1841 Census information (General)
by Don Cameron 
, Friday, October 26, 2007, 20:00 (6240 days ago)
Could someone explain to me the details of the 1841 census entries listed at this web-site. For example what is meant by the term "Box"?
I've looked at some entries here that don't appear on the 1841 Census from Ancestry.com, why would this be the case?
My particular interest is in a group of people named KERSEY in piece 365/3, folio 59. Are all the people listed in this folio in the one household, or are they in a number of households?
Richard KERSEY (sic) and his wife Amelia KERSEY (sic) nee ROBERTS are related to me - real surname KEARSEY. I'm trying to establish if William KERSEY and his wife Jane KERSEY are related to my Richard and Amelia KEARSEY.
Any help - very appreciated!
Cheers,
Don Cameron.
--
Don Cameron
1841 Census information - box
by slowhands , proud of his ancient Dean Forest roots, Friday, October 26, 2007, 21:38 (6240 days ago) @ Don Cameron
Designation for the 1841 census is HO 107.
Then the box number containing the enumeration book is given.
Then the book number, folio number and last the page number.
Littledean (part) is HO 107/364/14/(folio number)/(page number).
Morse ( Ruardean) is HO107/365/10/(folio number)/(page number).
Ruardean Hill is HO107/364/7/(folio number)/(page number).
1841 Census information KEARSEY
by slowhands , proud of his ancient Dean Forest roots, Friday, October 26, 2007, 21:42 (6240 days ago) @ Don Cameron
I suspect this is how Ancestry has the transcription in its database
1841
Richard Freasey abt 1801 Gloucestershire, England Newland Gloucestershire
Amelia Freasey abt 1816 Gloucestershire, England Newland Gloucestershire
Source Citation: Class: HO107; Piece 365; Book: 3;
Civil Parish: Newland; County: Gloucestershire; Enumeration District: 21;
Folio: 58; Page: 15; Line: 19; GSU roll: 288776.
< it looks like a ROBERTS household>
1841 Census information KEARSEY
by Don Cameron , Friday, June 20, 2008, 04:25 (6002 days ago) @ slowhands
Many thanks Slowhands for your reply, it seems that I missed your reply for some reason, but better late than never. Yes it would appear that you are correct it has been incorrectly transcribed.
Regards,
--
Don Cameron