1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. If you're looking for the LostCousins site please click the logo in the top left corner - these forums are for existing LostCousins members only.
  3. This is the LostCousins Forum. If you were looking for the LostCousins website simply click the logo at the top left.
  4. Coronavirus Corner - a place to share your hopes, dreams, and frustrations.
  5. Only registered members can see all the forums - if you've received an invitation to join (it'll be on your My Summary page) please register NOW!

The 1939 Register

Discussion in 'Latest news' started by AdrienneQ, Oct 27, 2015.

  1. Bryman

    Bryman LostCousins Megastar

    On HIS Death Registration??? Nobody else would know the names of his parents (who had died back in England). He would just be another Joe Bloggs, or whatever name he had chosen, with unknown parents. I am sure that there must have been many such individuals in Australia at that time. I have searched for his real name and drawn a blank. I have no idea what other name he may have chosen. He is unlikely to have used the name of somebody closely related to him. I probably have more chance of winning the lottery :) than of guessing his new name.

    His daughter, who married just before his departure from England, also posted requests for news about him over 30 years later in Sydney and Adelaide publications (that I have found). Perhaps she put similar requests in other towns/countries that I have not found.
     
  2. Margery

    Margery LostCousins Member

    Have you tried Sands Directory?
     
  3. Bryman

    Bryman LostCousins Megastar

    I have tried it briefly but it seems to be massive and difficult to find anything specific, even using an automated search. Unless, of course, you know how to take a short cut?
     
  4. Margery

    Margery LostCousins Member

    Sorry Bryman, it's just hard slog:).
     
  5. Susan48

    Susan48 LostCousins Star

    I have just come across an entry in the 1939 register where the wife's occupation is given (both in the original and in the transcript) as "Underpaid domestic duties". Does this reflect frustration or a wry sense of humour, I wonder?
     
    • Creative Creative x 1
  6. peter

    peter Administrator Staff Member

    I'm not sure what it is intended to mean. The standard description for a housewife is 'Unpaid domestic duties', and being 'Unpaid' is surely worse than being 'Underpaid'?

    There seem to be only 40 examples in the 1939 Register, so I suspect they are transcription errors. If the previous entry was 'Under school age' the enumerator might well have written 'Underpaid' by mistake.
     
  7. Susan48

    Susan48 LostCousins Star

    I had assumed it to be a transcription error, but it nevertheless made me smile.
     
  8. emjay

    emjay LostCousins Member

    If a transcription error,what does the original state?
     
  9. peter

    peter Administrator Staff Member

    The original schedules haven't survived, so we don't now what the householder wrote. But we do know from the original post that it wasn't an error by a modern transcriber.

    If you analyse the 40 examples Findmypast finds you might discern a pattern.
     
  10. Susan48

    Susan48 LostCousins Star

    My search method on Findmypast obviously wasn't sophisticated enough - I got over 1000 results when searching the occupation field, and the ones I looked at were not 'underpaid domestic duties', but 'unpaid domestic duties'.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2020
  11. peter

    peter Administrator Staff Member

    I got about 8 million results when I searched for 'underpaid domestic duties' as it seems to perform a keyword search.

    But I found that searching for just one word and using wildcards stopped this happening, ie '*underpaid*'
     
    • Thanks! Thanks! x 1

Share This Page