Genealogy Chat
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
Second opinion
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Crista | Report | 25 Jan 2005 01:06 |
|
Looks like she did marry the 75 year old Joseph because Arthur is listed as her stepson in 1881. Crista |
|||
|
Crista | Report | 25 Jan 2005 00:45 |
|
Peter, The "dependent on parents" applies to the son above. I don't think it applies to her. Also, I think the adopted child applies to the cook as it's in her row and column. If she's a boarder she's paying money to stay there. Crista |
|||
|
Peterkinz | Report | 25 Jan 2005 00:39 |
|
On the 1871 census RG10/1091 Folio 82 p26 there is an Adelaide Krofft (I think it should be (actually I know) Krafft). She is shown as a boarder....dependent on parents... On the line below her is Caroline....servant, and in the same box, above the word servant is "adopted child" The head of the household is Joseph Burgess aged 71, living on income from bonds. According to BMD, in 1874 Adelaide Krafft married Joseph Burgess (not sure if it was the same one). In 1881 she is a widow.....Given that Adelaide was born 1847/8 and her father was still producing children in 1870 (according to the census)there is no reason for her to be adopted, would anyone like to surmise what was going on...? |
|||
Researching: |
|||