tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4361643719072455990.post7116691199285733805..comments2024-02-06T01:09:04.011-06:00Comments on Long Lost Relatives.net: Madness Monday - The case of the Missing Mary KellySusan Petersenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02788283253544225956noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4361643719072455990.post-78314343215237663812010-07-08T21:03:04.871-05:002010-07-08T21:03:04.871-05:00Kathi - I think you have a pretty good theory goin...Kathi - I think you have a pretty good theory going there. However, W.D. was very much alive at the time and he outlived his wife. Mary died in 1886 and W.D. died ten years later. Although - this could be a reference to Mary - so that would make her husband W.D. the missing person. Maybe I need to be looking for him in the census instead. Either way - one of them wasn't enumerated with the remainder of the family for this census. I appreciate your insight!Susan Petersenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02788283253544225956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4361643719072455990.post-50598660600783198472010-07-05T21:46:31.790-05:002010-07-05T21:46:31.790-05:00Susan, do the stats fit Mary? This could be referr...Susan, do the stats fit Mary? This could be referring to her. I have a census that lists the widow by the husband's initials, widow, female, housekeeper, etc. Was W.D deceased at this time? Kathi M.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15370542182133517725noreply@blogger.com