Help locate Page 1 of 1891 Census for Chipstead, Surrey, England.
I have checked these sites, Ancestry, Findmypast & Familysearch; all do not show page 1. Could someone please check the microfilm to see if this page has been missed during digitization; or was missed during microfilming? Page 2 commences with Thomas Trish, age 7, 8 Star Cottages, Chipstead; followed by Ellen E. Trish, age 2, etc.
Thanks for your time and help, RLN.
Best Answer
-
In the past I have emailed the national archives at Kew to inform them that the organisation who digitised the public records (and were paid handsomely to do it) had not performed the task satisfactorily. I gave specific details like those you have provided in your question. They responded within a few days and attached the missing page. I should add that it was a few years ago, before the fall.
0
Answers
-
Thanks for your help. Being in Australia, I would not have thought of going straight to the source for help. Trying to contact the hosting sites [Ancestry, etc], only ends up with a run around and 'leave a message'. I have been doing research for a lot of years, and have come across this problem numerous times. Probably the most common fault that I have come across is incorrect labeling of records, or record groups; e.g. 10 years of burial records in the back of baptism register, that were not recorded anywhere else, and hence will never be located; hint to researchers, always check the back pages of registers, I have regularly found unrecorded 'addendums' hidden in the back [or front] of registers. Good luck to you all. RLN.
0 -
This reminds me of my efforts (true, many years ago) to find an ancestor who I knew was living at a particular Essex village in 1851. On a visit to the then Family Records Centre in London, I slowly went through the microfilm that covered the parish and, disappointingly, there was no trace of her. Then I found the Essex Family History Society had published these records on microfiche - and there she was! So then I decided to check-out the microfilm held at the Essex Record Office and, again, there was no trace of her. Another check through the film revealed the answer to the problem: "page 13" (on which she appeared, of course) had not been filmed.
Back in London, I filled in a form at the enquiry desk and by the time of my next visit (only a few weeks later) there was a version of the microfilm in question that now did include the missing page! Goodness knows from which source the Essex FHS had produced its index, but at last I was able to get a photocopy of the original record.
The problem today is that even if the matter can be reported (presumably nowadays to the TNA at Kew), would the different publishers (Find My Past, Ancestry, etc.) pick up on any "restored" page(s) and add them to their census indexes?
Perhaps @LDS Search Test could expand on the example experienced - by confirming if the copy was sent by email, or if it did the missing page / record then become viewable through FMP. or any other website?
0 -
@Paul W - I can clearly remember the response containing the missing page was an email with an attachment, sent directly from TNA. It was around 2005 ish. I haven't revisited the matter since, and I haven't checked whether the missing sheet has appeared on the various platforms. There have been many failed drives and changes of email over the last 20 odd years. I'm now going through back-up CDs. I recall that the missing page was from a census in Hampstead, but there were a few related families one of which was Williams so it's a big catchment. I can visualize where I was sitting and which computer I was using, but I haven't located the email yet. Still hunting.. (Sometimes OCD can be useful)
1 -
OK, this is of no help to the OP, but just a follow up to my response to @Paul W . I've found my copy of the missing page that prompted me to contact TNA. It was from the 1891 England and Wales Census: RG12 / 9 Folio 111 Page 57. I have located copies of the pdf that was mailed from TNA in my records, but not the original message. When I fire up on old steam-powered windows machine I'll see If I can get the authoring details from the pdf to show the date and origin. In the meantime, I have checked, and I can confirm that page 57 is still missing from the 1891 census records on Acnersty. The page is present in the collection on FamilySearch.
Familysearch URLs
person record on Page 56 (image 221)
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QQ3M-C3Z
person record on Page 57 (image 222)
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QQ37-46Z
person record on Page 58 (image 223)
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QQ3Z-5N2
The first and third appear on Acnersty:-
Page 56 https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageviewer/collections/6598/images/LNDRG12_8_10-0421
Page 58 https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageviewer/collections/6598/images/LNDRG12_8_10-0422
but there is no reference for page 57 - it has been skipped.
0 -
Yes @LDS Search Test - the Ancestry and FamilySearch images of p56 are from different filmings - the RG12/9 box at the bottom of the image are at different angles. Not that it helps the OP of this thread.
1 -
The National Archives have confirmed that the census page was 'missed during micro-filming' and this 'error' would be fixed by the the licensing team. As stated by LDS Search Test, the Archives did send me a copy of the original census page; which was a great help to me , and filled in a lot of missing information that I was looking for. It was also very informative to see a true copy of the census pages - colour of the paper, markings and ticks, etc. My OCD problem is that I cannot attach a document/census page as we generally receive them from the hosting sites - crooked, out of perspective, tick marks through the details, etc. So I put each document through Photo Shop and methodically 'clean & correct', label, and add information where needed (as attached notes) to help the viewer (e.g. a stepfather marrying his deceased wife's daughter with the same name within a census period!) get the most information out of the document. As you can appreciate, this is time consuming and not as simple as 'click and attach'; but this is the way I enjoy doing my hobby. Over the years, I have been criticized by some 'family researchers' for 'changing the original document', and praised for clarifying hard to read records by other researchers; I always tell them " if your not happy with my work, DON'T COPY IT; do you own with the 'original' documents." I have done 1000's of documents over the years. I have attached a couple (sorry without the originals). Happy researching, RLN.
0
