House Breaker

[Colin Bignell]

I'm new here, so please don't throw things if I have got the wrong group.

First decade of 20th century, one of my ancestors entered House Breaker
as his occupation on his marriage certificate. I am assuming he isn't
admitting to a life of crime, but can anybody confirm or refute my
assumption that he was what today would probably be called a demolition
operative? I.e. he knocked down houses, possibly reclaiming anything
with scrap value.

I've been surprised by what some occupations turn out to be before, but
the places I usually look up old job descriptions don't help here.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

Post by Colin Bignell
I'm new here, so please don't throw things if I have got the wrong group.
First decade of 20th century, one of my ancestors entered House Breaker
as his occupation on his marriage certificate. I am assuming he isn't
admitting to a life of crime, but can anybody confirm or refute my
assumption that he was what today would probably be called a demolition
operative? I.e. he knocked down houses, possibly reclaiming anything
with scrap value.
I've been surprised by what some occupations turn out to be before, but
the places I usually look up old job descriptions don't help here.

What did he say in the 1911 census? That might also give who (if anyone)
he worked for, and maybe whether his sons if any were in the same trade
(though if married in 190x, probably not old enough). (And the 1921, but
that'll cost you extra, even if you have a subscription to one of the
places you can look at the 1911, or go to a library.) And possibly the
1901 (or his father if too young).

I suspect you _are_ right that it means involvement in demolition; I did
wonder if it might be what we'd now call house _clearance_, but I think
your suggestion is more likely.

Of course, it'd be fun if he _was_ a burglar - or being facetious! (Is
there any obligation - either on participants to be honest and sober, or
on the registrar to check?)

[knuttle]

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by Colin Bignell
I'm new here, so please don't throw things if I have got the wrong group.
First decade of 20th century, one of my ancestors entered House
Breaker as his occupation on his marriage certificate. I am assuming
he isn't admitting to a life of crime, but can anybody confirm or
refute my assumption that he was what today would probably be called a
demolition operative? I.e. he knocked down houses, possibly reclaiming
anything with scrap value.
I've been surprised by what some occupations turn out to be before,
but the places I usually look up old job descriptions don't help here.

What did he say in the 1911 census? That might also give who (if anyone)
he worked for, and maybe whether his sons if any were in the same trade
(though if married in 190x, probably not old enough). (And the 1921, but
that'll cost you extra, even if you have a subscription to one of the
places you can look at the 1911, or go to a library.) And possibly the
1901 (or his father if too young).
I suspect you _are_ right that it means involvement in demolition; I did
wonder if it might be what we'd now call house _clearance_, but I think
your suggestion is more likely.
Of course, it'd be fun if he _was_ a burglar - or being facetious! (Is
there any obligation - either on participants to be honest and sober, or
on the registrar to check?)

This is not a definitive, but I did a internet search and the hits
"House Breaker" was refereed to as a negative term.

From the context of the hits, it appears to be what you first thought,
some one who breaks into a house and sells his spoils

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

Post by knuttle

Post by Colin Bignell
I'm new here, so please don't throw things if I have got the wrong group.
First decade of 20th century, one of my ancestors entered House
Breaker as his occupation on his marriage certificate. I am assuming
he isn't admitting to a life of crime, but can anybody confirm or
refute my assumption that he was what today would probably be called
a demolition operative? I.e. he knocked down houses, possibly
reclaiming anything with scrap value.

[]

Post by knuttle
This is not a definitive, but I did a internet search and the hits
"House Breaker" was refereed to as a negative term.
From the context of the hits, it appears to be what you first thought,
some one who breaks into a house and sells his spoils

I think Colin was making what sounds like the reasonable point that he'd
be unlikely to put this on his marriage record! Even if he _was_ mainly
a burglar, I would imagine he'd put some other skill - or make something
up - for that.

[Colin Bignell]

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by knuttle

Post by Colin Bignell
I'm new here, so please don't throw things if I have got the wrong group.
First decade of 20th century, one of my ancestors entered House
Breaker as his occupation on his marriage certificate. I am assuming
he isn't admitting to a life of crime, but can anybody confirm or
refute my assumption that he was what today would probably be called
a  demolition operative? I.e. he knocked down houses, possibly
reclaiming  anything with scrap value.

[]

Post by knuttle
This is not a definitive, but I did a internet search and the hits
"House Breaker" was refereed to as a negative term.
From the context of the hits, it appears to be what you first thought,
some one who breaks into a house and sells his spoils

I was taken aback when I saw that on the marriage certificate, as I'd
not heard the term used in any other way before.

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
I think Colin was making what sounds like the reasonable point that he'd
be unlikely to put this on his marriage record! Even if he _was_ mainly
a burglar, I would imagine he'd put some other skill - or make something
up - for that.

I certainly wouldn't be surprised to find yet another person in my
family tree who had criminal tendencies, but I would hope he was bright
enough not to make a public declaration of the fact.

[Colin Bignell]

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by Colin Bignell
I'm new here, so please don't throw things if I have got the wrong group.
First decade of 20th century, one of my ancestors entered House
Breaker as his occupation on his marriage certificate. I am assuming
he isn't admitting to a life of crime, but can anybody confirm or
refute my assumption that he was what today would probably be called a
demolition operative? I.e. he knocked down houses, possibly reclaiming
anything with scrap value.
I've been surprised by what some occupations turn out to be before,
but the places I usually look up old job descriptions don't help here.

What did he say in the 1911 census? That might also give who (if anyone)
he worked for, and maybe whether his sons if any were in the same trade
(though if married in 190x, probably not old enough). (And the 1921, but
that'll cost you extra, even if you have a subscription to one of the
places you can look at the 1911, or go to a library.) And possibly the
1901 (or his father if too young).

Thanks for the reply. I'm using Ancestry to build my family tree and
hadn't noticed that it didn't offer the 1911 census for him, although it
did offer it for his father, who has exactly the same first and middle
names. (I do wish some of my ancestors had been a bit more creative with
names). Searching for the 1911 census entry, having read your reply, it
gives the much clearer description of House Demolisher. In 1901 he had
been a plasterer, as was his father. By 1939 he was a builder's carpenter.

As you can probably tell, I've not been at this very long.

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
I suspect you _are_ right that it means involvement in demolition; I did
wonder if it might be what we'd now call house _clearance_, but I think
your suggestion is more likely.
Of course, it'd be fun if he _was_ a burglar - or being facetious! (Is
there any obligation - either on participants to be honest and sober, or
on the registrar to check?)

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

[]

Post by Colin Bignell

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
What did he say in the 1911 census? That might also give who (if

[]

Post by Colin Bignell
Thanks for the reply. I'm using Ancestry to build my family tree and

(Make sure you have a copy of all data independent of Ancestry.)

Post by Colin Bignell
hadn't noticed that it didn't offer the 1911 census for him, although

I've hardly ever relied on Ancestry to find census entries in that way -
I've nearly always searched the census(es) for the person.

Post by Colin Bignell
it did offer it for his father, who has exactly the same first and
middle names. (I do wish some of my ancestors had been a bit more

Tell us about it (-:. It's a common problem!

Post by Colin Bignell
creative with names). Searching for the 1911 census entry, having read
your reply, it gives the much clearer description of House Demolisher.

Glad to help!
[]

Post by Colin Bignell
As you can probably tell, I've not been at this very long.

Welcome to the hobby - we all started somewhere!

(When your Ancestry sub runs out, give FindMyPast a go. Both have quirks
[and when you get back to using parish records etc., each has areas the
other doesn't]. Some people alternate between them.)
[]

[Colin Bignell]

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]

Post by Colin Bignell

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
What did he say in the 1911 census? That might also give who (if

[]

Post by Colin Bignell
Thanks for the reply. I'm using Ancestry to build my family tree and

(Make sure you have a copy of all data independent of Ancestry.)

Thanks for the tip. I'm not sure I could manage that for everybody in my
tree. There are over 4,000 of them and the number is increasing as I
drill down some side branches, to discover where my DNA matches fit in.

It would be probably be practical for my direct ancestors, of whom I
have so far found 383, out of possible 4,096 if I were able to trace
them all back as many generations as my direct male line.

I am sure that some of my early entries are a bit dubious, but I have
rechecked the main trunk and the most important side branches in light
of experience. I'm not sure whether it was the posthumous marriage or
the ancestor who lived to 135 that alerted me to the fact that a lot of
people don't check the data they put in their trees, which Ancestry then
shares with others.

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by Colin Bignell
hadn't noticed that it didn't offer the 1911 census for him, although

I've hardly ever relied on Ancestry to find census entries in that way -
I've nearly always searched the census(es) for the person.

As I said, I am new at this and haven't got into much independent
research yet, other than looking through British newspaper archives
online, which have been quite useful at times.

Plans for later in the year are for a trip to a couple of records
office, one possibly with my cousin. She gave me a head start on my main
family line from a tree she researched several years ago. That was all
done by visiting records offices and looking up original documents.
However, she is particularly interested in tracking down more
information about our great-grandfather and those records are probably
in Buckinghamshire, which she didn't visit. I also hope to visit a few
graveyards and to see any surviving places my ancestors lived. Google
street view has confirmed that some of them are still there.

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by Colin Bignell
it did offer it for his father, who has exactly the same first and
middle names. (I do wish some of my ancestors had been a bit more

Tell us about it (-:. It's a common problem!

Post by Colin Bignell
creative with names). Searching for the 1911 census entry, having read
your reply, it gives the much clearer description of House Demolisher.

Glad to help!
[]

Post by Colin Bignell
As you can probably tell, I've not been at this very long.

Welcome to the hobby - we all started somewhere!

I started by accident. My partner of almost 50 years, Barbara, died last
August and her cousin, who has a comprehensive family tree on
MyHeritage, asked if I could help with some questions that she was not
willing to answer. Probably because she was sure that he wouldn't stop
asking questions if she answered even one. I could tell him the date of
her birth, but not things like when her father died. However, he gave me
full access to his tree and revived an interest in working out just how
many cousins I have (I'm still missing a few). It has grown from there.

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
(When your Ancestry sub runs out, give FindMyPast a go. Both have quirks
[and when you get back to using parish records etc., each has areas the
other doesn't]. Some people alternate between them.)
[]

I use Ancestry because it is the platform one of Barbara's friends uses.
She has been using it for years and has been very helpful in guiding me.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

[snipped]
Replying by email - hope it won't bounce!

[Peter Johnson]

Post by Colin Bignell
I also hope to visit a few
graveyards and to see any surviving places my ancestors lived. Google
street view has confirmed that some of them are still there.

Now you are getting serious, but there is nothing more mind-numbing
than walking up and down churchyeards and cemteries looking for
specific graves, unless it's quite small.

So, a couple of websites:
https://www.deceasedonline.com/
Mostly large private and local authority cemeteries. Chargeable to
view records but free to search if registered. Ancestry links to it.

https://www.findagrave.com/
millions of graves, internationally, but a bit hit and miss because it
depends on the public posting photographs, and if you get a match it
doesn't tell you the location of the grave but you will know what to
look for.

Findmypast has the Church of England burial records, but they don't
give the locations.

Some local authorities have cemetery databases online or will run a
gravesearch on request, which might be charegable.

Churches with websites sometimes mention their churchyards but if they
don't it might be worth an email to ask.

Some county family history societies have surveyed memorial
inscriptions in churches and churchyards and sell copies of their
reports. If you know the churchyard an email to the society might tell
you the location withjout having to buy the report.

Finally, a story. I knew where someone I was interested in had died
but didn't know where they had been buried. There were three
churchyards within a reasonable distance. One of them had a database
of burials but he wasn't on it. The second replied to an email - not
known there. I visited the third en route to my brother in law's
funeral 15 miles away and found the grave by walking up and down.

Should mention that the poor didn't always have memorials.

[John]

On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 17:53:52 +0000, Peter Johnson

Post by Peter Johnson

Post by Colin Bignell
I also hope to visit a few
graveyards and to see any surviving places my ancestors lived. Google
street view has confirmed that some of them are still there.

Now you are getting serious, but there is nothing more mind-numbing
than walking up and down churchyeards and cemteries looking for
specific graves, unless it's quite small.
https://www.deceasedonline.com/
Mostly large private and local authority cemeteries. Chargeable to
view records but free to search if registered. Ancestry links to it.
https://www.findagrave.com/
millions of graves, internationally, but a bit hit and miss because it
depends on the public posting photographs, and if you get a match it
doesn't tell you the location of the grave but you will know what to
look for.

There is also Billion Graves, https://billiongraves.com/
which geotags the location of the grave within the cemetery so that
you can find the grave relatively easy, within the accuracy of the GPS
signal at the time.

Post by Peter Johnson
Findmypast has the Church of England burial records, but they don't
give the locations.
Some local authorities have cemetery databases online or will run a
gravesearch on request, which might be charegable.
Churches with websites sometimes mention their churchyards but if they
don't it might be worth an email to ask.
Some county family history societies have surveyed memorial
inscriptions in churches and churchyards and sell copies of their
reports. If you know the churchyard an email to the society might tell
you the location withjout having to buy the report.
Finally, a story. I knew where someone I was interested in had died
but didn't know where they had been buried. There were three
churchyards within a reasonable distance. One of them had a database
of burials but he wasn't on it. The second replied to an email - not
known there. I visited the third en route to my brother in law's
funeral 15 miles away and found the grave by walking up and down.
Should mention that the poor didn't always have memorials.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 at 17:53:52, Peter Johnson
<***@parksidewood.nospam> wrote (my responses usually follow points
raised):
[]

Post by Peter Johnson
https://www.deceasedonline.com/
Mostly large private and local authority cemeteries. Chargeable to
view records but free to search if registered. Ancestry links to it.
https://www.findagrave.com/
millions of graves, internationally, but a bit hit and miss because it
depends on the public posting photographs, and if you get a match it
doesn't tell you the location of the grave but you will know what to
look for.

[]
Another one I've found useful for British:
https://www.gravestonephotos.com/public/countries.php?scrwidth=800
I've generally found findagrave more US-oriented, though they're getting
better. The above gravestone photographic resource is patchy, but for
the cemeteries it does cover, I think very good. In general you get a
usable picture, and can email for a bigger one: it's free, though
accepts donations.

Cemetery Records Online http://www.interment.net/Default.htm can also be
useful.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Peter Johnson

Post by Colin Bignell
I also hope to visit a few
graveyards and to see any surviving places my ancestors lived. Google
street view has confirmed that some of them are still there.

Now you are getting serious, but there is nothing more mind-numbing
than walking up and down churchyeards and cemteries looking for
specific graves, unless it's quite small.

Then you discover the headstone is gone and the location grassed over
years back! That was after you found that the records had confused
Guildford and Godalming. Searched the former many times, to discover, by
chance, I should have been searching the latter.

[Colin Bignell]

Post by Peter Johnson

Post by Colin Bignell
I also hope to visit a few
graveyards and to see any surviving places my ancestors lived. Google
street view has confirmed that some of them are still there.

Now you are getting serious, but there is nothing more mind-numbing
than walking up and down churchyeards and cemteries looking for
specific graves, unless it's quite small.
https://www.deceasedonline.com/
Mostly large private and local authority cemeteries. Chargeable to
view records but free to search if registered. Ancestry links to it.
https://www.findagrave.com/
millions of graves, internationally, but a bit hit and miss because it
depends on the public posting photographs, and if you get a match it
doesn't tell you the location of the grave but you will know what to
look for.
Findmypast has the Church of England burial records, but they don't
give the locations.
Some local authorities have cemetery databases online or will run a
gravesearch on request, which might be charegable.
Churches with websites sometimes mention their churchyards but if they
don't it might be worth an email to ask.
Some county family history societies have surveyed memorial
inscriptions in churches and churchyards and sell copies of their
reports. If you know the churchyard an email to the society might tell
you the location withjout having to buy the report.
Finally, a story. I knew where someone I was interested in had died
but didn't know where they had been buried. There were three
churchyards within a reasonable distance. One of them had a database
of burials but he wasn't on it. The second replied to an email - not
known there. I visited the third en route to my brother in law's
funeral 15 miles away and found the grave by walking up and down.
Should mention that the poor didn't always have memorials.

First I would like to thank everybody who has responded. It is
refreshing to find a Usenet group that is still a place where people
with a shared interest are willing to help others and that is free from
spam and trolls. All hints so far have been very helpful and there are
resources you have mentioned that I was not aware of.

I may, however, have mislead you about my intentions re graves. I am not
planning on looking for specific grave sites. As you say, the poor
(which a lot of my ancestors certainly were*) may have been buried by
the Parish without markers.

What I am planning to do is visit places where they lived and take
photographs for my tree. In some cases the original buildings still
remain (Thank you Google Street View). While there, I plan to pop into
the local churchyard and have a browse through the gravestones of the
right periods to see what, if anything, I can find. Obviously, having
first checked for any information I can find online. I won't be downcast
if I can't find anything.

* As an aside, I found a couple of generations of related people had
been born in a poorhouse. Further checking showed that, in both cases,
their parents were the Warden and the Matron of those poorhouses.

[knuttle]

snip

Post by Colin Bignell
I may, however, have mislead you about my intentions re graves. I am not
planning on looking for specific grave sites. As you say, the poor
(which a lot of my ancestors certainly were*) may have been buried by
the Parish without markers.
What I am planning to do is visit places where they lived and take
photographs for my tree. In some cases the original buildings still
remain (Thank you Google Street View). While there, I plan to pop into
the local churchyard and have a browse through the gravestones of the
right periods to see what, if anything, I can find. Obviously, having
first checked for any information I can find online. I won't be downcast
if I can't find anything.
* As an aside, I found a couple of generations of related people had
been born in a poorhouse. Further checking showed that, in both cases,
their parents were the Warden and the Matron of those poorhouses.

Taking pictures of where our ancestors lived is one of the fun part of
the research.

One example: I was with my mother and we were taking pictures of her
grandfathers home. While we were stopped the current owner came down
to the road asking who we were and why were we photographing his home.
When he learned, we talked for about 20 minutes. We talked about the
Hay fork that my mother remember riding across the barn, and found it
still existed but in the owner's brother's barn.

In another incidence the owner learned his home was much older than he
thought as a results of our conversation.

As Paul Harvey used to say; we got "The rest of the story."

I have had many nice conversation with the current owners of ancestral
home, who we met in a similar manner. We have also had some interesting
situations, as when we did drive-by-shootings of their homes in a high
crime areas of Chicago.

[Colin Bignell]

On 13/02/2022 12:22, knuttle wrote:
...

Post by knuttle
Taking pictures of where our ancestors lived is one of the fun part of
the research.
One example:  I was with my mother and we were taking pictures of her
grandfathers home.   While we were stopped the current owner came down
to the road asking who we were and why were we photographing his home.
When he learned, we talked for about 20 minutes.  We talked about the
Hay fork that my mother remember riding across the barn, and found it
still existed but in the owner's brother's barn.
In another incidence the owner learned his home was much older than he
thought as a results of our conversation.
 As Paul Harvey used to say; we got "The rest of the story."
I have had many nice conversation with the current owners of ancestral
home, who we met in a similar manner.  We have also had some interesting
situations, as when we did drive-by-shootings of their homes in a high
crime areas of Chicago.

Hi. I've only just seen your reply. For some reason, my newsreader
stopped downloading headers on 12th February and Giganews had to change
me to a different server to sort the problem.

One of the things I wondered about was how people would react to my
taking pictures of their property. Your reply has encouraged me,
although I am not planning on including Chicago in my search.

Many urban dwellings have long since gone as part of slum clearances,
although I was lucky enough to find these on the Reading Museum web site
and the museum granted me permission to use the images:

http://collections.readingmuseum.org.uk/index.asp?page=record&mwsquery=+%7Bcollection%7D%3D%7Bhistory%7D&filename=REDMG&hitsStart=1542

http://collections.readingmuseum.org.uk/index.asp?page=record&mwsquery=%28%7Bsearch%7D%3D%2A%7Babbey%7D%29&filename=REDMG&hitsStart=43

However, my paternal line was mostly farm labourers and a lot of the
places they lived in are still rural. While many can be photographed
from the road (they appear on Google StreetView), a few are on farms and
some distance from any public access.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 at 06:02:04, Colin Bignell
<***@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote (my responses usually follow points
raised):
[]

Post by Colin Bignell
Many urban dwellings have long since gone as part of slum clearances,

[]
And/or Luftwaffe action, and urban redevelopment (lots in 1960s).

http://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/ has a lot of pictures from around
1921 - not necessarily straight-down, but at about 45 degree angle, so
you can often see the buildings. Covers quite a lot of the UK. I was
able to find Turner street in (Shieldfield,) Newcastle for a cousin, by
comparing old maps with one of the pictures thereon.

[Colin Bignell]

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 at 06:02:04, Colin Bignell
[]

Post by Colin Bignell
Many urban dwellings have long since gone as part of slum clearances,

[]
And/or Luftwaffe action, and urban redevelopment (lots in 1960s).

I know that Hitler had no hand in the ones I am missing. Either too
early for him or, as with the ones in Reading, too late. However, my
grandmother and her house had a close call. My father was coming back
from fire watching at the local railway yard when he found an aerial
mine lodged in a tree, with its trigger cable about a foot from the ground.

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
http://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/ has a lot of pictures from around
1921 - not necessarily straight-down, but at about 45 degree angle, so
you can often see the buildings. Covers quite a lot of the UK. I was
able to find Turner street in (Shieldfield,) Newcastle for a cousin, by
comparing old maps with one of the pictures thereon.

An interesting resource, thank you. I can see me spending lots of time
looking at that.

[MB]

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
And/or Luftwaffe action, and urban redevelopment (lots in 1960s).
http://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/ has a lot of pictures from around
1921 - not necessarily straight-down, but at about 45 degree angle, so
you can often see the buildings. Covers quite a lot of the UK. I was
able to find Turner street in (Shieldfield,) Newcastle for a cousin, by
comparing old maps with one of the pictures thereon.

One of my Great Grandfather's sisters lived in a small cottage in
Bolton, she had seven or eight children there, all illegitimate and many
dying very young. There is an article in a Bolton paper of the 1930s
that describes a walk past this "picturesque" cottage and speculates
that it could have been a couple of hundred years old.

It cannot have been very salubrious because there was bleachworks near
it and the outflow from thr settling tanks went past the cottage.

There is just the footprint now (*) but I wanted to see a picture, I
thought that if it had been old and picturesque then surely someone must
have drawn, painted or photographed it. But could not find one anywhere.

Eventually I looked on Britain from Above and found a series of aerial
photographs of the bleachworks which showed also the cottage.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

Post by MB

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
And/or Luftwaffe action, and urban redevelopment (lots in 1960s).
http://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/ has a lot of pictures from around
1921 - not necessarily straight-down, but at about 45 degree angle, so
you can often see the buildings. Covers quite a lot of the UK. I was

[]

Post by MB
One of my Great Grandfather's sisters lived in a small cottage in
Bolton, she had seven or eight children there, all illegitimate and

[]

Post by MB
It cannot have been very salubrious because there was bleachworks near

[]

Post by MB
There is just the footprint now (*) but I wanted to see a picture, I

[Was that "(*)" connected to something? If so, it got lost by the time
your post reached me.]

Post by MB
thought that if it had been old and picturesque then surely someone
must have drawn, painted or photographed it. But could not find one
anywhere.

(Local museum/history society maybe? Though I fear Britain probably has
too many such cottages for them all to have been painted!)

Post by MB
Eventually I looked on Britain from Above and found a series of aerial
photographs of the bleachworks which showed also the cottage.

Glad to have helped! Yes, it's a good resource; it _tends_ to
concentrate on factories, docks, mines, and the like, but these often
will include nearby - especially dense housing, as often found near such
(colliery rows and the like). Also schools, hospitals, football grounds,
big hotels, churches, ... . That's how I found Turner street in
Newcastle - there was just a dense area of housing visible behind a
picture of the docks. It was at quite a shallow angle - I wouldn't have
been able to reliably identify it if I hadn't also had a streetmap of
the area from the period.

[MB]

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
(Local museum/history society maybe? Though I fear Britain probably has
too many such cottages for them all to have been painted!)

Not in urban areas.

[MB]

Post by knuttle
Taking pictures of where our ancestors lived is one of the fun part of
the research.
One example: I was with my mother and we were taking pictures of her
grandfathers home. While we were stopped the current owner came down
to the road asking who we were and why were we photographing his home.
When he learned, we talked for about 20 minutes. We talked about the
Hay fork that my mother remember riding across the barn, and found it
still existed but in the owner's brother's barn.

Many years ago when I got interested in family history, I visited the
area in North Wales where my Taid had lived. I had not been there for
many years so was trying to work out the way up to his old house.

A man came across from a house over the road, probably just being nosey
but when cam back to my car he invited me inside and answered some
questions about Taid and his family.

I also went into the village and was trying to work out where he was
born, I went and asked in a small Post Office. I taken through into the
house and shown a book on the history of the school that had been over
the road, lots of my family were listed as having given money to build
the school.

P.S. The school is now An Caban in Brynrefail and has a very good cafe
(presume it is still open).

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 at 08:50:10, Colin Bignell <***@bignell.me.uk> wrote
(my responses usually follow points raised):
[]

Post by Colin Bignell
* As an aside, I found a couple of generations of related people had
been born in a poorhouse. Further checking showed that, in both cases,
their parents were the Warden and the Matron of those poorhouses.

At least one of the LostCousins newsletters in the past few months
included a favourable review of a book or two about the poorhouse
system. (These newsletters are free and online, and there's a search
function.)

[Roger Mills]

Post by Colin Bignell

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]

Post by Colin Bignell

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
What did he say in the 1911 census? That might also give who (if

[]

Post by Colin Bignell
Thanks for the reply. I'm using Ancestry to build my family tree and

(Make sure you have a copy of all data independent of Ancestry.)

Thanks for the tip. I'm not sure I could manage that for everybody in my
tree. There are over 4,000 of them and the number is increasing as I
drill down some side branches, to discover where my DNA matches fit in.
It would be probably be practical for my direct ancestors, of whom I
have so far found 383, out of possible 4,096 if I were able to trace
them all back as many generations as my direct male line.
I am sure that some of my early entries are a bit dubious, but I have
rechecked the main trunk and the most important side branches in light
of experience. I'm not sure whether it was the posthumous marriage or
the ancestor who lived to 135 that alerted me to the fact that a lot of
people don't check the data they put in their trees, which Ancestry then
shares with others.

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by Colin Bignell
hadn't noticed that it didn't offer the 1911 census for him, although

I've hardly ever relied on Ancestry to find census entries in that way
- I've nearly always searched the census(es) for the person.

As I said, I am new at this and haven't got into much independent
research yet, other than looking through British newspaper archives
online, which have been quite useful at times.
Plans for later in the year are for a trip to a couple of records
office, one possibly with my cousin. She gave me a head start on my main
family line from a tree she researched several years ago. That was all
done by visiting records offices and looking up original documents.
However, she is particularly interested in tracking down more
information about our great-grandfather and those records are probably
in Buckinghamshire, which she didn't visit. I also hope to visit a few
graveyards and to see any surviving places my ancestors lived. Google
street view has confirmed that some of them are still there.

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by Colin Bignell
it did offer it for his father, who has exactly the same first and
middle names. (I do wish some of my ancestors had been a bit more

Tell us about it (-:. It's a common problem!

Post by Colin Bignell
creative with names). Searching for the 1911 census entry, having
read your reply, it gives the much clearer description of House
Demolisher.

Glad to help!
[]

Post by Colin Bignell
As you can probably tell, I've not been at this very long.

Welcome to the hobby - we all started somewhere!

I started by accident. My partner of almost 50 years, Barbara, died last
August and her cousin, who has a comprehensive family tree on
MyHeritage, asked if I could help with some questions that she was not
willing to answer. Probably because she was sure that he wouldn't stop
asking questions if she answered even one. I could tell him the date of
her birth, but not things like when her father died. However, he gave me
full access to his tree and revived an interest in working out just how
many cousins I have (I'm still missing a few). It has grown from there.

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
(When your Ancestry sub runs out, give FindMyPast a go. Both have
quirks [and when you get back to using parish records etc., each has
areas the other doesn't]. Some people alternate between them.)
[]

I use Ancestry because it is the platform one of Barbara's friends uses.
She has been using it for years and has been very helpful in guiding me.

I prefer FindMyPast because they're invariably first off the mark with
new resources such as the 1921 census.

You might also find LostCousins.com useful. You enter details of your
ancestors as found in certain specified censuses and it matches you with
people who have recorded the same entries - who just may be distantly
related to you.

[Peter Johnson]

On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 17:58:23 +0000, Roger Mills

Post by Roger Mills
I prefer FindMyPast because they're invariably first off the mark with
new resources such as the 1921 census.

Being first but charging members extra to see the records doesn't do
it for me. I can wait for Ancestry to catch up.
FMP is useful for its church records, though, and I occasionally take
a short subscription to access them.

[Roger Mills]

Post by Peter Johnson
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 17:58:23 +0000, Roger Mills

Post by Roger Mills
I prefer FindMyPast because they're invariably first off the mark with
new resources such as the 1921 census.

Being first but charging members extra to see the records doesn't do
it for me. I can wait for Ancestry to catch up.
FMP is useful for its church records, though, and I occasionally take
a short subscription to access them.

Yes, I shall wait until the 1921 census is covered by my FMP
subscription - but that's likely to be earlier than Ancestry.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 at 15:49:08, Peter Johnson

Post by Peter Johnson
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 17:58:23 +0000, Roger Mills

Post by Roger Mills
I prefer FindMyPast because they're invariably first off the mark with
new resources such as the 1921 census.

Being first but charging members extra to see the records doesn't do
it for me. I can wait for Ancestry to catch up.

Agreed, (Though will Ancestry charge extra too?)

Post by Peter Johnson
FMP is useful for its church records, though, and I occasionally take
a short subscription to access them.

Unfortunately, the two companies each have records the other doesn't.
The most recent list I have of which company has which counties is I'm
afraid from 2017:
https://www.lostcousins.com/newsletters2/oct17news.htm#Masterclass
(scroll down to the map then about another six paragraphs). I have a
more recent list
https://www.lostcousins.com/newsletters2/midnov21news.htm#FMPoffer, but
that only lists the ones FMP has. (Note those links are not available
between 1 and 2 a. m. every day.)

[knuttle]

Post by Colin Bignell

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]

Post by Colin Bignell

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
What did he say in the 1911 census? That might also give who (if

[]

Post by Colin Bignell
Thanks for the reply. I'm using Ancestry to build my family tree and

(Make sure you have a copy of all data independent of Ancestry.)

Thanks for the tip. I'm not sure I could manage that for everybody in my
tree. There are over 4,000 of them and the number is increasing as I
drill down some side branches, to discover where my DNA matches fit in.
It would be probably be practical for my direct ancestors, of whom I
have so far found 383, out of possible 4,096 if I were able to trace
them all back as many generations as my direct male line.
I am sure that some of my early entries are a bit dubious, but I have
rechecked the main trunk and the most important side branches in light
of experience. I'm not sure whether it was the posthumous marriage or
the ancestor who lived to 135 that alerted me to the fact that a lot of
people don't check the data they put in their trees, which Ancestry then
shares with others.

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by Colin Bignell
hadn't noticed that it didn't offer the 1911 census for him, although

I've hardly ever relied on Ancestry to find census entries in that way
- I've nearly always searched the census(es) for the person.

As I said, I am new at this and haven't got into much independent
research yet, other than looking through British newspaper archives
online, which have been quite useful at times.
Plans for later in the year are for a trip to a couple of records
office, one possibly with my cousin. She gave me a head start on my main
family line from a tree she researched several years ago. That was all
done by visiting records offices and looking up original documents.
However, she is particularly interested in tracking down more
information about our great-grandfather and those records are probably
in Buckinghamshire, which she didn't visit. I also hope to visit a few
graveyards and to see any surviving places my ancestors lived. Google
street view has confirmed that some of them are still there.

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)

Post by Colin Bignell
it did offer it for his father, who has exactly the same first and
middle names. (I do wish some of my ancestors had been a bit more

Tell us about it (-:. It's a common problem!

Post by Colin Bignell
creative with names). Searching for the 1911 census entry, having
read your reply, it gives the much clearer description of House
Demolisher.

Glad to help!
[]

Post by Colin Bignell
As you can probably tell, I've not been at this very long.

Welcome to the hobby - we all started somewhere!

I started by accident. My partner of almost 50 years, Barbara, died last
August and her cousin, who has a comprehensive family tree on
MyHeritage, asked if I could help with some questions that she was not
willing to answer. Probably because she was sure that he wouldn't stop
asking questions if she answered even one. I could tell him the date of
her birth, but not things like when her father died. However, he gave me
full access to his tree and revived an interest in working out just how
many cousins I have (I'm still missing a few). It has grown from there.

Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
(When your Ancestry sub runs out, give FindMyPast a go. Both have
quirks [and when you get back to using parish records etc., each has
areas the other doesn't]. Some people alternate between them.)
[]

I use Ancestry because it is the platform one of Barbara's friends uses.
She has been using it for years and has been very helpful in guiding me.

As with anything, the hardest to accomplish is the first one. (you have
to get over finding reason not to do it)

Get in the habit of downloading any document you bring up to review.
After a while you will have all of the documents on your computer.

Note: Don't just download them to a folder your computer. Set up a
logical folder system that works for you.

The folder system for all of my documents are based on the grandparent
families. The main folder contains the main line of the family, ie
paternal surname, A subfolder exist for each maternal surname lines.

Each family folder contains a folder for general documents, birth,death,
marriage, and similar documents, A folder for Census reports, A
folder for pictures. A folder for burial information, pictures of
tombstones,etc.

As you system grows you may need addition subfolder. In one of my
direct line family, I have established subfolders to each on the
siblings of the earliest generation in the family.

[BrightsideS9]

Post by Colin Bignell
I'm new here, so please don't throw things if I have got the wrong group.
First decade of 20th century, one of my ancestors entered House Breaker
as his occupation on his marriage certificate. I am assuming he isn't
admitting to a life of crime, but can anybody confirm or refute my
assumption that he was what today would probably be called a demolition
operative? I.e. he knocked down houses, possibly reclaiming anything
with scrap value.
I've been surprised by what some occupations turn out to be before, but
the places I usually look up old job descriptions don't help here.

Try http://www.finedictionary.com/breakers.html and click on the
picture ""House Breaker".

It seems this guy is proud of demolishing The Elzabeth Tower (as it is
now known).

I would agree that the named profession on the marriage cert is what
is now called a "demolition opeartive".

[Colin Bignell]

Post by BrightsideS9

Post by Colin Bignell
I'm new here, so please don't throw things if I have got the wrong group.
First decade of 20th century, one of my ancestors entered House Breaker
as his occupation on his marriage certificate. I am assuming he isn't
admitting to a life of crime, but can anybody confirm or refute my
assumption that he was what today would probably be called a demolition
operative? I.e. he knocked down houses, possibly reclaiming anything
with scrap value.
I've been surprised by what some occupations turn out to be before, but
the places I usually look up old job descriptions don't help here.

Try http://www.finedictionary.com/breakers.html and click on the
picture ""House Breaker".
It seems this guy is proud of demolishing The Elzabeth Tower (as it is
now known).
I would agree that the named profession on the marriage cert is what
is now called a "demolition opeartive".

Thank you for that link. The picture is marvellous.

[Nigel Reed]

On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 13:59:35 +0000

Post by Colin Bignell
I'm new here, so please don't throw things if I have got the wrong group.
First decade of 20th century, one of my ancestors entered House
Breaker as his occupation on his marriage certificate. I am assuming
he isn't admitting to a life of crime, but can anybody confirm or
refute my assumption that he was what today would probably be called
a demolition operative? I.e. he knocked down houses, possibly
reclaiming anything with scrap value.
I've been surprised by what some occupations turn out to be before,
but the places I usually look up old job descriptions don't help here.

According to Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housebreaker_(business)


A housebreaker is an organisation that specialises in the disposition
of large, old residential buildings.

From the late 19th century and peaking in the mid 20th, many large
country houses, manors, stately homes, and castles in the United
Kingdom became impractical to maintain; initially due to the repeal of
the Corn Laws and the late 19th-century agricultural depression, later
because of cultural changes following the First World War and then
requisitioning during the Second World War. Often, they were sold to
housebreakers such as Crowthers of London or Charles Brand of Dundee
for disposal of their contents and demolition.

Typically, after an initial 'walk-round sale' or auction was carried
out, fixtures, fittings, and occasionally whole rooms, were sold off to
museums or for re-installation in other properties. The main buildings
were then un-roofed or demolished (see Destruction of country houses in
20th-century Britain).

From 1969, the destruction of houses of architectural or historical
significance was prohibited by law and the job of the housebreakers
ended. An estimated 1,800 buildings were disposed of by housebreakers
before this time.

Welcome to the group.

[Colin Bignell]

Post by Nigel Reed
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 13:59:35 +0000

Post by Colin Bignell
I'm new here, so please don't throw things if I have got the wrong group.
First decade of 20th century, one of my ancestors entered House
Breaker as his occupation on his marriage certificate. I am assuming
he isn't admitting to a life of crime, but can anybody confirm or
refute my assumption that he was what today would probably be called
a demolition operative? I.e. he knocked down houses, possibly
reclaiming anything with scrap value.
I've been surprised by what some occupations turn out to be before,
but the places I usually look up old job descriptions don't help here.

According to Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housebreaker_(business)
A housebreaker is an organisation that specialises in the disposition
of large, old residential buildings.
From the late 19th century and peaking in the mid 20th, many large
country houses, manors, stately homes, and castles in the United
Kingdom became impractical to maintain; initially due to the repeal of
the Corn Laws and the late 19th-century agricultural depression, later
because of cultural changes following the First World War and then
requisitioning during the Second World War. Often, they were sold to
housebreakers such as Crowthers of London or Charles Brand of Dundee
for disposal of their contents and demolition.
Typically, after an initial 'walk-round sale' or auction was carried
out, fixtures, fittings, and occasionally whole rooms, were sold off to
museums or for re-installation in other properties. The main buildings
were then un-roofed or demolished (see Destruction of country houses in
20th-century Britain).
From 1969, the destruction of houses of architectural or historical
significance was prohibited by law and the job of the housebreakers
ended. An estimated 1,800 buildings were disposed of by housebreakers
before this time.

Thank you for that link. I didn't find it when I Googled, but that may
be because I searched for house breaker, rather than housebreaker. As he
had been a plasterer in 1901, I doubt he was in the business of buying
up large houses, but it suggests he was employed by somebody who did.

Post by Nigel Reed
Welcome to the group.

Thank you. I'll try not to be a nuisance.

[John]

Post by Colin Bignell
I'm new here, so please don't throw things if I have got the wrong group.
First decade of 20th century, one of my ancestors entered House Breaker
as his occupation on his marriage certificate. I am assuming he isn't
admitting to a life of crime, but can anybody confirm or refute my
assumption that he was what today would probably be called a demolition
operative? I.e. he knocked down houses, possibly reclaiming anything
with scrap value.
I've been surprised by what some occupations turn out to be before, but
the places I usually look up old job descriptions don't help here.

Are you sure he was not a horse breaker

[Colin Bignell]

Post by John

Post by Colin Bignell
I'm new here, so please don't throw things if I have got the wrong group.
First decade of 20th century, one of my ancestors entered House Breaker
as his occupation on his marriage certificate. I am assuming he isn't
admitting to a life of crime, but can anybody confirm or refute my
assumption that he was what today would probably be called a demolition
operative? I.e. he knocked down houses, possibly reclaiming anything
with scrap value.
I've been surprised by what some occupations turn out to be before, but
the places I usually look up old job descriptions don't help here.

Are you sure he was not a horse breaker

The hand writing is quite clear and, following a lead given here, I have
found he gave his occupation as house demolisher in the 1911 census.

[Tony Proctor]

Post by Colin Bignell
I'm new here, so please don't throw things if I have got the wrong group.
First decade of 20th century, one of my ancestors entered House Breaker as his occupation on his marriage certificate. I am assuming he isn't
admitting to a life of crime, but can anybody confirm or refute my assumption that he was what today would probably be called a demolition operative?
I.e. he knocked down houses, possibly reclaiming anything with scrap value.
I've been surprised by what some occupations turn out to be before, but the places I usually look up old job descriptions don't help here.

It would meaning dismantling houses, Colin. These days, re-development usually requires bulldozing all the old walls and contents, and using it for
landfill, but back then stuff would be re-claimed and re-used. This still occurs here in Ireland if the old building had real limestone walls, or real
slates on the roof, or real wood floors, although the reason is now as much about authenticity as cost.

Tony

[Colin Bignell]

Post by Tony Proctor

Post by Colin Bignell
I'm new here, so please don't throw things if I have got the wrong group.
First decade of 20th century, one of my ancestors entered House
Breaker as his occupation on his marriage certificate. I am assuming
he isn't admitting to a life of crime, but can anybody confirm or
refute my assumption that he was what today would probably be called a
demolition operative? I.e. he knocked down houses, possibly reclaiming
anything with scrap value.
I've been surprised by what some occupations turn out to be before,
but the places I usually look up old job descriptions don't help here.

It would meaning dismantling houses, Colin. These days, re-development
usually requires bulldozing all the old walls and contents, and using it
for landfill, but back then stuff would be re-claimed and re-used. This
still occurs here in Ireland if the old building had real limestone
walls, or real slates on the roof, or real wood floors, although the
reason is now as much about authenticity as cost.
Tony

Thank you. In the 1911 census, he put down the rather clearer occupation
of house demolisher, but I hadn't spotted that when I wrote my enquiry.