Okay more deciphering

[maggie_4_7]

Sorry about this I know I'm a nuisance. Its a very bad copy I can't believe I even found it.

Attached snippet from Scottish 1871 census.

62

The fifth person down...

I think it says
James Young
Elizabeth Young
Richard Young

But on James relationship to head I think it says Boarder, does Elizabeth's if it is Elizabeth (not even sure of the name) say Ditto? and what does it have for occupation for Elizabeth? James is Iron Stone Miner I think.

I am thinking this is another wife or his sister living with him to look after Richard who was 3 years old when his mother died but he is now 9 years old. I can't find a marriage for James Young and Elizabeth anywhere that fits!

Also Mods if I have shown to much of image please let me know so I can edit.

[Just Gillian]

I think James and Richard are correct. Condition and occupation for the second name are Ditto. The second person's age is in the male column so unlikely to be Elizabeth.

[maggie_4_7]

The second person's age is in the male column so unlikely to be Elizabeth.

Oh yes - see I missed that, I've been looking for Elizabeth! Its probably one of his brothers. It was the R underneath that looked like a lower case Z on the name above its how I write my lower case Z.

:rolleyes:

Edit to say: Is it Charles?

[Just Gillian]

I thought probably Charles but it's a terrible image!

If you want to be sure, you could ask SP to rescan it for you.

Edit - having said that, I'm not sure about Charles now lol There seems to be one stroke too many at the start of the name.

[maggie_4_7]

Sorry I've been out.

Will they rescan then? I would have thought the orginal image is the problem and recanning wouldn't be any help.

I think it is Charles maybe someone else will have a look later.

[Uncle John]

Sorry I've been out.

Will they rescan then? I would have thought the orginal image is the problem and recanning wouldn't be any help.

I think it is Charles maybe someone else will have a look later.

They are very good at getting the very best image from the original register etc., and will usually email you the image. It takes some time for the improved image to get loaded on SP.

[Just Gillian]

They are usually very good about illegible images. I've had quite a few illegible BMD images, including some very faint ones, rescanned and sent to me via snail or email and they have been much clearer.

If you go to "Contact us" at the bottom of the opening page, there's a link to "Continue here to fill out the contact us form". The third option from the bottom on the next page is "Illegible image"

[maggie_4_7]

Okay thank you Just Gillian and Uncle John.

I've never done that before but I shall go and send a message now.

[maggie_4_7]

Just to let you know I received an email today from SP Customer Services apologising for the poor quality of the scane. Said they were going to get it rescanned and uploaded to SP and will email me a copy when it is done.

So thank you for that. I never realised you could do that.

[Uncle John]

Told you they were helpful. You'll be surprised how much better the scan is. And they may refund you some credits.

[Just Gillian]

Glad they are going to rescan for you Maggie.

My best rescan ever was an 1855 death cert. Place of birth, how long resident in the area, names and ages of all the children etc were all illegible first time round. Someone on one of the forums told me about the rescan option and I couldn't believe the clarity when it arrived. I also had my 5 credits refunded.

[maggie_4_7]

Lo and behold there was an email when I got home with new rescanned image :)

63

It was James' brother Charles with him and James' son Richard :)

[Uncle John]

My best rescan ever was an 1855 death cert. Place of birth, how long resident in the area, names and ages of all the children etc were all illegible first time round. Someone on one of the forums told me about the rescan option and I couldn't believe the clarity when it arrived. I also had my 5 credits refunded.

Might have been me. I had an 1855 birth rescanned. They posted it to me (2 x A3 sheets - 1855 entries were double page). The legibility problem arose because the registrar used such a fine nib that the original scan missed most of the writing. It was a work of art and I'm sorry I don't still have it. It went in my aunt's 90th. birthday present, a family tree for her.

[Kit]

That is a fantastic rescan Maggie.

Lucky you posted on here.

My first impression was Charles and then by power of suggestion I decided you were right and it was Elizabeth lol.

[Just Gillian]

Nice one Maggie!

And full marks to SP for their, as always, rapid response.

It probably was you UJ. As I recall, you were often the one on GR who solved my problems when I was first learning the ropes on SP.