Queen Victoria saves on telegrams

[Currie]

That’s a very interesting story Scott, there’s plenty of flesh there to add to the bare bones of a family tree for anyone lucky enough to make the link. It was probably the tobacco that killed him.

Thanks for those Census ages Sarah. Apart from 1861 the ages in ’51, ‘’71, and ’81 seem to fit with a birth year around 1785, which means he had been ‘gilding the lily’ from as early as 1851 or else the genealogists got it all wrong.

Hibee, the detailed reports on each census that Andrew mentioned, and also on BDM registrations, are included in Parliamentary Papers. They are also available on the HistPop site. http://www.histpop.org

All the best,
Alan

[Hibee]

Thanks, Alan.

The earlier figures seem to bear out the inaccurate reporting theory.....

1851: 103
1861: 87

There were 720 in 2008, btw.

Hibee