Docherty family Glasgow.....

ninatoo · Post by **ninatoo** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 3:00 am

Okay, and now to confuse matters even MORE!

On the 1881 census I have one of my Docherty family, Sarah, married to James O'Brien and living with several O'Brien children at 4 Sth Pettigrew Street Glasgow.

Looking at the 1881 at SP, I have found a John Docherty and wife Jane living at 5 Sth Pettigrew Street, Glasgow as well as an Ann Docherty living at 4 Sth Pettigrew Street.

While they might only share the same surname, it is very odd that they are all in the same address that I have the sister of Sarah Docherty O'Brien, Jane, living in the 1891 census, as well as Sarah herself, stil with family O'Brien!!!

My head is spinning!!!!

The 'John' in the 1881 is not my John born 1853 as I have him living with his mother in Havannah Street...but surely he has to be connected. And I don't have an Ann...but isn't this all too much of a coincidence?

Nina

JustJean · Post by **JustJean** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 11:50 am

Hi Nina

I haven't looked further but think you could have found a very good clue!!

These are the families you refer to.....

Dwelling: No 5 Sth Pettigrew Str
Census Place: Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Source: FHL Film 0203646 GRO Ref Volume 644-5 EnumDist 37 Page 3
Marr Age Sex Birthplace
John DOCHERTY M 39 M Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Head
Occ: Whitewasher
Jane DOCHERTY M 38 F Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Wife
Mary MC GOLPN U 38 F Ayr, Ayr, Scotland
Rel: Boarder
Occ: Cotton & Wool Winder

Dwelling: No 4 Sth Pettigrew St
Census Place: Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Source: FHL Film 0203646 GRO Ref Volume 644-5 EnumDist 37 Page 7
Marr Age Sex Birthplace
Mary DAVIE W 30 F Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Head
Occ: Shirt Finisher
Robert STEAD U 25 M Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Visitor
Occ: Hammerman
Ann DOCHERTY U 33 F Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Boarder
Occ: Weaver

and now here is your Margaret mn Watson household in 1881....

Dwelling: 2 Harannah St
Census Place: Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Source: FHL Film 0203646 GRO Ref Volume 644-5 EnumDist 39 Page 12
Marr Age Sex Birthplace
Margaret DOCHERTY W 58 F Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Head
Occ: Shawl Fringer
Jane DOCHERTY U 31 F Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Dau
Occ: Shawl Fringer
John DOCHERTY U 28 M Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Son
Occ: Carter
Patrick MC GIVIN 12 M Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Grandson
Occ: Scholar
Margaret ... 3 F Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Grand Daughter
Peter MC MANUS U 28 M Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Boarder
Occ: Bricklayers Laborer

now because you've found a married couple (though would be much easier if they had a wee one still at home with them) you can search for possible John/Jane combinations having Docherty children in Glasgow around 1858-1865 for instance. Not knowing of course if this particular couple did have any children but let's just assume they did. The IGI shows a possible John Dougherty/Jane Kennnedy that might be worth following up....they had these children recorded:

1. JAMES DOUGHERTY - International Genealogical Index
Gender: Male Birth: 22 MAR 1856 Central District, Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland

2. ROBERT DOUGHERTY - International Genealogical Index
Gender: Male Birth: 09 SEP 1858 Anderston, Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland

3. ROBERT DOUGHERTY - International Genealogical Index
Gender: Male Birth: 21 JUL 1861 Calton, Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland

Now I'm not saying this is your family but you can see how I went about this. From this point you've now proven that this couple lived in likely areas...was born in Glasgow.....so likely married there. With the first birth the IGI shows being in 1856 they might have married in 1855...so worth checking the IGI for a marriage. So off we go.....and here we have....

JOHN DOCHERTY
Male Family

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marriages:
Spouse: JANE KENNEDY Family
Marriage: 16 SEP 1853 Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland

Too bad....they beat the 1855 magical year. But good because you now see that the surname was spelled DOCHERTY instead of the Dougherty used later so even more possible of a connection! Unfortunately what you really want is to get backwards another generation and find parents names. Since the marriage is in the OPR you could have this checked at NRH in case the banns states any parents names.....but the odds aren't good it will. The only other thing to try is to locate their deaths. You might need to look for Jane's first as you have two surnames for her. If that is found then you can narrow up a smaller death window for John. Then if you get really lucky and find John's death and it states who his parents were and if his father's name was William or John you have a possible chance he's a grandson of James Docherty and Sarah Boag. Can't prove that unless both his parents are named on his DC and hopefully the parents wll have died post 1855.

Lot of if's in my sample run around but not impossible to strike it rich.

Don't forget too that it might be possible to find a clue in the census....especially since this John/Jane couple have a baby in 1861 Calton that year might be easy to find. See if they had other children. See who else they could be living with.

Again lot of if's.............

Hope in some ridiculous way this helps

!

Best wishes
Jean

ninatoo · Post by **ninatoo** » Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:09 pm

Hi Jean and thanks for all of that wonderful research and hints. It is people like you that keep me going!!

The 1881 for Margaret Watson Docherty and family was a good mystery...I wondered who Patrick McGivin and Margaret belonged to. I thought it was likely the daughter Jane Docherty but I left it after a few searches. This was ages ago. Then when I found Jane's sister Sarah O'Brien in the 1891, who should be living next door but Jane, Patrick and Margaret...Jane had them down as boarders and Margaret now had a surname Fitzgerald. So after some digging I was able to prove that these two were in fact the illigitimate children of Jane.

I think that Jane Kennedy and John Docherty are not the same Jane and John as on the 1881 census as they married in 1853, and by the ages given on the 1881 census, the couple would only have been about 13/14 years of age? Or am I confuddled?

Here is something I forgot all about. I have the OPR extract for the marriage of James Docherty and Margaret Watson, and on the same page there is a John Docherty who married an Elizabeth Donnelly. I forgot this certificate because it only has the couples' names, no parents disappointingly. At the time I received it I wondered if the John was a brother to James (I didn't know about him then) but when I tried to search it I could find no link....too many John Dochertys died to check them ALL to see which one married Elizabeth Docherty. In any case...how likely IS it that these two are brothers, marrying on the same day? (10 April 1842)

Now HERE would be a terrific aid in death searches...to allow a search for a male using spouse's maiden name. While I am at it, a post 1855 birth search would be so much easier if you search including parents' names. Or is that all too easy? Sighhhhhh....

I get disgruntled with SP when I can't find a particularly common name. I so pity the Smith descendents!!! But just how many credits can you spend before getting annoyed? Oh well, off my soap box now

Nina

JustJean · Post by **JustJean** » Mon May 01, 2006 1:34 am

ninatoo wrote:

I think that Jane Kennedy and John Docherty are not the same Jane and John as on the 1881 census as they married in 1853, and by the ages given on the 1881 census, the couple would only have been about 13/14 years of age? Or am I confuddled?

Gee that's odd.....I must have gained a finger this morning and now have lost it

.....I do believe I'm the confuddled one

!

Here is something I forgot all about. I have the OPR extract for the marriage of James Docherty and Margaret Watson, and on the same page there is a John Docherty who married an Elizabeth Donnelly. I forgot this certificate because it only has the couples' names, no parents disappointingly. At the time I received it I wondered if the John was a brother to James (I didn't know about him then) but when I tried to search it I could find no link....too many John Dochertys died to check them ALL to see which one married Elizabeth Docherty. In any case...how likely IS it that these two are brothers, marrying on the same day? (10 April 1842)

Not impossible they had a double wedding. I would think the odds are greater on two identiccal surnames marrying in the same parish same day who were not related!

It might be worth the expense to peek at the only two death records indexed for Eli* D*ty Don*ly ......altho if you have a young marriage age for her in 1842 probably not her as these seem like she would have married in her 30's.....hmmmm

1874 DOCHERTY ELIZABETH DONNELLY F 67 GLASGOW CENTRAL DISTRICT GLASGOW CITY/LANARK 644/01 0144 VIEW (5 CREDITS) ORDER
1881 DOCHERTY ELIZABETH DONNOLLY CAULFIELD F 73 ST ROLLOX GLASGOW CITY/LANARK 644/06 0746 VIEW (5 CREDITS) ORDER

Now here would be a terrific aid in death searches...to allow a search for a male using spouse's maiden name. While I am at it, a post 1855 birth search would be so much easier if you search including parents' names. Or is that all too easy? Sighhhhhh....

I get disgruntled with SP when I can't find a particularly common name. I so pity the Smith descendents!!! But just how many credits can you spend before getting annoyed? Oh well, off my soap box now

Things may not always be indexed this broadly on SP. Of course change takes time

.......so it could well be our grgrandchildren who reap the benefits of any improvements!

Best wishes
Jean

ninatoo · Post by **ninatoo** » Mon May 01, 2006 2:25 am

Hi Jean,

Thanks for those...yes I had searched for Elizabeth Donnelly...forgot wildcards, so hadn't found the second before your post. The first married a Thomas Docherty.

The second married a Michael Caufield, then looks like she was widowed, and then married John Docherty, shoemaker, who died before her. Looking at the OPR entry, this is the correct Elizabeth, as her John was a shoemaker in 1842. However, she would have been a good 15 years older than my John.

A shoemaker....hmmm. Seems like this can't be my John...My John was simply noted as a labourer in the 1841 census.

Unless he changed occupations.

Elizabeth died in the Glasgow City poorhouse. I wonder if that will tell me anything more? In fact she was listed in the online 1881 Glasgow city poorhouse records as a 73 year old widow from Ireland.

I think I may just have to give up before I go broke!!!

I think I am the point of just going around in circles...but I can't help feeling like I am missing something!!! I think the only way I am going to get further is to find a live rellie who can prove they are descended from John or William Docherty.

Nina

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Mon May 01, 2006 9:47 am

ninatoo wrote:.....snipped........Elizabeth died in the Glasgow City poorhouse. I wonder if that will tell me anything more? In fact she was listed in the online 1881 Glasgow city poorhouse records as a 73 year old widow from Ireland.

.......snipped..............

Nina

Well worth asking one of the TS regulars to see if there is a surviving inspector's report at The Mitchell/Glasgow City Archives

David

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Mon May 01, 2006 9:52 am

JustJean wrote:Now here would be a terrific aid in death searches...to allow a search for a male using spouse's maiden name. While I am at it, a post 1855 birth search would be so much easier if you search including parents' names. Or is that all too easy? Sighhhhhh....

Things may not always be indexed this broadly on SP. Of course change takes time .......so it could well be our grgrandchildren who reap the benefits of any improvements!

Best wishes
Jean

It could well be our grandchildren

Unfortunately, it's never been the case that the annual death register indexes have contained the surname of the wife of a married male.

The reason why this was done for a married female is that she still retained her maiden surname in legal terms.

In other words, it would be a massive effort to go back to 1855 and extract and add the required info to the indexes ..................

David

ninatoo · Post by **ninatoo** » Tue May 02, 2006 3:06 am

I think I have just found Sarah Docherty (ms Boag) on the 1861 census living in King Street, High Church District. She had lived in King Street in 1841, in 1851 was with son James and family and seems to have moved out after James died in 1855 to her own place where she is probably subsidised by her boarders.

Still no sign of any of the Williams or Johns I am looking for, and I have decided to call a halt to the search in Scotland. After numerous census, marriage and death searches, I think the elder two either died before 1851 or immigrated. The younger two most probably immigrated or settled somewhere else in Scotland, but given their popular names, they are going to be impossible to find!

As I have never tried to find immigrants before, where would I start for the time period 1841 onwards? Ellis Island site begins too late. Of course they may have just gone to England...I haven't tried there yet!

I like a challenge but this is driving me round the bend!

Nina