NameWilliam Hunter, 43, M
Birth1810-05-24, St Cyrus, Kincardineshire, Scotland
Death1894, Montrose, Angus, Scotland
OccupationCarter
Spouses
Birth1807-11-13, Logie Pert, Angus, Scotland
Death1872, Montrose, Angus, Scotland
Marriage1842-12-25, Montrose, Angus, Scotland
Notes for William Hunter
William Hunter was born at St. Cyrus, Kincardineshire about 1811. He was a carter in Montrose. 1891 census inicates he was born Garvock, Kincardineshire.
The family lived at 5 Victoria Street, Montrose in 1851 and at 1 Victoria Place, Montrose in a four room dwelling in 1861. They had been living in Montrose since at least 1848.
NOTES:
1. In my 1976 publication, the surname of this family was recorded as "Himter." From the handwritting in the 1861 census, this appeared to be the spelling. However, it was not clear. Upon checking the 1851 census, it was obvious that the correct spelling is Hunter.
2. Is it possible that William Low (ID=63), who adopted the middle name Hunter after 1865, took the name from this family? Why he would do so is not known. This couple was the aunt and uncle of William (Hunter) Low.
Notes for Margaret (Spouse 1)
Baptismal date/place given - Possibly born Fettercairn earlier.
When Margaret Low was baptized at Logie Pert on 13 November 1807, the address of her parents James Low and Margaret Law was given as Northwater Bridge, in that parish. There is some discrepency in the records indicating when and where she was born. She was clearly the youngest of seven children, and it is probable that all of her siblings were born in Fettercairn, Kincardineshire. From her age stated in 1855 (51) it would appear that she was born about 1804, and was not baptized until three years later. From this, I concluded that she was likely born in Fettercairn just before her parents were about to move in 1804, and was not baptized until 1807. Then, I discovered Margaret Low "born in Logie Pert, age 52" in the 1861 census of Montrose. This would indicate that she was born about 1809. Upon checking the 1851 census, I found her age given as 40. I cannot explain this discrepency, except to note that ages given to census takers were not always correct.
No other Margaret Low was found in the Logie Pert Register between 1800 and 1815. It is possible, but I think unlikely, that the Margaret Low who was married to William Hunter was not the same Margaret who was the daughter of James and Margaret Low.