Hello there Bill, please write to me off list as we have many of these folk mentioned in your email, on our family tree. Look forward to hearing back from you and swapping information Regards Eileen in New Zeland. Bill and Jenny Deverell <[email protected]> wrote: Peter I know it's going to be a slog. There's no suitable YATES anywhere on IGI in Beds even though when you study the 1841 entry William is born Beds! The 1841 entry has in one household 2 families. William Yates 55 Ag Lab Y Lydia 55 Y Elizabeth Bunker 30 Charwoman (?) Y Sarah 9 Y William 7 Y Ancestry had them as YALES and BONTER !! As you ha noted Ruth is eleswhere (with the WOOLFREY family) Sarah, William and Ruth's baptisms are on IGI (parents Thomas and Elizabeth BUNKER) As is Elizabeth's subsequent marriage to John CHAPMAN in 1845 which reveals her father as William YATES. This all started when trying to locate more about Elizabeth's son Joseph born 1842 whose father is neither Thomas BUNKER nor John CHAPMAN (no father on birth cert and no father on 1842 baptism). In 1851 Elizabeth is with new huband John son Joseph, new dau Mary Ann age 4 (she appears in 1891 and 1901) as his half sister! And John from John's previous marriage to Ann. Sarah marries Abel DENTON in 1850 (his sister Thirza married my 7C4R William STAPLETON - on same page of GRO so could be same date) William marries Eliza KEECH 1858 and Rachel PEDDER 1870. Ruth marries William SWANNELL 1855 (lost them after 1861 The Brick Wall I face is going back on William and Lydia - hence need to see if anything extra in the Ampthill PRs transcripts or original for around 1806. Bill -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter Booth Sent: 15 April 2008 01:51 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BDF] HAITES in Ampthill PRs Bill, It looks like this is going to take some concentrated research. David has provided some good clues, but it requires follow up. I don't know the answers either. But I found a few more clues. In 1841 census, Ancestry records them as YALES. William and Lydia are living alone in Flitton. But the original image is very feint. By 1851, William has died. Lydia Yates, widow is living with grandchildren William Bunker 17 and Ruth Bunker 15, but there is no sign of parents. I went back to 1841 to find Ruth, but Ancestry have her as a single entry even though she is only 5. I couldn't find a match for William. I'd suggest you try look at an alternative census source like FindMyPast or others. Often they have different transcriptions and spellings. I'd also try and trace William and Ruth through subsequent censuses. Often parents or relative come back to live with them in old age. I think it's a case of roll up the sleeves and get into some hard research. Peter The List Guidelines http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message The List Guidelines http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com

> I wonder if anyone can check whether this scenario is correct for me > please? I have: Mary COOPER baptised 1829 Riseley marrying Thomas > SMITH on 29 July 1850 Riseley (IGI). Sept Q 1850 6/59 Father John > Cooper. A witness at the wedding was Phoebe Cooper ( Mary's sister) I > think: Mary SMITH died Sept Q 1850. (Free BMD) Probably buried > Riseley. I think Thomas SMITH might then have married Phoebe COOPER > (Mary's sister) June Q 1851.Bedford 6/85 (Free BMD) I think: Phoebe > SMITH also died June Q 1856 3b/197.Bedford Legally, Thomas who married Mary could not have married her sister then. True, this sometimes happened, but mostly the couple would have to go well away from where they were known. Thomas Smith is such a common name that this is > > The problem with this scenario is that a Thomas SMITH married Agnes > Peasnall at Riseley in June Q 1851!!!!!!!!!! I cannot find a > marriage/death for Phoebe nor can I find her in 1861. > > Can anyone help please? I'm going cross eyed! Parhaps fresh eyes and > fresh perspective might help! Marlene > > > > I cannot identify either Mary or Phoebe in 1861 and this scenario > would settle both! > > > > > > > > > The List Guidelines > > http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > -- > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.17.4/1187 - Release Date: > 16/12/2007 11:36 >

Peter I know it's going to be a slog. There's no suitable YATES anywhere on IGI in Beds even though when you study the 1841 entry William is born Beds! The 1841 entry has in one household 2 families. William Yates 55 Ag Lab Y Lydia 55 Y Elizabeth Bunker 30 Charwoman (?) Y Sarah 9 Y William 7 Y Ancestry had them as YALES and BONTER !! As you ha noted Ruth is eleswhere (with the WOOLFREY family) Sarah, William and Ruth's baptisms are on IGI (parents Thomas and Elizabeth BUNKER) As is Elizabeth's subsequent marriage to John CHAPMAN in 1845 which reveals her father as William YATES. This all started when trying to locate more about Elizabeth's son Joseph born 1842 whose father is neither Thomas BUNKER nor John CHAPMAN (no father on birth cert and no father on 1842 baptism). In 1851 Elizabeth is with new huband John son Joseph, new dau Mary Ann age 4 (she appears in 1891 and 1901) as his half sister! And John from John's previous marriage to Ann. Sarah marries Abel DENTON in 1850 (his sister Thirza married my 7C4R William STAPLETON - on same page of GRO so could be same date) William marries Eliza KEECH 1858 and Rachel PEDDER 1870. Ruth marries William SWANNELL 1855 (lost them after 1861 The Brick Wall I face is going back on William and Lydia - hence need to see if anything extra in the Ampthill PRs transcripts or original for around 1806. Bill -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter Booth Sent: 15 April 2008 01:51 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BDF] HAITES in Ampthill PRs Bill, It looks like this is going to take some concentrated research. David has provided some good clues, but it requires follow up. I don't know the answers either. But I found a few more clues. In 1841 census, Ancestry records them as YALES. William and Lydia are living alone in Flitton. But the original image is very feint. By 1851, William has died. Lydia Yates, widow is living with grandchildren William Bunker 17 and Ruth Bunker 15, but there is no sign of parents. I went back to 1841 to find Ruth, but Ancestry have her as a single entry even though she is only 5. I couldn't find a match for William. I'd suggest you try look at an alternative census source like FindMyPast or others. Often they have different transcriptions and spellings. I'd also try and trace William and Ruth through subsequent censuses. Often parents or relative come back to live with them in old age. I think it's a case of roll up the sleeves and get into some hard research. Peter The List Guidelines http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Bill, It looks like this is going to take some concentrated research. David has provided some good clues, but it requires follow up. I don't know the answers either. But I found a few more clues. In 1841 census, Ancestry records them as YALES. William and Lydia are living alone in Flitton. But the original image is very feint. By 1851, William has died. Lydia Yates, widow is living with grandchildren William Bunker 17 and Ruth Bunker 15, but there is no sign of parents. I went back to 1841 to find Ruth, but Ancestry have her as a single entry even though she is only 5. I couldn't find a match for William. I'd suggest you try look at an alternative census source like FindMyPast or others. Often they have different transcriptions and spellings. I'd also try and trace William and Ruth through subsequent censuses. Often parents or relative come back to live with them in old age. I think it's a case of roll up the sleeves and get into some hard research. Peter

I have Manning from 1791, Parker from 1767 . These folk were from Eaton Socon, Gt Barford and Colsedon Roxton if of interest to you Elizabeth or anyone else on this list. Kind Regards Heather

If there is a reader with access to Ampthill PRs in film or transcript , I would be grateful for more info (if any there is more than on the IGI) relating to The 1806 marriage of William HAITES to Lydia DICKENS And the birth of their daughter Elizabeth in 1807. I can't find any more info online on this couple under this name or their 1841/51 census name of YATES other than their burials in Flitton. Bill

Dear Peter, Thank you. This site looks very useful indeed. Have just downloaded one lot of info so far but obviously a lot here to look in to. Appreciate the help Cheers, Elizabeth -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Peter Booth Sent: Monday, 14 April 2008 9:46 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BDF] MANNING LEACH of ELSTOW and SANDY Elizabeth, If you use the Hugh Wallis site, you can search IGI batches for Elstow and Sandy for Manning and Leach BDM events just using the surnames. http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hughwallis/IGIBatchNumbers /CountyBedford.htm#PageTitle There are a few Manning events in Elstow around 1695. The earliest Leach event in Sandy goes back to 1563. But there are too few BDM events recorded to bridge the gap between 1600 and 1800 where you are currently. So a lot of work will be required. If you don't get any replies from researchers of these families, you might try submitted family trees at sites like Rootsweb, Ancestry or GenesReunited. Peter in Sydney. The List Guidelines http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

1st class - Men 17-30, unmarried, no children under 10 2nd class - Men 30-50 unmarried, no children under 10 3rd class - Men 17-30 married, or 2 children under 10 4th class - remainder of men 17-55 ie unmarried men between 50-55; married men over 30; married men 17-30 with more than 2 children under 10 These classes were laid down in the 1803 Defence Acts David Graham Ward <[email protected]> a écrit : Can anyone explain the significance of the Class that applied to the National Defence Volunteers and Militia lists. There were classes 1-4 and in some way related to their ability to serve in the militia. Were these classes consistentlty applied across all militia lists? Thanks Graham The List Guidelines http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message --------------------------------- Envoyé avec Yahoo! Mail. Une boite mail plus intelligente.

Elizabeth, If you use the Hugh Wallis site, you can search IGI batches for Elstow and Sandy for Manning and Leach BDM events just using the surnames. http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hughwallis/IGIBatchNumbers/CountyBedford.htm#PageTitle There are a few Manning events in Elstow around 1695. The earliest Leach event in Sandy goes back to 1563. But there are too few BDM events recorded to bridge the gap between 1600 and 1800 where you are currently. So a lot of work will be required. If you don't get any replies from researchers of these families, you might try submitted family trees at sites like Rootsweb, Ancestry or GenesReunited. Peter in Sydney.

Hmmmm...... If *I* had then been between 17 and 30 - and unmarried - I suspect I'd arrange to have a child and so be Exempt Altogether :-) Gus ----- Original Message ----- From: "David" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 9:50 AM Subject: [BDF] RE : National Defence Volunteers - Class? 1st class - Men 17-30, unmarried, no children under 10 2nd class - Men 30-50 unmarried, no children under 10 3rd class - Men 17-30 married, or 2 children under 10 4th class - remainder of men 17-55 ie unmarried men between 50-55; married men over 30; married men 17-30 with more than 2 children under 10 These classes were laid down in the 1803 Defence Acts David Graham Ward <[email protected]> a écrit : Can anyone explain the significance of the Class that applied to the National Defence Volunteers and Militia lists. There were classes 1-4 and in some way related to their ability to serve in the militia. Were these classes consistentlty applied across all militia lists? Thanks Graham The List Guidelines http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message --------------------------------- Envoyé avec Yahoo! Mail. Une boite mail plus intelligente. The List Guidelines http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Can anyone explain the significance of the Class that applied to the National Defence Volunteers and Militia lists. There were classes 1-4 and in some way related to their ability to serve in the militia. Were these classes consistentlty applied across all militia lists? Thanks Graham

Hello List, Am researching Manning and Leach families of Elstow and Sandy. William Manning and wife Sarah (nee Leach) are in Elstow from early 1800's. Sarah born in Sandy. Any leads at all on these families much appreciated. I would like to fill gaps in family tree and would like to establish how long the families had been in these towns. Son Robert Roland Manning is found in New Zealand. Grandson John Leach Manning is found in Australia. Regards, Elizabeth South Australia

Could someone tell me if there is an site for the Bedford Park cemetery up DePayres Ave. I would like to get some names of family buried there. Cheers Carol

Hi David, Thanks so much for the death date of Susanna FORFEIT that has really made my day. Regards Betty Lark, Richmond, Nelson, NZ > Message: 2 > Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 08:21:39 +0200 (CEST) > From: David <[email protected]> > Subject: [BDF] RE : FORFEIT(T) of Millbrook & Ridgmont > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > A Susanna Forfeit age 34 was buried at Ridgmont on 15 April 1813 > > David >

As the baptism on the IGI is taken from the transcript done by Bedfordshire Records Office which was an amalgamation of the parish register and the bishop's transcript, I think it more likely that any variation in spelling is likely to be that of whoever wrote the entries in the registers. The vicar wrote down what he thought he'd heard! But I would check the film of the parish register myself. Elizabeth's second marriage also gives her father as Yates on the IGI, and I don't think there's any doubt that the 1841/51 images are Yates. David Bill and Jenny Deverell <[email protected]> a écrit : David Thanks. I wonder if HAITES on the IGI is a transcription error The census originals in 41 and 51 certainly look like YATES Bill -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David Sent: 12 April 2008 08:18 To: [email protected] Subject: [BDF] RE : Ampthill and Flitton/Silsoe records 1812-1840 A bit of a mystery this lot, with so many missing marriages and baptisms, particularly in parishes which have been extracted onto the IGI, which implies i) that a search of the parish register might be fruitless, and ii) that they might be under a spelling variation Lydia gave her birthplace as Stevington in 1851, and Elizabeth might be a bit older than you state as she gave her age as 44 in 1851, which would push back her parents' marriage as well But.... looking at the IGI for an Elizabeth born Ampthill c1807-10 there's an Elizabeth Haites daughter of William and Lydia Haites baptised 26 Dec 1807 (born 30 Oct 1807) and a marriage of William Haites and Lydia Dickens in Ampthill on 1 Dec 1806 which would be worth investigating I can't see a Lydia Dickens baptised in Stevington that fits, but there were Dickens in the parish and one named a daughter Lydia in 1812, which may just be coincidence. David The List Guidelines http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message --------------------------------- Envoyé avec Yahoo! Mail. Une boite mail plus intelligente.

David Thanks. I wonder if HAITES on the IGI is a transcription error The census originals in 41 and 51 certainly look like YATES Bill -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David Sent: 12 April 2008 08:18 To: [email protected] Subject: [BDF] RE : Ampthill and Flitton/Silsoe records 1812-1840 A bit of a mystery this lot, with so many missing marriages and baptisms, particularly in parishes which have been extracted onto the IGI, which implies i) that a search of the parish register might be fruitless, and ii) that they might be under a spelling variation Lydia gave her birthplace as Stevington in 1851, and Elizabeth might be a bit older than you state as she gave her age as 44 in 1851, which would push back her parents' marriage as well But.... looking at the IGI for an Elizabeth born Ampthill c1807-10 there's an Elizabeth Haites daughter of William and Lydia Haites baptised 26 Dec 1807 (born 30 Oct 1807) and a marriage of William Haites and Lydia Dickens in Ampthill on 1 Dec 1806 which would be worth investigating I can't see a Lydia Dickens baptised in Stevington that fits, but there were Dickens in the parish and one named a daughter Lydia in 1812, which may just be coincidence. David

This Indenture made the Four and Twentieth Day of June in the Third Year of the Reign of our Sovereign Lord George the Second by the Grace of God, of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, King Defender of the Faith, &c Annoq; Dom 1729 Witnesseth, That John Woolerston and Edward Emery Churchwardens of the Parish of Eaton Socon in the County of Bedford and John Emery John Abbys and John Watford Overseers of the Poor of the said Parish, by and with the Consent of his Majesty's Justices of the Peace of the said County whose Names are hereunto subscribed, have put and placed, and by these Presents do put and place William Rootham a poor Child of the said Parish, Apprentice to William Rootham his Grandfather of Staughton mega Labourer with him to dwell and serve from the Day of the Date of these Presents, until the said Apprentice shall accomplish (?) full age of Four and Twenty years according to the Statute in that Case made and provided: During all which term, the said Apprentice his said Master faithfully shall serve in all lawful Business, according to his Power, Wit, and Ability; and honestly, orderly, and obediently in all Things demean and behave himself towards his said Master and all his during the said term. And the said William Rootham for himself, his Executors and Administrators, doth Covenant and Grant to and with the said Churchwardens and Overseers, and every of them, their and every of their Executors and Administrators, and their and every of their Successors for the time being, by these Presents, That the said William Rootham P(?)er the said Apprentice in the way of labouring shall teach and instruct or cause to be taught or instructed whereby to get his living And shall and will, during all the term aforesaid, find, provide and allow unto the said Apprentice, meet, competent, and sufficient Meat, Drink, and Apparel, Lodging, Washing, and all other Things necessary and fit for an Apprentice. And also shall and will so provide for the said Apprentice, that he be not any way a Charge to the said Parish, or Parishioners of the same; but of and from all Charge shall and will save the said Parish and Parishioners harmless and indemnified during the said term. And at the end of the said term, shall and will make, provide, allow, and deliver unto the said Apprentice double Apparel of all sorts, good and new, (that is to say) a good new suit for the Holy-days, and another for the Working says. In Witness whereof, the Parties abovesaid to the present Indentures interchangeably have put their Hands and Seals the Day and Year above written. Sealed and Delivered in the Presence of Robert Cope Jno Smith We whose Names are subscribed, Justices of the Peace of the said County aforesaid do (quorum unus) consent to the putting forth of the abovesaid William Rootham an Apprentice, according to the Intent and Meaning of the Indenture abovesaid. T Bromsall Richard Willersdon The mark f Wm Rootham Memorandum the day and year within Written The within Named Churchwardens and Overseers of the poor for and in Consideration of all and Singular the Agreements within mentioned and expressed to be performed and kept Have paid at the Ensealing of these present Indentures unto the within named William Rootham of Great Staughton in the County of Huntingdon Labourer the sum of Fourty Shillings being the first payment toward the within named William Rootham's Apprenticeshipp Grandson of the abovesaid William Rootham the Elder And the aid Churchwardens and Overseers of the poor Do further promise and agree that the Successors of them for the time being shall well and truly pay or cause to be paid unto the Said William Rootham the Elder his Executors Administrators or Assigns the further Sum of Twenty Shillings A year untill the full Sum of Six pounds more (Over and above the said sum of Fourty Shillings) shall be fully paid and discharged which will make in all the Sum of Eight pounds being the full and whole sum of the Contract Money for the said William Rootham's Apprenticeshipp Provided Nevertheless that in case the said William Rootham shall happen to dye before any or any part of the said Twenty Shillings A year shall become due and payable That then So much as shall not be due or payable before the Death of the said William Rootham shall then become Void and Unpayable

A bit of a mystery this lot, with so many missing marriages and baptisms, particularly in parishes which have been extracted onto the IGI, which implies i) that a search of the parish register might be fruitless, and ii) that they might be under a spelling variation Lydia gave her birthplace as Stevington in 1851, and Elizabeth might be a bit older than you state as she gave her age as 44 in 1851, which would push back her parents' marriage as well But.... looking at the IGI for an Elizabeth born Ampthill c1807-10 there's an Elizabeth Haites daughter of William and Lydia Haites baptised 26 Dec 1807 (born 30 Oct 1807) and a marriage of William Haites and Lydia Dickens in Ampthill on 1 Dec 1806 which would be worth investigating I can't see a Lydia Dickens baptised in Stevington that fits, but there were Dickens in the parish and one named a daughter Lydia in 1812, which may just be coincidence. David Bill and Jenny Deverell <[email protected]> a écrit : Has any reader got the parish records for Ampthill and Flitton with Silsoe areas 1812 - 1840 especially marriages. I am looking for a William YATES b1789 married to Lydia b1783 (both buried Silsoe) Their dau Elizabeth b around 1810 Ampthill married to Thomas BUNKER around 1830 - children baptised Flitwick (Thomas may be the one born Steppingley died 1838.) He died before 1841 and she married again to John CHAPMAN 1845 (this last is on IGI) I have the families in 1841 and 1851 censuses despite vagaries of Ancestry transcriptions!! Bill The List Guidelines http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message --------------------------------- Envoyé avec Yahoo! Mail. Une boite mail plus intelligente.

Hello Listers, Thomas FORFEIT(T) & Susanna ROBINSON mc1774 and so far I have only found 1 son William FORFEIT(T) bc1775 Bapt.4 Nov. 1781 Millbrook. this William FORFEIT(T) m.29 July 1799 Susanna ROBINSON and they had 3 daughters Mary 1801 Fanny 1804 Sarah 1810 all bapt. Ridgmont (that seems to be the easy bit) did Susanna FORFEIT(T) nee ROBINSON die between 1810 & 1815? as there is a William FORFEIT(T) m 24 Oct. 1815 Ridgmont Elizabeth LANSBURY 1790-1868. From the 1851 Census I have guestimated that William FORFEIT(T) would have been born c1775 Millbrook he d.1857 Ridgmont. this couple had 5 children. If someone has access to the Marriages of Ridgmont could they check if it just happens to mention on the marriage of 24 Oct 1815 that William FORFEIT(T) was a Widower. Thanks very much for any help it is much appreciated. Betty Lark, Richmond, Nelson, NZ