New South Wales, Australia 1828 - 1842: Bounty Immigrants List Description: This is an extraction of the New South Wales, Australia 1828 - 1848: Bounty Immigrants list. Perhaps they only have rights to utilize a portion of the information so they've extracted just that much information. Perhaps further information can be had from Ancestry's sources: Original data: Bounty Immigrants to New South Wales 1828 - 1842.. Records kept at the New South Wales State Records Office, P.O. Box 516, Kingswood, NSW 2747; at the Archives Office of Tasmania, 77 Murray St., Hobart, TAS 7000; and at the State Records Office of Western Australia, Alexander Library, Perth Cultural Centre, Perth, WA 6000. Cheers, > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 12:10:06 +0100 > From: "Sue Ahrens" <sue.ahrens@ntlworld.com> > Subject: [AUS-IMM-SHIPS] NSW 1828-1842 Bounty Immigrants List on > Ancestry > To: <AUS-IMMIGRATION-SHIPS@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <002601c7ff64$a2308610$0200a8c0@DELL> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Hi listers, > > I was wondering if anyone knows what is going on with the NSW 1828-1842 > Bounty Immigrants List on the Ancestry website. It seems to me that > something must be wrong with it, as only passengers with surnames starting > near the beginning of the alphabet are showing up. > > For example, I searched for the voyage of the "William Jardine" in 1841 and > it returned only 19 names, most starting with A or B (and two with H). I've > read somewhere (in the archives of this list, I think, that there were 341 > passengers on that ship! I am also pretty sure that my ancestors William > and Elizabeth Wilton were among them, and I'd like to confirm this, so this > technical (?) glitch is quite frustrating for me. > > At first I thought that maybe it was just my bad luck and that some of the > records for that voyage of the "William Jardine" were missing, but then I > tried several other test searches, for ships and for surnames, all with the > same kinds of results - i.e. essentially the only people EVER listed are > those with surnames starting with early letters in the alphabet. So it > looks more like a programming or implementation error of some sort. > > I sent a note to Ancestry about 10 days ago via their Feedback facility, but > I haven't had any reply. > > Sue > -- Laury Walkey (Miss) BC, Canada