Address in 1901

Can anyone look up addresses on census? (rather than the name)

I'm interested in 167 Cricklade Road Swindon Wilts. It's a couple of houses down (or up) from the Duke of Edinburgh public house.

One of my little ancestors met his end there and as it wasn't his home address I am curious to know who was supposed to be looking after the poor mite.

well duke of edinburgh pub comes between 79 and 80 on the form . then it goes upto 125 then skips to 173????

Do you have a name?

167 exists in 1911 schedule
but doesnt seem to be on 1891 schedule either

Hi vron thanks for looking.

No I don't have a name just the address from the death certificate. The house is still there as is the house he lived which was tother side of the road.

I wonder if the pub marked the end of one area and the start of another.

Who was living there in 1911?

> Who was living there in 1911?

37yo Albert and 40yo Fanny King, with their children, Harry 11, Arthur 9, Lucy 8 and Elsie 7.

Ring any bells?

STG

In 1901 Albert, Fanny and baby Harry were living at No. 80 Cricklade Road.

Will have another look tomorrow to see if I can find anything else.

Night
STG

cricklade road came up under a few different areas - i looked at them all but no 167

I'm wondering if there was some re-numbering between 1901 and 1911.

In 1901, Arthur Bowker is the publican at the Duke of Edinburgh Inn, and that's listed as No. 79 Cricklade RoadDuke of Edinburgh Inn.
In 1911, he's a Licensed Vitualler (I can't spell it) living at No. 159 (but not named as the pub).

So, if No. 79 became No. 159, then No. 167 would have originally been No. 87 and this is the image for the folks who lived there in 1901.

http://search.ancestry.co.uk/Browse/view.aspx?dbid=7814&path=Wiltshire.Swindon.ALL.13.9&sid=&gskw=Arthur+Bowker

Is there any logic at all in what I've just written?

STG

Correction to my post number 6.

In 1901 Albert, Fanny and baby Harry were living at No. 83 (not No. 80).

http://search.ancestry.co.uk/Browse/view.aspx?dbid=7814&path=Wiltshire.Swindon.ALL.13.8&sid=&gskw=Arthur+Bowker

STG

Thanks so much for looking. My family lived at 262 Cricklade Road but they must have moved there after the 1901 census as I have them in Morley St in 1901 including the little boy who died in September. He was 22 months old and my grandfather was born 10 days later. Poor mother lost and gained a son all at the same time.

Arthur Bowker absolutely rings a bell I must look where he fits in after lunch.

STG Can your logic work out who was living at 262 in 1901 for me?

The numbers seem to be +/- ~80 (1901 number for the pub + 80 = 1911 number for the pub). Logic/maths might not be infallible, but at least it gave me somewhere to start. So, 262 in 1911 would be ~182 in 1901.

Can you give the names/reference number for the family in 1891, so that we can see them on the census page and look at their neighbours? Then we can see if we can find any of the same neighbours still living in Cricklade Road in 1901.

Am off out now, but will look again this afternoon if you've replied.

STG

In 1891 they were living in another different street so I don't think that would help.

That is my Arthur Bowker changing occupations. Previously he was a forgeman in railway.
His wife was a cousin of my great grandfather.

Here's the sheet that covers No. 182 in 1901

http://search.ancestry.co.uk/Browse/view.aspx?dbid=7814&path=Wiltshire.Swindon.ALL.14.6&sid=&gskw=

Can you view it? Any names ring a bell?

STG

Yes I can view it thank you. No names ring a bell but the birthplace for most of 182 is the same village great grandmother came from.

You wouldn't have thought they would have dumped the child on strangers to look after would you especially if they had only just moved there.

All we can do is conjecture. For all I know his parents or siblings were there as well when he died (he was poisoned by swallowing something he shouldn't)