I have recently found a childs (11 months old in 1851) death cert stating she died of "teething". This is not in my Beds roots but I wonder has anyone else come across the same cause of death stated. Jane

Great minds eh? >From: "Patricia Salter" <ps015p6402@blueyonder.co.uk> >Reply-To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest >Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:16:33 -0000 > >Hi Pauline >I thought I was the only one thinking the very same thing. I have several >families who kept christening their children with a particular name, and >each time that child died - it was as if there was a curse on certain names >in some families, so I'm with you there. >Cheers >Patti > ----- Original Message ----- > From: pauline davy > To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com > Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 1:16 AM > Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest > > > Hi everyone - I'm butting in here, hope you don't mind, but you >mentioned a > family who had three children named William, obviously the first two had > died. Does anyone find, as I do, that these children who are given a > deceased siblings name, often die themselves? Just recently I came >across a > Margaret, three times a child was christened that, and three times the >baby > died. This doesn't seem to be an isolated incident either. I'd be >interested > in what other listers think. > Regards, > Pauline in OZ > > > >From: "Peter Booth" <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> > >Reply-To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com > >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com > >Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest > >Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 16:49:03 +1100 > > > >Donna, > > > > I don't have any links to this family. But your's was the only > >message received today, so I had the luxury of some time to have a >close > >look. Lucky for you. > > > > I've been advising people for years to click on batch numbers >on > >IGI records. It's amazing what you find. > > > > I found the 1694 record for Elizabeth, clicked on the batch >number > >and searched for KIGHTLEY. Only the one record came back up. I >suspected > >possible surname variants. It would be unusual for just one child. > > > > Not to be outdone, I searched the batch again, this time using >just > >father's given name Francis. Et Voila !!. Elizabeth and seven brothers >and > >sisters all with different surname spellings. Only one included a >mother's > >name Elizabeth. Primed with success I went and found the marriage. > > > > Francis Kitely married Elizabeth Cliffton on 3rd May 1677 in > >Houghton Conquest. Elizabeth was the youngest of eight children. The >name > >William was used three times suggesting the earlier two had died. The > >children were :- Francis 1678, William (I) 1680, John 1682, Joseph >1685, > >William (II) 1687, William (III) 1689, James 1691 and Elizabeth 1694. > > > > I also clicked on the batch number for the marriage record. It > >indicated that Elizabeth Cliffton had a brother John who married Ann > >Slingsby. > > > > Your back in the "dark ages" when it comes to finding birth >records > >for Francis and Elizabeth. I found nothing for Francis, but there was >an > >Elizabeth Clifton b1849 at Houghton Conquest. It makes her 28 at >marriage > >which might be a bit old for the era. And there are lots of Elizabeth's >in > >other counties. > > > > That will give you something to do for a couple of days. Hope >you > >can follow the logic. get back to me if you have problems. > > > > Good luck > > > > Peter in Sydney > > > >PS!! Some of the variant spellings were Kitely, Kightly, Kitly, Citly, > >Keightley and Kitghtley. > > > > > >==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== > >The Bedfordshire Surnames List can be viewed at: > >http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > realestate.com.au: the biggest address in property > http://ninemsn.realestate.com.au > > > ==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== > For any updates our info about the status of this list go to > http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com > > > > >==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== >Go to the Bedfordshire Lookup Exchange at: >http://freespace.virgin.net/m.harbach/bdf.html > _________________________________________________________________ New year, new job – there's more than 100,00 jobs at SEEK http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fninemsn%2Eseek%2Ecom%2Eau&_t=752315885&_r=Jan05_tagline&_m=EXT

Whilst I haven't come across any uncle/nephew situations where they are described as senior/junior I have a couple of grandfather/grandson examples in parish registers where they are differentiated by Junior/Senior (also the same in a census where grandfather and grandson were both in Biggleswade workhouse) David Patricia Salter <ps015p6402@blueyonder.co.uk> a écrit : Thank you Donald, that sets my mind at rest, I was hoping it was something like that and not the American version. Cheers Patti ----- Original Message ----- From: Donald Massey To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 5:33 PM Subject: Re: [BDF] The titles of Junior and Senior It may be that in the parish there were two people of the same name, not necessarily father and son, and the Minister wished to differentiate: he may have had no other way. Donald Massey ----- Original Message ----- : >I have another query that I have had problems with - the titles of senior >and junior. I always thought that one had to have a father with the same >name ie William in order to be called William Junior, however I seem to >have a lot of juniors and seniors that are related only as uncle and nephew >etc - is this possible, or have I been climbing up some wrong trees. ==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== Bedfordshire at Rootsweb http://www.rootsweb.com/~engbdf/ ==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== To do a search of the Bedford Archives go to http://searches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl Enter Bedford in the box --------------------------------- Nouveau : téléphonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! Découvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.Téléchargez la version beta.

Thank you Donald, that sets my mind at rest, I was hoping it was something like that and not the American version. Cheers Patti ----- Original Message ----- From: Donald Massey To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 5:33 PM Subject: Re: [BDF] The titles of Junior and Senior It may be that in the parish there were two people of the same name, not necessarily father and son, and the Minister wished to differentiate: he may have had no other way. Donald Massey ----- Original Message ----- : >I have another query that I have had problems with - the titles of senior >and junior. I always thought that one had to have a father with the same >name ie William in order to be called William Junior, however I seem to >have a lot of juniors and seniors that are related only as uncle and nephew >etc - is this possible, or have I been climbing up some wrong trees. ==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== Bedfordshire at Rootsweb http://www.rootsweb.com/~engbdf/

It may be that in the parish there were two people of the same name, not necessarily father and son, and the Minister wished to differentiate: he may have had no other way. Donald Massey ----- Original Message ----- : >I have another query that I have had problems with - the titles of senior >and junior. I always thought that one had to have a father with the same >name ie William in order to be called William Junior, however I seem to >have a lot of juniors and seniors that are related only as uncle and nephew >etc - is this possible, or have I been climbing up some wrong trees.

Hi Folks, The twins I was referring to were in Yorkshire in the mid-1700s. There were 12 children altogether and only one other died.I was fortunate enough to have twins myself and my genealogy studies have made me so grateful that we live in healthier times. I only wish scans had been available then(1969) so that I could have been prepared for 2 ! I would have been able to take things a lot easier, which is something else they weren't able to do if they were working class. It's almost certain that the mothers would have worked as hard as they normally did, up to the time they gave birth. It's always very sad to find records of a mother having died in childbirth and the baby dying shortly afterwards. Unless the family could pay for a wet-nurse, a baby was likely to starve to death after losing it's mother. On that cheerful note I'll finish !! Jill

I have another query that I have had problems with - the titles of senior and junior. I always thought that one had to have a father with the same name ie William in order to be called William Junior, however I seem to have a lot of juniors and seniors that are related only as uncle and nephew etc - is this possible, or have I been climbing up some wrong trees. Patti

Hello Bedford, Any one have any information on the Myler clan from Cardington Bedfordshire area? I am looking for Mylers pre 1731. I understand this area was quite small at that time. Any Mylers there then would most likley be related. Thank You Ed Mylar Paradise Ed Mylar From: BEDFORD-D-request@rootsweb.com Reply-To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com To: BEDFORD-D@rootsweb.com Subject: BEDFORD-D Digest V06 #28 Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 02:16:34 -0700 >Content-Type: text/plain > >BEDFORD-D Digest Volume 06 : Issue 28 > >Today's Topics: >#1 Thanks for the Straw Bonnet Inform [Chris Roberts <c.robertsis@rogers.] >#2 CROFT/OSBORNE - Henlow [Eunice Cubbage <eunice@cubbage.plu] >#3 CROFT - Henlow [Eunice Cubbage <eunice@cubbage.plu] >#4 RE: [BDF] CROFT/OSBORNE - Henlow ["Sandee" <sandee@ionet.net>] >#5 RE: [BDF] CROFT/OSBORNE - Henlow [David <david11000carca@yahoo.fr>] >#6 Re: [BDF] CROFT/OSBORNE - Henlow [Eunice Cubbage <eunice@cubbage.plu] >#7 Henlow - 1841 Census - Samuel CROF [Eunice Cubbage <eunice@cubbage.plu] >#8 Eaton Socon Overseers (of the Poor ["Jim Bundy" <jbundy48@comcast.net>] >#9 BOSWELL. GASCOIGNE. POULTON. ["carol" <crb@beattie727.freeserve.] >#10 RE: [BDF] Henlow - 1841 Census - S [David <david11000carca@yahoo.fr>] >#11 Re: [BDF] BOSWELL. GASCOIGNE. POUL [AudreyJoyceMcC@aol.com] >#12 Re: [BDF] Henlow - 1841 Census - S ["Ruth Croft" <ruth@brum38.fsnet.co] >#13 Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Hough ["pauline davy" <perilsofpauline1@h] >#14 Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Hough ["Sandee" <sandee@ionet.net>] >#15 Re: [BDF] CROFT/OSBORNE - Henlow ["Sandee" <sandee@ionet.net>] > >Administrivia: >To unsubscribe from BEDFORD-D, send a message to > >BEDFORD-D-request@rootsweb.com > >that contains in the body of the message the command > >unsubscribe > >and no other text. No subject line is necessary, but if your software >requires one, just use unsubscribe in the subject, too. > >To unsubscribe on the web, go to > >http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/subscribe.html > >Hugh > >Listowner > >hugh@xtra.co.nz >______________________________ >X-Message: #1 >Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 17:27:58 -0500 >From: Chris Roberts <c.robertsis@rogers.com> >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-Id: <3721c94e691f7aaef6060b133133e7d5@rogers.com> >Subject: Thanks for the Straw Bonnet Information >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > >Thank you to Sharon, Patricia, Kirsten , Elizabeth and Margaret who >made comments and gave information regarding my "Bonnet Sewers" and >"Straw Plaiters" in Dunstable. I especially enjoyed Kirsten's quote >from Eve, who is very knowledgeable with 'down to earth take,' as >always. Also, I recommend Patricia's posted web-site >www.hertfordshire-genealogy.co.uk/data/occupations/straw-plait.htm >for tons of information on this very important work source in past >centuries and particularly, Luton in the nineteenth century. > >As always, the list folk are an amazing forum of information--everyone >gets to help at some time or another, and I am grateful that this time, >I was the recipient. I found out a whole lot about the straw hat >industry and the many people in Bedfordshire who worked in this field. > >Many thanks, > >Chris in Ontario > >______________________________ >X-Message: #2 >Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 11:51:21 +0000 >From: Eunice Cubbage <eunice@cubbage.plus.com> >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <43F85BB9.7050306@cubbage.plus.com> >Subject: CROFT/OSBORNE - Henlow >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >Whilst doing some lookups on my FULFORD ancestors, specifically an Esther >Fulford who married into the Timpson family who were originally from >Clifton >Reynes, Bucks, I may have stumbled upon a Bedford onnection. > >I have been trying to find out a little about Walter O Croft, who was born >at St Pancras around 1840. I was interested in him because in 1901 he has >his cousin, Eliza TIMPSON, a widow, living with him in London. ELiza's >husband, Isaac Timpson, had died in 1880. > >I have found Walter Croft in 1891, and living with him was a sister, Jane E >Croft (unmarried), also born St Pancras. I then looked on the IGI hoping to >find Walter and Jane's births (1840 & 1833-ish, respectively), and have >traced Jane to a Samuel Croft and his wife, Susan, nee Osborne, who were >married in Henlow, Bedfordshire in 1826 (There - got to the Bedford >connection at last!) > >I am thinking this is a possible connection because Eliza's son, Edward >Timpson (who married Esther Augusta Fulford) had the middle name Osborn, >and >continued the tradition by giving one of his sons, Harry (b.1890) the >middle >name Osborn, also. (I suspect the O in Walter O Croft is also Osborn) > >I hope you have followed this so far, I am hoping to hear from anyone who >knows anything about Samuel Croft and Susan Osborn, who can confirm any of >this. > >Thanks for reading > >Regards > >Eunice Cubbage > >______________________________ >X-Message: #3 >Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 12:05:30 +0000 >From: Eunice Cubbage <eunice@cubbage.plus.com> >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <43F85F0A.1000907@cubbage.plus.com> >Subject: CROFT - Henlow >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >Further to my previous message, some further digging has proved my >thinking, >Walter Osborn Croft was definitely the son of Samuel Croft, who was born at >Henlow Beds around 1805. > >If anyone on the list is researching OSBORNs from Henlow, I'd love to hear >from them. > >The name EASON (Poss. EASTON) also figures. > >Thanks > >Eunice CUbbage > >______________________________ >X-Message: #4 >Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 06:55:04 -0600 >From: "Sandee" <sandee@ionet.net> >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <410-22006201912554860@ionet.net> >Subject: RE: [BDF] CROFT/OSBORNE - Henlow >Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > >I am still going thru this film, but so far have found: >LDS 1042926, Campton Church of England Parish Records: > >26Jan1812: Baptised Rebecca, daughter of William and Mary Croft >20Mar1785 Buried ___ Thomas Osborn > >not much so far, but hopefully it will eventually 'plug in' :) >sandee > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Eunice Cubbage <eunice@cubbage.plus.com> > > To: <BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com> > > Date: 2/19/2006 5:52:18 AM > > Subject: [BDF] CROFT/OSBORNE - Henlow > > > > Whilst doing some lookups on my FULFORD ancestors, specifically an >Esther > > Fulford who married into the Timpson family who were originally from >Clifton > > Reynes, Bucks, I may have stumbled upon a Bedford onnection. > > > > I have been trying to find out a little about Walter O Croft, who was >born > > at St Pancras around 1840. I was interested in him because in 1901 he >has > > his cousin, Eliza TIMPSON, a widow, living with him in London. ELiza's > > husband, Isaac Timpson, had died in 1880. > > > > I have found Walter Croft in 1891, and living with him was a sister, >Jane >E > > Croft (unmarried), also born St Pancras. I then looked on the IGI hoping >to > > find Walter and Jane's births (1840 & 1833-ish, respectively), and have > > traced Jane to a Samuel Croft and his wife, Susan, nee Osborne, who were > > married in Henlow, Bedfordshire in 1826 (There - got to the Bedford > > connection at last!) > > > > I am thinking this is a possible connection because Eliza's son, Edward > > Timpson (who married Esther Augusta Fulford) had the middle name Osborn, >and > > continued the tradition by giving one of his sons, Harry (b.1890) the >middle > > name Osborn, also. (I suspect the O in Walter O Croft is also Osborn) > > > > I hope you have followed this so far, I am hoping to hear from anyone >who > > knows anything about Samuel Croft and Susan Osborn, who can confirm any >of this. > > > > Thanks for reading > > > > Regards > > > > Eunice Cubbage > > > > > > ==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== > > For any updates our info about the status of this list go to > > http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com > > > >______________________________ >X-Message: #5 >Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 14:24:37 +0100 (CET) >From: David <david11000carca@yahoo.fr> >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <20060219132437.9954.qmail@web26314.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> >Subject: RE: [BDF] CROFT/OSBORNE - Henlow >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > >Hi Eunice > >Samuel Craft was the elder brother of my 3xg gt aunt Mary Ann Craft b 1808 >Henlow who married into my Cooper forebears. He was christened on 30 June >1805 at Henlow, the son of Samuel and Elizabeth Craft. Samuel snr was >christened at Astwick Beds on 26 June 1768, and he married Elizabeth Bailey >at Astwick on 12 Oct 1793. She was born at Ashwell Herts c 1766 (she was >aged 85 in 1851). > >Osborn was not a Henlow name and I can't see where Susan was from. She was >dead by 1861 where Samuel was a widower but I can't find the family in >1851. I'll carry on digging > >Regards > >David > >Eunice Cubbage <eunice@cubbage.plus.com> a écrit : Whilst doing some >lookups on my FULFORD ancestors, specifically an Esther >Fulford who married into the Timpson family who were originally from >Clifton >Reynes, Bucks, I may have stumbled upon a Bedford onnection. > >I have been trying to find out a little about Walter O Croft, who was born >at St Pancras around 1840. I was interested in him because in 1901 he has >his cousin, Eliza TIMPSON, a widow, living with him in London. ELiza's >husband, Isaac Timpson, had died in 1880. > >I have found Walter Croft in 1891, and living with him was a sister, Jane E >Croft (unmarried), also born St Pancras. I then looked on the IGI hoping to >find Walter and Jane's births (1840 & 1833-ish, respectively), and have >traced Jane to a Samuel Croft and his wife, Susan, nee Osborne, who were >married in Henlow, Bedfordshire in 1826 (There - got to the Bedford >connection at last!) > >I am thinking this is a possible connection because Eliza's son, Edward >Timpson (who married Esther Augusta Fulford) had the middle name Osborn, >and >continued the tradition by giving one of his sons, Harry (b.1890) the >middle >name Osborn, also. (I suspect the O in Walter O Croft is also Osborn) > >I hope you have followed this so far, I am hoping to hear from anyone who >knows anything about Samuel Croft and Susan Osborn, who can confirm any of >this. > >Thanks for reading > >Regards > >Eunice Cubbage > > >==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== >For any updates our info about the status of this list go to >http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com > > > > >- ------------------------------- >Nouveau : téléphonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! Découvez les tarifs >exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.Téléchargez la >version beta. > >______________________________ >X-Message: #6 >Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 18:11:25 +0000 >From: Eunice Cubbage <eunice@cubbage.plus.com> >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <43F8B4CD.1090207@cubbage.plus.com> >Subject: Re: [BDF] CROFT/OSBORNE - Henlow >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >David - > >Thanks for the info - I see you refer to Craft rather than Croft - were >these two names interchangeable ? > >Eunice > > >David wrote: > > Hi Eunice > > > > Samuel Craft was the elder brother of my 3xg gt aunt Mary Ann Craft b >1808 Henlow who married into my Cooper forebears. He was christened on 30 >June 1805 at Henlow, the son of Samuel and Elizabeth Craft. Samuel snr was >christened at Astwick Beds on 26 June 1768, and he married Elizabeth Bailey >at Astwick on 12 Oct 1793. She was born at Ashwell Herts c 1766 (she was >aged 85 in 1851). > > > > Osborn was not a Henlow name and I can't see where Susan was from. She >was dead by 1861 where Samuel was a widower but I can't find the family in >1851. I'll carry on digging > > > > Regards > > > > David > >______________________________ >X-Message: #7 >Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 18:46:18 +0000 >From: Eunice Cubbage <eunice@cubbage.plus.com> >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <43F8BCFA.5020605@cubbage.plus.com> >Subject: Henlow - 1841 Census - Samuel CROFT/CRAFT >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >Hi, I haven't done any research in Bedfordshire, so am not sure what >records >are easily searchable. > >Can anyone check the 1841 Census for Henlow, I'm looking for a Samuel Croft >(or Craft) and his wife, Susan, and any children. > >Hope someone can help. > >Regards > >Eunice Cubbage > >______________________________ >X-Message: #8 >Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 10:53:55 -0800 >From: "Jim Bundy" <jbundy48@comcast.net> >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <005401c63585$d5962ff0$6600a8c0@jbundy> >Subject: Eaton Socon Overseers (of the Poor) Account book 1800, note 56 >Content-Type: text/plain; >format=flowed; >charset="iso-8859-1"; >reply-type=original >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >(Date) (Name/Item) (Amount) > >1800 Brot Over 29/2/4 > >July 15 Pd James Fulch 3/6 Finding 2/ 0/5/6 > >T Walker 2/ Hattwood 3/ Briggs 10/ 0/15/0 > >Salloway 3/6 W Barker 2/ Mayes 2/6 >0/8/0 > >Mary Oakley 7/6 Sumpter 3/ 0/10/6 > >Wid Ray 2/6 Sallaway 2/6 0/5/0 > >Wid Thornton 1/6 Wid Gobby 3/ 0/4/6 > >Thos Rowlett 5/ Wid Gardner 5/ 0/10/0 > >Jno Oakley 1/ Fisher 1/6 Cross 2/6 0/5/0 > >16th Pd Taylor 4/ W Gardner 5/ 0/9/0 > >Jno Newman 2/ Cleland 5/ 0/7/0 > >W Hix 1/ Quince's Son Jarbretty 3 wks 8/ 0/9/0 > >Thos Rowlett 2/6 W Barker 2/ 0/4/6 > >Thos Fisher 2/ T Cranfield 6/ 0/8/0 > >Four Paupers on the Road 0/1/6 > >W Valentine 3/ Hull 1/ Attwood 3/6 0/7/6 > >Geo Childs 3/ Hen Maddy 1/6 0/4/6 > >Quince 1/6 Jos Newman 2/ 0/3/6 > >Ann Simpson 2/ Hix 1/ 0/3/0 > >Pd Brit Brace 1/ Math pay to 13 Aug >0/8/0 > >Ma Shelton 2/ W James 2/ Jarvis 1/ 0/5/0 > >Shadbolt 6/ Bastefield 2/6 0/8/6 > >Sallaway 3/6 Townsend 4/ 0/7/6 > >Jno Mason 3/ T Cullup 1/ 0/4/0 > >Geo Walker 4/ Robinson 5/ 0/9/0 > >Thos Griffin 2/6 Muffin 4/6 0/7/0 > >Sar Neal 3/ Eliz Endersby 1/6 0/4/6 > >Rob Barns 1/ Booth's Child 2/ 0/3/0 > >Rt Quince 2/6 Sumpter 2/6 0/5/0 > >Wid Peck 4/ Wid Barker 4/ 0/8/0 > >Ma Cranfield 1/6 Brown 1/6 0/3/0 > >Eliz Day 2/6 Pheby Darlow 4/ 0/6/6 > >Edy Barker 2/ Grace Briley /6 0/3/6 > >Eliz Goodchild 1/ Sim Bass 3/ 0/4/0 > >Sar Day 5/ Wid Dee 2/ 0/7/0 > >Amy Emery 1/ Mary Oakley 1/6 0/2/6 > >Mary Clark 2/ W Hull 1/ 0/3/0 > >(total) 41/2/4 > >______________________________ >X-Message: #9 >Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 19:31:03 -0000 >From: "carol" <crb@beattie727.freeserve.co.uk> >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <002d01c6358b$05d59ed0$06414154@D225D71J> >Subject: BOSWELL. GASCOIGNE. POULTON. >Content-Type: text/plain; >charset="iso-8859-1" > >I am reposting my interests in the hope that someone might offer some >information about the following people. They were possibly Romanies. > >SIDNEY BOSWELL b 1877 NORTHAMPTON. >FREDERICK GASCOIGNE b approx 1858 BEDFORD. >ELIZA POULTON b 1878 Frederick's first wife. >SUSANNAH B 1866. > >I have located them on the 1891 and 1901 censuses but have not been able to >find a B.M. or D for any of them. Until I find some Birth Marriage or Death >certificates for these people I cant move on. I wait with baited breath >hoping someone might be able to help. >Thankyou, >Carol > >______________________________ >X-Message: #10 >Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 21:03:38 +0100 (CET) >From: David <david11000carca@yahoo.fr> >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <20060219200338.8014.qmail@web26310.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> >Subject: RE: [BDF] Henlow - 1841 Census - Samuel CROFT/CRAFT >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > >Hi Eunice > >They were all Craft or Crafts until the mid 1820s when the spelling seemed >to change to Croft > >They weren't in Henlow in 1841 (I checked) - by that time they were already >in St Pancras, London, as in 1861 Jane was 28 and Walter was 21 both with a >birthplace St Pancras > >I haven't been able to find them in 1851 but suspect that Susannah may have >died in late 1850 as there is a death in St Pancras of Susannah Croft in >the Dec quarter. > >Regards > >David > >Eunice Cubbage <eunice@cubbage.plus.com> a écrit : Hi, I haven't done any >research in Bedfordshire, so am not sure what records >are easily searchable. > >Can anyone check the 1841 Census for Henlow, I'm looking for a Samuel Croft >(or Craft) and his wife, Susan, and any children. > >Hope someone can help. > >Regards > >Eunice Cubbage > > >==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== >The Bedfordshire Family History Page is at >http://www.bfhs.org.uk > > > > >- ------------------------------- >Nouveau : téléphonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! Découvez les tarifs >exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.Téléchargez la >version beta. > >______________________________ >X-Message: #11 >Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 15:56:15 EST >From: AudreyJoyceMcC@aol.com >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <1db.4ce7d260.312a356f@aol.com> >Subject: Re: [BDF] BOSWELL. GASCOIGNE. POULTON. >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > >Carol > >I think the Romanies are fairly well documented although not as well in >official sources. > >Certainly, the BOSWELLs are documented in Spalding > >Please try: http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > >cathy > >______________________________ >X-Message: #12 >Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 23:43:21 -0000 >From: "Ruth Croft" <ruth@brum38.fsnet.co.uk> >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <00e801c635ae$4b4013b0$0a01a8c0@croftpc> >Subject: Re: [BDF] Henlow - 1841 Census - Samuel CROFT/CRAFT >Content-Type: text/plain; >charset="iso-8859-1" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >David said: > > They were all Craft or Crafts until the mid 1820s when the spelling >seemed to change to Croft< > >It seems to have been exactly the same over the border in Hertfordshire too >with my 'Craft/Croft gang'. >Mind you, that's easy compared with at least 7 different Lessels spellings >of children baptised in one single family of mine in Fife - and no, I >haven't managed to trace their descendants properly yet! > >Good luck, > >Ruth in Brum. (Birmingham, England.) > >______________________________ >X-Message: #13 >Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 11:16:10 +1000 >From: "pauline davy" <perilsofpauline1@hotmail.com> >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <BAY105-F11722B35E9A3944B0C47128CFF0@phx.gbl> >Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest >Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed > >Hi everyone - I'm butting in here, hope you don't mind, but you mentioned a >family who had three children named William, obviously the first two had >died. Does anyone find, as I do, that these children who are given a >deceased siblings name, often die themselves? Just recently I came across a >Margaret, three times a child was christened that, and three times the baby >died. This doesn't seem to be an isolated incident either. I'd be >interested >in what other listers think. >Regards, >Pauline in OZ > > > >From: "Peter Booth" <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> > >Reply-To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com > >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com > >Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest > >Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 16:49:03 +1100 > > > >Donna, > > > > I don't have any links to this family. But your's was the only > >message received today, so I had the luxury of some time to have a close > >look. Lucky for you. > > > > I've been advising people for years to click on batch numbers on > >IGI records. It's amazing what you find. > > > > I found the 1694 record for Elizabeth, clicked on the batch number > >and searched for KIGHTLEY. Only the one record came back up. I suspected > >possible surname variants. It would be unusual for just one child. > > > > Not to be outdone, I searched the batch again, this time using just > >father's given name Francis. Et Voila !!. Elizabeth and seven brothers >and > >sisters all with different surname spellings. Only one included a >mother's > >name Elizabeth. Primed with success I went and found the marriage. > > > > Francis Kitely married Elizabeth Cliffton on 3rd May 1677 in > >Houghton Conquest. Elizabeth was the youngest of eight children. The name > >William was used three times suggesting the earlier two had died. The > >children were :- Francis 1678, William (I) 1680, John 1682, Joseph 1685, > >William (II) 1687, William (III) 1689, James 1691 and Elizabeth 1694. > > > > I also clicked on the batch number for the marriage record. It > >indicated that Elizabeth Cliffton had a brother John who married Ann > >Slingsby. > > > > Your back in the "dark ages" when it comes to finding birth records > >for Francis and Elizabeth. I found nothing for Francis, but there was an > >Elizabeth Clifton b1849 at Houghton Conquest. It makes her 28 at marriage > >which might be a bit old for the era. And there are lots of Elizabeth's >in > >other counties. > > > > That will give you something to do for a couple of days. Hope you > >can follow the logic. get back to me if you have problems. > > > > Good luck > > > > Peter in Sydney > > > >PS!! Some of the variant spellings were Kitely, Kightly, Kitly, Citly, > >Keightley and Kitghtley. > > > > > >==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== > >The Bedfordshire Surnames List can be viewed at: > >http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > > > >_________________________________________________________________ >realestate.com.au: the biggest address in property >http://ninemsn.realestate.com.au > >______________________________ >X-Message: #14 >Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 20:37:14 -0600 >From: "Sandee" <sandee@ionet.net> >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <410-22006212023714490@ionet.net> >Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest >Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > >i have also noticed this throught the years......in fact, can only readily >remember one incident when a child that was named after a deceased sib >survived! i understand the parents reasoning for 'honoring' a deceased >child....but the bad luck ogre seems to prevail. > > > > [Original Message] > > From: pauline davy <perilsofpauline1@hotmail.com> > > To: <BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com> > > Date: 2/19/2006 7:16:50 PM > > Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest > > > > Hi everyone - I'm butting in here, hope you don't mind, but you >mentioned >a > > family who had three children named William, obviously the first two had > > died. Does anyone find, as I do, that these children who are given a > > deceased siblings name, often die themselves? Just recently I came >across >a > > Margaret, three times a child was christened that, and three times the >baby > > died. This doesn't seem to be an isolated incident either. I'd be >interested > > in what other listers think. > > Regards, > > Pauline in OZ > > > > > > >From: "Peter Booth" <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> > > >Reply-To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com > > >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com > > >Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest > > >Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 16:49:03 +1100 > > > > > >Donna, > > > > > > I don't have any links to this family. But your's was the only > > >message received today, so I had the luxury of some time to have a >close > > >look. Lucky for you. > > > > > > I've been advising people for years to click on batch numbers on > > >IGI records. It's amazing what you find. > > > > > > I found the 1694 record for Elizabeth, clicked on the batch >number > > >and searched for KIGHTLEY. Only the one record came back up. I >suspected > > >possible surname variants. It would be unusual for just one child. > > > > > > Not to be outdone, I searched the batch again, this time using >just > > >father's given name Francis. Et Voila !!. Elizabeth and seven brothers >and > > >sisters all with different surname spellings. Only one included a >mother's > > >name Elizabeth. Primed with success I went and found the marriage. > > > > > > Francis Kitely married Elizabeth Cliffton on 3rd May 1677 in > > >Houghton Conquest. Elizabeth was the youngest of eight children. The >name > > >William was used three times suggesting the earlier two had died. The > > >children were :- Francis 1678, William (I) 1680, John 1682, Joseph >1685, > > >William (II) 1687, William (III) 1689, James 1691 and Elizabeth 1694. > > > > > > I also clicked on the batch number for the marriage record. It > > >indicated that Elizabeth Cliffton had a brother John who married Ann > > >Slingsby. > > > > > > Your back in the "dark ages" when it comes to finding birth >records > > >for Francis and Elizabeth. I found nothing for Francis, but there was >an > > >Elizabeth Clifton b1849 at Houghton Conquest. It makes her 28 at >marriage > > >which might be a bit old for the era. And there are lots of Elizabeth's >in > > >other counties. > > > > > > That will give you something to do for a couple of days. Hope >you > > >can follow the logic. get back to me if you have problems. > > > > > > Good luck > > > > > > Peter in Sydney > > > > > >PS!! Some of the variant spellings were Kitely, Kightly, Kitly, Citly, > > >Keightley and Kitghtley. > > > > > > > > >==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== > > >The Bedfordshire Surnames List can be viewed at: > > >http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > realestate.com.au: the biggest address in property > > http://ninemsn.realestate.com.au > > > > > > ==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== > > For any updates our info about the status of this list go to > > http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com > > > >______________________________ >X-Message: #15 >Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 21:31:14 -0600 >From: "Sandee" <sandee@ionet.net> >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-ID: <410-22006212033114490@ionet.net> >Subject: Re: [BDF] CROFT/OSBORNE - Henlow >Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > >Per LDS 1042925, Campton Parish Records: i show: > >John Cooper, m Mary, had dau Ann. Ann died 11Mar1784 >Emma Cooper m Enoch George ODell, 14May1894 >Fredrick Cooper m Elizabeth Wells, 11Nov1877 >George Cooper m Elizabeth Frombeley, 25Dec1780 >James Cooper bap 1805, son of George and Elizabeth (Frombley) Cooper >Mary Cooper dau George and Elizabeth (Frombley) christened 16Sep1810 >Thomas Cooper son of George and Elizabeth (Frombley) christened 16Aug1807 >William Cooper son of George and Elizabeth (Frombley), christened >17Apr1802, m Elizabeth Watts, 8Nov__ >James Cooper buried 1662 >John Cooper m Mary >Joseph Cooper m Fanny Thompson12Dec1666 >Michael Cooper m Ann Wells, 25Oct1818 >Thomas Cooper m Sarah Wells, 29May17__ >The Widow Cooper m Robert Sharp 24Oct1662 > >I am still plugging away at this microfilm, have barely scratched the >surface! my connections are WELLS and ODELL. > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Eunice Cubbage <eunice@cubbage.plus.com> > > To: <BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com> > > Date: 2/19/2006 12:12:12 PM > > Subject: Re: [BDF] CROFT/OSBORNE - Henlow > > > > David - > > > > Thanks for the info - I see you refer to Craft rather than Croft - were > > these two names interchangeable ? > > > > Eunice > > > > > > David wrote: > > > Hi Eunice > > > > > > Samuel Craft was the elder brother of my 3xg gt aunt Mary Ann Craft b >1808 Henlow who married into my Cooper forebears. He was christened on 30 >June 1805 at Henlow, the son of Samuel and Elizabeth Craft. Samuel snr was >christened at Astwick Beds on 26 June 1768, and he married Elizabeth >Bailey at Astwick on 12 Oct 1793. She was born at Ashwell Herts c 1766 >(she was aged 85 in 1851). > > > > > > Osborn was not a Henlow name and I can't see where Susan was from. >She was dead by 1861 where Samuel was a widower but I can't find the >family in 1851. I'll carry on digging > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > David > > > > > > ==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== > > Bedfordshire at Rootsweb > > http://www.rootsweb.com/~engbdf/ > >

Hi everyone - I'm butting in here, hope you don't mind, but you mentioned a family who had three children named William, obviously the first two had died. Does anyone find, as I do, that these children who are given a deceased siblings name, often die themselves? Just recently I came across a Margaret, three times a child was christened that, and three times the baby died. This doesn't seem to be an isolated incident either. I'd be interested in what other listers think. Regards, Pauline in OZ >From: "Peter Booth" <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> >Reply-To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest >Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 16:49:03 +1100 > >Donna, > > I don't have any links to this family. But your's was the only >message received today, so I had the luxury of some time to have a close >look. Lucky for you. > > I've been advising people for years to click on batch numbers on >IGI records. It's amazing what you find. > > I found the 1694 record for Elizabeth, clicked on the batch number >and searched for KIGHTLEY. Only the one record came back up. I suspected >possible surname variants. It would be unusual for just one child. > > Not to be outdone, I searched the batch again, this time using just >father's given name Francis. Et Voila !!. Elizabeth and seven brothers and >sisters all with different surname spellings. Only one included a mother's >name Elizabeth. Primed with success I went and found the marriage. > > Francis Kitely married Elizabeth Cliffton on 3rd May 1677 in >Houghton Conquest. Elizabeth was the youngest of eight children. The name >William was used three times suggesting the earlier two had died. The >children were :- Francis 1678, William (I) 1680, John 1682, Joseph 1685, >William (II) 1687, William (III) 1689, James 1691 and Elizabeth 1694. > > I also clicked on the batch number for the marriage record. It >indicated that Elizabeth Cliffton had a brother John who married Ann >Slingsby. > > Your back in the "dark ages" when it comes to finding birth records >for Francis and Elizabeth. I found nothing for Francis, but there was an >Elizabeth Clifton b1849 at Houghton Conquest. It makes her 28 at marriage >which might be a bit old for the era. And there are lots of Elizabeth's in >other counties. > > That will give you something to do for a couple of days. Hope you >can follow the logic. get back to me if you have problems. > > Good luck > > Peter in Sydney > >PS!! Some of the variant spellings were Kitely, Kightly, Kitly, Citly, >Keightley and Kitghtley. > > >==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== >The Bedfordshire Surnames List can be viewed at: >http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > _________________________________________________________________ realestate.com.au: the biggest address in property http://ninemsn.realestate.com.au

Hi Folks, I don't believe in luck, or a curse attached to a name. It is just coincidence - a high mortality rate due to insanitary conditions and diseases for which we now have innoculation.It was a miracle that any child survived.They obviously had certain family names that they were determined to perpetuate and they would have given them irrespective of whether the child was healthy or not. I also notice that twins rarely survived. I have a case in my family tree where the babies were called by names which did not follow the family naming pattern because they were obviously not expected to survive.It was the couple's second set of twins. Neither set lived. Jill

Bob Dawson has published "THE GENEALOGY OF THE ROMANY BOSWELLS" - details on the Romany and Traveller Family History Society site http://www.rtfhs.org.uk/ Carol, If you are anywhere near Chesterfield there's a Romany and Traveller Culture & Family History Day on 11th March. Dianne

Hi Pauline I thought I was the only one thinking the very same thing. I have several families who kept christening their children with a particular name, and each time that child died - it was as if there was a curse on certain names in some families, so I'm with you there. Cheers Patti ----- Original Message ----- From: pauline davy To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 1:16 AM Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest Hi everyone - I'm butting in here, hope you don't mind, but you mentioned a family who had three children named William, obviously the first two had died. Does anyone find, as I do, that these children who are given a deceased siblings name, often die themselves? Just recently I came across a Margaret, three times a child was christened that, and three times the baby died. This doesn't seem to be an isolated incident either. I'd be interested in what other listers think. Regards, Pauline in OZ >From: "Peter Booth" <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> >Reply-To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest >Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 16:49:03 +1100 > >Donna, > > I don't have any links to this family. But your's was the only >message received today, so I had the luxury of some time to have a close >look. Lucky for you. > > I've been advising people for years to click on batch numbers on >IGI records. It's amazing what you find. > > I found the 1694 record for Elizabeth, clicked on the batch number >and searched for KIGHTLEY. Only the one record came back up. I suspected >possible surname variants. It would be unusual for just one child. > > Not to be outdone, I searched the batch again, this time using just >father's given name Francis. Et Voila !!. Elizabeth and seven brothers and >sisters all with different surname spellings. Only one included a mother's >name Elizabeth. Primed with success I went and found the marriage. > > Francis Kitely married Elizabeth Cliffton on 3rd May 1677 in >Houghton Conquest. Elizabeth was the youngest of eight children. The name >William was used three times suggesting the earlier two had died. The >children were :- Francis 1678, William (I) 1680, John 1682, Joseph 1685, >William (II) 1687, William (III) 1689, James 1691 and Elizabeth 1694. > > I also clicked on the batch number for the marriage record. It >indicated that Elizabeth Cliffton had a brother John who married Ann >Slingsby. > > Your back in the "dark ages" when it comes to finding birth records >for Francis and Elizabeth. I found nothing for Francis, but there was an >Elizabeth Clifton b1849 at Houghton Conquest. It makes her 28 at marriage >which might be a bit old for the era. And there are lots of Elizabeth's in >other counties. > > That will give you something to do for a couple of days. Hope you >can follow the logic. get back to me if you have problems. > > Good luck > > Peter in Sydney > >PS!! Some of the variant spellings were Kitely, Kightly, Kitly, Citly, >Keightley and Kitghtley. > > >==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== >The Bedfordshire Surnames List can be viewed at: >http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > _________________________________________________________________ realestate.com.au: the biggest address in property http://ninemsn.realestate.com.au ==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== For any updates our info about the status of this list go to http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com

Lila Certainly, we cant blame the River for what happens in Shillington in 1760s! But it is interesting none-the-less. Were the PAGEs under 2 years old when they died? The age two, appears to be the age we leave off saying 'failure to thrive' and begin speaking about childhood illnesses...although they are often one & the same in 18th & 19th C. A poorly baby will be more susceptible to any illness that is going about? We can never establish this or any old diseases etc exactly. And as a PS the word 'Ouze' is Saxon for 'river' so when we say: 'River Ouze' - we are really saying 'River River'!?! cathy

In a message dated 2/20/06 11:26:29 AM GMT Standard Time, AudreyJoyceMcC@aol.com writes: > I don't know about twins 'though - I expect they are susceptible X 2. Sorry - a colleague of mine told me that it would be higher percentage than that with twins as the infants would probably have a lower birth-weight which would put them at a considerable disadvantage to a normal birth-weight child. Jill, you did not say when/where these babies were born, but new-borns are bigger these days - thanks to better nutrition of pregnant mums. These days we would say "inability to thrive" about poor sickly infants. Although twins do thrive now because we compensate nutritionally etc when needed. It must have been awful for the parents to lose 4 of their babies like that. And hard to imagine their sorrow. I think you have started an interesting discussion cathy

Jill Thank you for raising this, it is something I have often thought about too. I have noticed this high infant mortality too in some families where as other families do not lose their babies [my people in Mid-Beds didn't seem to lose babies at all] but I do not think there has been a study on it. It seems to me a bit macarbre the way parents continued to name their children after earlier dead offspring but it happens a lot. Bedford was said to be one of the unhealthiest place to live in England in the late 1820s - 1830s because of cholera. And, then, there was typhoid in the 1860s. There was an article about Bedford's high moratality rate in the Local History Magazine [no 82 in Nov-Dec 2000] But I researched a family who lived in the villages east of Bedford by the river in the 18th & early 19th C and they had high infant-mortality. They were very poor and that must be, at least, a contributing factor in repeated child mortality. I don't know about twins 'though - I expect they are susceptible X 2. However, I do wonder if the River [Ouze] has anything to do with child deaths? The LOVELL family are interesting because three brothers were transported in the 1830s [and it seems that they were the 'lucky' ones!]: http://www2.tribalpages.com/tribe/browse?userid=lovellfamily&view=9&pid=13&rand=586253606 It would be good to hear what other researchers have found. We can never establish, for instance, whether there was a greater child mortality in East Beds & Huntingdonshire etc [the villages down the river from Bedford] than in Mid-Beds? I would expect, at least, that there may have been more gastric disorders and the like but as there were no death certs until 1837 there is no way of telling. cathy

My family, the Page's were from Shillington, Beds. I have researched them back to 1700 so far. The generation that had children, seven of them to be exact, around 1760 had only two of the seven that survived. Interesting topic. Lila George AudreyJoyceMcC@aol.com wrote: Jill Thank you for raising this, it is something I have often thought about too. I have noticed this high infant mortality too in some families where as other families do not lose their babies [my people in Mid-Beds didn't seem to lose babies at all] but I do not think there has been a study on it. It seems to me a bit macarbre the way parents continued to name their children after earlier dead offspring but it happens a lot. Bedford was said to be one of the unhealthiest place to live in England in the late 1820s - 1830s because of cholera. And, then, there was typhoid in the 1860s. There was an article about Bedford's high moratality rate in the Local History Magazine [no 82 in Nov-Dec 2000] But I researched a family who lived in the villages east of Bedford by the river in the 18th & early 19th C and they had high infant-mortality. They were very poor and that must be, at least, a contributing factor in repeated child mortality. I don't know about twins 'though - I expect they are susceptible X 2. However, I do wonder if the River [Ouze] has anything to do with child deaths? The LOVELL family are interesting because three brothers were transported in the 1830s [and it seems that they were the 'lucky' ones!]: http://www2.tribalpages.com/tribe/browse?userid=lovellfamily&view=9&pid=13&rand=586253606 It would be good to hear what other researchers have found. We can never establish, for instance, whether there was a greater child mortality in East Beds & Huntingdonshire etc [the villages down the river from Bedford] than in Mid-Beds? I would expect, at least, that there may have been more gastric disorders and the like but as there were no death certs until 1837 there is no way of telling. cathy ==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== The Bedfordshire Surnames List can be viewed at: http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

David said: > They were all Craft or Crafts until the mid 1820s when the spelling seemed to change to Croft< It seems to have been exactly the same over the border in Hertfordshire too with my 'Craft/Croft gang'. Mind you, that's easy compared with at least 7 different Lessels spellings of children baptised in one single family of mine in Fife - and no, I haven't managed to trace their descendants properly yet! Good luck, Ruth in Brum. (Birmingham, England.)

Per LDS 1042925, Campton Parish Records: i show: John Cooper, m Mary, had dau Ann. Ann died 11Mar1784 Emma Cooper m Enoch George ODell, 14May1894 Fredrick Cooper m Elizabeth Wells, 11Nov1877 George Cooper m Elizabeth Frombeley, 25Dec1780 James Cooper bap 1805, son of George and Elizabeth (Frombley) Cooper Mary Cooper dau George and Elizabeth (Frombley) christened 16Sep1810 Thomas Cooper son of George and Elizabeth (Frombley) christened 16Aug1807 William Cooper son of George and Elizabeth (Frombley), christened 17Apr1802, m Elizabeth Watts, 8Nov__ James Cooper buried 1662 John Cooper m Mary Joseph Cooper m Fanny Thompson12Dec1666 Michael Cooper m Ann Wells, 25Oct1818 Thomas Cooper m Sarah Wells, 29May17__ The Widow Cooper m Robert Sharp 24Oct1662 I am still plugging away at this microfilm, have barely scratched the surface! my connections are WELLS and ODELL. > [Original Message] > From: Eunice Cubbage <eunice@cubbage.plus.com> > To: <BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com> > Date: 2/19/2006 12:12:12 PM > Subject: Re: [BDF] CROFT/OSBORNE - Henlow > > David - > > Thanks for the info - I see you refer to Craft rather than Croft - were > these two names interchangeable ? > > Eunice > > > David wrote: > > Hi Eunice > > > > Samuel Craft was the elder brother of my 3xg gt aunt Mary Ann Craft b 1808 Henlow who married into my Cooper forebears. He was christened on 30 June 1805 at Henlow, the son of Samuel and Elizabeth Craft. Samuel snr was christened at Astwick Beds on 26 June 1768, and he married Elizabeth Bailey at Astwick on 12 Oct 1793. She was born at Ashwell Herts c 1766 (she was aged 85 in 1851). > > > > Osborn was not a Henlow name and I can't see where Susan was from. She was dead by 1861 where Samuel was a widower but I can't find the family in 1851. I'll carry on digging > > > > Regards > > > > David > > > ==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== > Bedfordshire at Rootsweb > http://www.rootsweb.com/~engbdf/ >

Hi Eunice They were all Craft or Crafts until the mid 1820s when the spelling seemed to change to Croft They weren't in Henlow in 1841 (I checked) - by that time they were already in St Pancras, London, as in 1861 Jane was 28 and Walter was 21 both with a birthplace St Pancras I haven't been able to find them in 1851 but suspect that Susannah may have died in late 1850 as there is a death in St Pancras of Susannah Croft in the Dec quarter. Regards David Eunice Cubbage <eunice@cubbage.plus.com> a écrit : Hi, I haven't done any research in Bedfordshire, so am not sure what records are easily searchable. Can anyone check the 1841 Census for Henlow, I'm looking for a Samuel Croft (or Craft) and his wife, Susan, and any children. Hope someone can help. Regards Eunice Cubbage ==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== The Bedfordshire Family History Page is at http://www.bfhs.org.uk --------------------------------- Nouveau : téléphonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! Découvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.Téléchargez la version beta.

i have also noticed this throught the years......in fact, can only readily remember one incident when a child that was named after a deceased sib survived! i understand the parents reasoning for 'honoring' a deceased child....but the bad luck ogre seems to prevail. > [Original Message] > From: pauline davy <perilsofpauline1@hotmail.com> > To: <BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com> > Date: 2/19/2006 7:16:50 PM > Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest > > Hi everyone - I'm butting in here, hope you don't mind, but you mentioned a > family who had three children named William, obviously the first two had > died. Does anyone find, as I do, that these children who are given a > deceased siblings name, often die themselves? Just recently I came across a > Margaret, three times a child was christened that, and three times the baby > died. This doesn't seem to be an isolated incident either. I'd be interested > in what other listers think. > Regards, > Pauline in OZ > > > >From: "Peter Booth" <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> > >Reply-To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com > >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com > >Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest > >Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 16:49:03 +1100 > > > >Donna, > > > > I don't have any links to this family. But your's was the only > >message received today, so I had the luxury of some time to have a close > >look. Lucky for you. > > > > I've been advising people for years to click on batch numbers on > >IGI records. It's amazing what you find. > > > > I found the 1694 record for Elizabeth, clicked on the batch number > >and searched for KIGHTLEY. Only the one record came back up. I suspected > >possible surname variants. It would be unusual for just one child. > > > > Not to be outdone, I searched the batch again, this time using just > >father's given name Francis. Et Voila !!. Elizabeth and seven brothers and > >sisters all with different surname spellings. Only one included a mother's > >name Elizabeth. Primed with success I went and found the marriage. > > > > Francis Kitely married Elizabeth Cliffton on 3rd May 1677 in > >Houghton Conquest. Elizabeth was the youngest of eight children. The name > >William was used three times suggesting the earlier two had died. The > >children were :- Francis 1678, William (I) 1680, John 1682, Joseph 1685, > >William (II) 1687, William (III) 1689, James 1691 and Elizabeth 1694. > > > > I also clicked on the batch number for the marriage record. It > >indicated that Elizabeth Cliffton had a brother John who married Ann > >Slingsby. > > > > Your back in the "dark ages" when it comes to finding birth records > >for Francis and Elizabeth. I found nothing for Francis, but there was an > >Elizabeth Clifton b1849 at Houghton Conquest. It makes her 28 at marriage > >which might be a bit old for the era. And there are lots of Elizabeth's in > >other counties. > > > > That will give you something to do for a couple of days. Hope you > >can follow the logic. get back to me if you have problems. > > > > Good luck > > > > Peter in Sydney > > > >PS!! Some of the variant spellings were Kitely, Kightly, Kitly, Citly, > >Keightley and Kitghtley. > > > > > >==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== > >The Bedfordshire Surnames List can be viewed at: > >http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > realestate.com.au: the biggest address in property > http://ninemsn.realestate.com.au > > > ==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== > For any updates our info about the status of this list go to > http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com >