Question Author
Thanks for looking Rose, mmmm, on the 1851 henry is recorded as hobard and i thought that margaret was his wife but actually you may be right as on that one they are both recorded as unmarried and he is son-in-law to william rose, i've made the classic mistake of taking son-in-law as the child of a daughter whereas here it means step-son, it makes sense as henry was in leicestershire in 1841 aged 10 (henry Hobard) but, i've realised just now the link, the family he is with includes a Catherine Winsley aged 85 and i have henry's baptism in 1828 in westminster as the son of peter hoban and hannah winsley, so this must be Hannah Hoban nee Winsley on the 1851,
1841 England Census
Name: Cathl Winsley
Age: 85
Estimated Birth Year: abt 1756
Gender: Female
Where born: Leicestershire, England
Civil parish: Wimeswold
Hundred: East Goscote
County/Island: Leicestershire
Country: England
Street Address:
Occupation:
Registration district: Loughborough
Sub-registration district: Leake
Piece: 593
Book: 27
Folio: 18
Page Number: 3
Household Members:
Name Age
Joseph Utting 50
Beath Utting 50
Mary Utting 25
Elizh Utting 24
Martha Utting 20
Cathl Utting 18
Richard Utting 12
Cathl Winsley 85
Henry Hoband 10
that also means that the twins must have been from a marriage of Henry Hoban and Margaret Sweeney I think, not the maragaret hoban on the 1851, one of the twins was called catherine, which i think will mean the catherine winsley aged 85 is henry's maternal grandmother, her daughter Hannah was born nottinghamshire which is why henry went there and married Sarah Ann who then moved to Dukinfield........sorry Rose it's quite conusing just coming into it I know, but it's made better sense with your fresh eyes! thnks.