I've been researching several families in the Beler registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been able
to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?


--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/
http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 15:38:15 +0200
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been able
to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?

Is it possible they were not home at the time of the census? They could
have been visiting friends or traveling? I've seen this occasionally.
Have you tried surrounding areas?

Also try different spellings. I remember in the 1881 census one of my Whitworth's names was not transcribed properly.


--
End Of The Line BBS - Plano, TX
telnet endofthelinebbs.com 23

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 21/03/2022 13:38, Steve Hayes wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been able
to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?

There are no missing sections of Derbyshire census in 1871. See useful
list here- https://www.findmypast.co.uk/articles/census-for-england-wales-and-scotland-missing-pieces

Try the free search on Ancestry or Findmypast in case it is just
transcribed differently. If your families are in the same area it could
be the same enumerator with poor writing or hearing!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 15:38:15 +0200, Steve Hayes
<hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler

Belper?

registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been able
to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?

Have you checked up on e.g. their neighbours to see if they (or rather
their addresses) are present ? That might also solve mistranscription
problems if someone has messed up reading the names.

Were they in occupations which could have involved mobility?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 23:45:05 +0000, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 15:38:15 +0200, Steve Hayes
<hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler

Belper?

registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been able
to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just >>FamilySearch?

Have you checked up on e.g. their neighbours to see if they (or rather
their addresses) are present ? That might also solve mistranscription >problems if someone has messed up reading the names.

Were they in occupations which could have involved mobility?

Most of them were framework knitters, quarrymen or coal miners.

One moved from being a coalminer in the Belpwer district in 1861 to
being a scavenger for the district council in Basford in
Nottinghamshire in 1881, and was back down the mine in 1891, but in Nottinghamshire.


--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/
http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 10:21:49 -0500, Nigel Reed
<sysop@endofthelinebbs.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 15:38:15 +0200
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been able
to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?

Is it possible they were not home at the time of the census? They could
have been visiting friends or traveling? I've seen this occasionally.
Have you tried surrounding areas?

I'd be rather surised if 20 different families were not at home on the
same night in 1871, yet were at home in 1861 and 1881.

Sorry, the district should be Belper.


--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/
http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 22/03/2022 11:36, Steve Hayes wrote:

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 23:45:05 +0000, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 15:38:15 +0200, Steve Hayes
<hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler

Belper?

registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been able
to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?

Have you checked up on e.g. their neighbours to see if they (or rather
their addresses) are present ? That might also solve mistranscription
problems if someone has messed up reading the names.

Were they in occupations which could have involved mobility?

Most of them were framework knitters, quarrymen or coal miners.

One moved from being a coalminer in the Belpwer district in 1861 to
being a scavenger for the district council in Basford in
Nottinghamshire in 1881, and was back down the mine in 1891, but in Nottinghamshire.

Why not give enough information (names,DoB, etc) so others can search
for them?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 12:32:45 +0200
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 10:21:49 -0500, Nigel Reed
<sysop@endofthelinebbs.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 15:38:15 +0200
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been
able to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?

Is it possible they were not home at the time of the census? They
could have been visiting friends or traveling? I've seen this
occasionally. Have you tried surrounding areas?

I'd be rather surised if 20 different families were not at home on the
same night in 1871, yet were at home in 1861 and 1881.

Maybe they took a family holiday ;) Sorry, but to me "several" doesn't
equate to 20.




--
End Of The Line BBS - Plano, TX
telnet endofthelinebbs.com 23

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 22/03/2022 15:45, Nigel Reed wrote:

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 12:32:45 +0200
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 10:21:49 -0500, Nigel Reed
<sysop@endofthelinebbs.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 15:38:15 +0200
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been
able to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?

Is it possible they were not home at the time of the census? They
could have been visiting friends or traveling? I've seen this
occasionally. Have you tried surrounding areas?

I'd be rather surised if 20 different families were not at home on the
same night in 1871, yet were at home in 1861 and 1881.

Maybe they took a family holiday ;) Sorry, but to me "several" doesn't
equate to 20.

It is possible that one or more folios, present in the original books,
have been accidentally omitted from the digitisation (and, assuming the digitisation was done from microfilm, perhaps also from the microfilm).

This might be apparent from a break in the folio and page numbers. You
are not going to want to browse the whole of Belper (though you probably
would have done in pre-internet days when there was no alternative), but
if you can narrow down the area where the families should be, you might
be able to page through to check.

I found such an instance in the 1851 census for a town in Wales, where
entries I had transcribed from the microfilm years ago were missing from
either Findmypast or Ancestry (or both - I forget). This involved a
significant number of missing pages, and they did correct it after I
drew their attention to it.

It might be worth raising the query on a Derbyshire specific forum, for
example https://groups.io/g/derbysgen2 , in case someone with local
knowledge has an answer.

--
Chris Pitt Lewis

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 21/03/2022 13:38, Steve Hayes wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been able
to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?

Tell us who you are looking for and we can check Ancestry and/or FMP.

--
Jenny M Benson
Wrexham, UK

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 10:45:09 -0500, Nigel Reed
<sysop@endofthelinebbs.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 12:32:45 +0200
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 10:21:49 -0500, Nigel Reed
<sysop@endofthelinebbs.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 15:38:15 +0200
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been
able to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?

Is it possible they were not home at the time of the census? They
could have been visiting friends or traveling? I've seen this
occasionally. Have you tried surrounding areas?

I'd be rather surised if 20 different families were not at home on the
same night in 1871, yet were at home in 1861 and 1881.

Maybe they took a family holiday ;) Sorry, but to me "several" doesn't
equate to 20.

"Several" means more than two Different things -- in other words, in
this instance, separate and distinct families living in different
households. It is an indeterminat numbe and so doesn't "equate" with
any particular value, and the borderline between "several" and "many"
is vague and shifting.

I would be very surprised if "several" families all decided to go on
holiday on 2 April 1871.






--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/
http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:13:39 +0000, Jenny M Benson
<NemoNews@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

Tell us who you are looking for and we can check Ancestry and/or FMP.

Thanks very much for the offer.

I'll make a note of the ones I can't find and post some of them later
with a request.



--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/
http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:49:55 +0000, Chris Pitt Lewis
<chris@cjpl.co.uk> wrote:

It is possible that one or more folios, present in the original books,
have been accidentally omitted from the digitisation (and, assuming the >digitisation was done from microfilm, perhaps also from the microfilm).

Yes, that is what I was asking -- if anyone knew of something like
that happening in the Belper district.

This might be apparent from a break in the folio and page numbers. You
are not going to want to browse the whole of Belper (though you probably >would have done in pre-internet days when there was no alternative), but
if you can narrow down the area where the families should be, you might
be able to page through to check.

I suppose I could go the the nearest LDS FHS and (70 km away) order
the relevant microfilm and check. At one time I used to do that, and
go through the whole film, transctibing any records with surnames of
interest, but the proce of petrol hasd just gone up again.

I found such an instance in the 1851 census for a town in Wales, where >entries I had transcribed from the microfilm years ago were missing from >either Findmypast or Ancestry (or both - I forget). This involved a >significant number of missing pages, and they did correct it after I
drew their attention to it.

Yes, I wondered if something like that had happened in Belper, or
perhaps the original enumperation books had been lost.

It might be worth raising the query on a Derbyshire specific forum, for >example https://groups.io/g/derbysgen2 , in case someone with local
knowledge has an answer.

Thanks for that -- we're doing a lot of work on a lot of linked
Derbyshire families at the moment, so it might well be wroth joining.


--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/
http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 21/03/2022 13:38, Steve Hayes wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been able
to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?

I'm sure a lot people would like to have a search for these families, Steve, if you want to publish some details.

I have done a lot of Derbyshire research myself, and the only person I could never find was a Sarah Elizabeth WILDGOOSE, born 1842 in Darley Dale. I
believe she ran away from her husband, William ELLIOTT, who then remarried about 7 years later (something of a giveaway) but I have found no evidence
of any death. She was in the 1871 census but disappeared after that.

Tony

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 at 12:59:25, Tony Proctor
<tony@proctor_NoMore_SPAM.net> wrote (my responses usually FOLLOW):
[]

I have done a lot of Derbyshire research myself, and the only person I
could never find was a Sarah Elizabeth WILDGOOSE, born 1842 in Darley
Dale. I believe she ran away from her husband, William ELLIOTT, who
then remarried about 7 years later (something of a giveaway) but I have
found no evidence of any death. She was in the 1871 census but
disappeared after that.

Tony

I had to check the date, to see if you were sending us on a WILDGOOSE
chase!

Useful reminder to look out for such things in about 8 days' time (-:
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Stop calling unmarried people "single" as if they are incomplete. I prefer spouse-free. It is not a coincidence we are the new majority.
- Scott Adams, 2015

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:13:39 +0000, Jenny M Benson
<NemoNews@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

On 21/03/2022 13:38, Steve Hayes wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been able
to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?

Tell us who you are looking for and we can check Ancestry and/or FMP.

Thanks very much for the offer.

Here are two of them that I have not been able to find in the 1871
census on FamilySearch:

George Lowe, born about 1867 in Killamarsh, Derbyshire

Harriet Eley, borin about 1863 in Littleover, Derbyshire




--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/
http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 26/03/2022 05:48, Steve Hayes wrote:

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:13:39 +0000, Jenny M Benson
<NemoNews@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

On 21/03/2022 13:38, Steve Hayes wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been able
to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?

Tell us who you are looking for and we can check Ancestry and/or FMP.

Thanks very much for the offer.

Here are two of them that I have not been able to find in the 1871
census on FamilySearch:

George Lowe, born about 1867 in Killamarsh, Derbyshire

Harriet Eley, borin about 1863 in Littleover, Derbyshire

Perhaps you should have checked whether that census was available?

A quick search of the FamilySearch catalogue shows they do not have any
of the 1871 England and Wales Census.
The only link is to the records on Findmypast where the other
FamilySearch England and Wales census records come from.
See this page
https://www.familysearch.org/search/collection/1538354

The 1871 England and Wales census is searchable on both Ancestry and
Findmypast with either a 14-day trial or full subscription.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 26/03/2022 04:48, Steve Hayes wrote:

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:13:39 +0000, Jenny M Benson
<NemoNews@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

On 21/03/2022 13:38, Steve Hayes wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been able
to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?

Tell us who you are looking for and we can check Ancestry and/or FMP.

Thanks very much for the offer.

Here are two of them that I have not been able to find in the 1871
census on FamilySearch:

George Lowe, born about 1867 in Killamarsh, Derbyshire

Either/both of these?

First name(s) Last name Relationship Marital status Sex Age Birth
year Occupation Birth place
William Lowe Head - Male 42 1829 - Leicestershire, England
Sarah Lowe Wife - Female 40 1831 - Nottinghamshire, England
William Lowe Son - Male 16 1855 - Derbyshire, England
Thomas Lowe Son - Male 14 1857 - Derbyshire, England
Elizabeth Lowe Daughter - Female 9 1862 - Derbyshire, England
Susan Lowe Daughter - Female 7 1864 - Derbyshire, England
George Lowe Son - Male 4 1867 - Derbyshire, England
George Green Son-in-law - Male 7 1864 - Derbyshire, England
William Green Son-in-law - Male 2 1869 - Derbyshire, England

RG10-3617-26-2

Harriet Eley, borin about 1863 in Littleover, Derbyshire

First name(s) Last name Relationship Marital status Sex Age Birth
year Occupation Birth place
John Eley Head - Male 48 1823 - Derbyshire, England
Fanny Eley Wife - Female 42 1829 - Derbyshire, England
John Eley Son - Male 19 1852 - Derbyshire, England
Edward Eley Son - Male 17 1854 - Derbyshire, England
Ann Eley Daughter - Female 13 1858 - Derbyshire, England
Harriet Eley Daughter - Female 8 1863 - Derbyshire, England
Henry Eley Son - Male 5 1866 - Derbyshire, England
Lucy Eley Daughter - Female 3 1868 - Derbyshire, England
Elizabeth Eley Daughter - Female 1 1870 - Derbyshire, England

RG10-3668-51-26
--
Jenny M Benson
Wrexham, UK

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 26 Mar 2022 12:10:45 +0100, john
<john1@s145802280.onlinehome.fr> wrote:

Perhaps you should have checked whether that census was available?

A quick search of the FamilySearch catalogue shows they do not have any
of the 1871 England and Wales Census.

But they do have 1871 Census records for a lot of other places.


--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/
http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 26 Mar 2022 10:28:57 +0000, Jenny M Benson
<NemoNews@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

On 26/03/2022 04:48, Steve Hayes wrote:

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:13:39 +0000, Jenny M Benson
<NemoNews@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

On 21/03/2022 13:38, Steve Hayes wrote:

I've been researching several families in the Beler registration
district in Derbyshire, mainly on FamilySearch, and haven't been able
to find any of them in the 1871 Census.

Was there something wrong with it in Derbyshire, or is it just
FamilySearch?

Tell us who you are looking for and we can check Ancestry and/or FMP.

Thanks very much for the offer.

Here are two of them that I have not been able to find in the 1871
census on FamilySearch:

George Lowe, born about 1867 in Killamarsh, Derbyshire

Either/both of these?

First name(s) Last name Relationship Marital status Sex Age Birth
year Occupation Birth place
William Lowe Head - Male 42 1829 - Leicestershire, England
Sarah Lowe Wife - Female 40 1831 - Nottinghamshire, England
William Lowe Son - Male 16 1855 - Derbyshire, England
Thomas Lowe Son - Male 14 1857 - Derbyshire, England
Elizabeth Lowe Daughter - Female 9 1862 - Derbyshire, England
Susan Lowe Daughter - Female 7 1864 - Derbyshire, England
George Lowe Son - Male 4 1867 - Derbyshire, England
George Green Son-in-law - Male 7 1864 - Derbyshire, England
William Green Son-in-law - Male 2 1869 - Derbyshire, England

RG10-3617-26-2

Thanks very much.

That tells me, which the other censuses didn't, that I must look for
the death of the husband of Sarah Green between 1868 and 1871, and a
marriage of Sarah Green to William Lowe in the same period.

It also tells me about the daughter Susan Lowe that I had no other
record of.

Harriet Eley, borin about 1863 in Littleover, Derbyshire

First name(s) Last name Relationship Marital status Sex Age Birth
year Occupation Birth place
John Eley Head - Male 48 1823 - Derbyshire, England
Fanny Eley Wife - Female 42 1829 - Derbyshire, England
John Eley Son - Male 19 1852 - Derbyshire, England
Edward Eley Son - Male 17 1854 - Derbyshire, England
Ann Eley Daughter - Female 13 1858 - Derbyshire, England
Harriet Eley Daughter - Female 8 1863 - Derbyshire, England
Henry Eley Son - Male 5 1866 - Derbyshire, England
Lucy Eley Daughter - Female 3 1868 - Derbyshire, England
Elizabeth Eley Daughter - Female 1 1870 - Derbyshire, England

RG10-3668-51-26

Again, thanks very much for that. It is very helpful.



--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/
http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 27/03/2022 06:57, Steve Hayes wrote:

On Sat, 26 Mar 2022 12:10:45 +0100, john
<john1@s145802280.onlinehome.fr> wrote:

Perhaps you should have checked whether that census was available?

A quick search of the FamilySearch catalogue shows they do not have any
of the 1871 England and Wales Census.

But they do have 1871 Census records for a lot of other places.

They DID have 1871 census records available for general access.

But, if you had checked again https://www.familysearch.org/search/collection/list?fcs=placeId%3A1986340&ec=region%3AUNITED_KINGDOM_IRELAND%2CplaceId%3A1986340

England and Wales Census, 1841
15,782,939 Jul 16, 2021

England and Wales Census, 1851
18,369,674 Jul 16, 2021

England and Wales Census, 1861
19,591,543 Sep 26, 2020

England and Wales Census, 1871
Browse Images Mar 16, 2022 <------------

England and Wales Census, 1881
26,124,851 Jul 30, 2018

England and Wales Census, 1891
29,048,399 Dec 14, 2021

England and Wales Census, 1901
34,138,955 May 22, 2019

England and Wales Census, 1911
36,354,828 Aug 1, 2019

There is a discussion of the problem. https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/91797/england-and-wales-census-1871-problems/

And in particular this answer on the second page:
On 12 November 2021, the contract between TNA (UK National Archives- the owner/custodian of the UK censuses) and FamilySearch expired. This
contract gave FS the right to publish the Images of UK Censuses at FHCs, Affiliate Libraries and to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter Day Saints. The relationship between the two is now governed by
general terms and conditions (not a contract) that permit FamilySearch
to make the images available at FHCs and Affiliate Libraries. Any
Indexes that FamilySearch themselves created are their own property and
they can keep publishing those if they wish. This I learned by
contacting TNA myself and making a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
request. However some of the Indexes come from FindMyPast, and there's a partnership between FS and FMP that may affect FS's ability to publish
the Indexes.

It seems from other comments the 1841 census may also disappear from FamilySearch

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)