. This edit was made without seeing the census, so hope you will make sure it still reads as intended. –  GeneJ Feb 12 '13 at 3:14
    
Question: Was Jane White reported to be ae 11, as above, in the 1911 census? (If so, she would appear older than Thomas, not a "younger sister.") –  GeneJ Feb 12 '13 at 3:15
    
@GeneJ Jane was 7 at the time of the 1911 census, John was 11. It is John that I want to find out more about after 1911 and another sibling who isn't on the 1901 census but must have died before the 1911. –  AvieRose Feb 12 '13 at 10:46
    
@Fortiter thanks for correcting my error. –  AvieRose Feb 12 '13 at 10:50
add comment

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

Well an obvious problem here is that John White is a fairly common name, so pinning down his death is likely to take a bit of work...

The first thing to do on that front would be to obtain the birth certificate, which will give you a precise date of birth. Assuming that he didn't die in infancy, and lived to a reasonable age, then he will hopefully have died after full birth dates started being included in the index of deaths which should make identifying his date and place of death easier.

Finding the sixth child is a whole other challenge - children who are born and die in infancy without every appearing in a census can be very hard to find especially with a relatively common surname. Short of looking at every White born in Newport in that period the best hope may be if you can find baptismal records for the other children and then look through the register for some trace of the sixth child.

share|improve this answer
1  
When did the full birth dates start being included in the death index? –  AvieRose Feb 12 '13 at 17:13
1  
Sometime in 1969 by the looks of things (Q4 has it but Q1 doesn't) so it's probably going to be a close thing in this case. –  TomH Feb 12 '13 at 17:31
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.