Hi Peter " I've answered 982 postings on this forum alone. You're at 28. I can't be accused at lack of effort". Nobody is accusing you of lack of effort, only the reminder at how much this would have cost if you had been paid! You are not forced to answer every query, but are obviously doing it because you want to which is great. Personally only having one or two names in Bedfordshire and a fairly tight area in which they lived, I only answer questions/help where I am sure of the answer/ or can provide an insight which is possibly not available elsewhere, there is certainly no point in duplicating replies. 982 against 28 postings, I wish I had the time to count them! "My point is that there is a cost in resources and subscriptions and a large amount of effort required to look up readily available data on basic sites like Family Search, FreeBMD and Census records. It's extremely frustrating when people are unwilling or incapable of extracting data that's staring them in the face." Yes, it would be nice if everybody was Internet savvy but suprisingly alot of people are not, especially beginners & older people. A gentle nudge in the right direction is often appreciated. Kind Regards Norina > From: pbo08596@bigpond.net.au > To: bedford@rootsweb.com > Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 20:22:36 +1100 > Subject: Re: [BDF] THOMAS MORGAN & SARAH HALE - c1840 Heath & Reach > > Norina, > > > > And I replied within a hour of the post. I'm the only one to have done > so. And while I'm not criticising, he's had 24 hours to at least acknowledge > my efforts. > > As for the other lady, I put in a similar effort on my initial response > to her in June last year and it wasn't followed up. > > > > My purpose in mentioning money is simply to illustrate that each answer > is equivalent to $20-$50 from a professional researcher. > > On that basis, I've provided over $25,000 worth of effort to help people > on this list. And that's just one list. > > Peter > > > > > > > > > The List Guidelines > > http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ > > The Bedfordshire Surnames List > > http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BEDFORD-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message _________________________________________________________________ We want to hear all your funny, exciting and crazy Hotmail stories. Tell us now http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/

Hi Peter, Thanks for answering. The previous posts were put on by me, I thought I would give it another go, you never know. Patricia Craft is my aunt. Susan WAS the mother of both. I have found that they were a little slack in registering the births. Sometimes Susan was Garret, sometimes Underwood and sometimes Craft. When she died she was Ella May Craft, but lucking her death certificate had "also known as" on it. Then you get to Althea. She paid for my grandfathers funeral and bought a double plot, then promptly disappeared........ The joys of family history hunting. Thanks again, and have a good day. Sue ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Booth" <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> To: <bedford@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 5:19 PM Subject: Re: [BDF] UNDERWOOD, Claude Charles > Sue, > > I can see a number of posts on this subject going back to 1996. So not > sure we can add much more. It looks like you've taken over from your > mother > or your aunt. > > WWI records were largely destroyed in WW2 bombings. Only a very small > percentage remain. Some are on Ancestry. There are also some medal cards, > but as most are service medals, basically all they reveal is that he > served, > which you know already. > > There is a private member tree at Ancestry for son Claude born 1921. If > you don't have a subscription, perhaps you can get somebody who has to try > and make contact. > > I think your main query concerns Althea. The only likely birth in > Bedfordshire 1900-1920 is Althea Bennett born 1905, but she married in > 1934, 5 years before he died. Of course she could have been separated from > her husband by 1839, but I'd probably discount her. > > Assuming she wasn't a married woman and she wasn't around a year after > his death, you're probably looking for any Althea marriage 1939-1940 in > Bedfordshire or any of the London counties. Even if you find one, how > you'd > ever prove their relationship is a problem. > > I'd also recommend you re-check some of your assumptions. Unless I have > the wrong births, Kenneth Underwood is registered 12/1929 mother's name > Garrett while Patricia Craft was registered 6/1929, a bare six months > earlier. Even allowing for registration quarters, it gets pretty tight for > Susan to be the mother of both. > > I also notice that Brenda's birth on FreeBMD has mother's maiden name > as Underwood and Dorothy has Garrett. I couldn't get the images on > Ancestry > as it's undergoing maintenance. > > Not sure if that's helped. But I think you'rr asking a question that we > really can't answer from basic records. > > Peter in Sydney > > > > > The List Guidelines > > http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ > > The Bedfordshire Surnames List > > http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BEDFORD-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

It is with a certain amount of trepidation that I post this reply to the various emails in response to my initial posting! The reason for my posting in the first place was I had conflicting information on Thomas and Sarah and their children and I naively thought that it might be better to put the minimum of information rather than lead people down the same conflicting alley I had been - how wrong was I! Add to this the difficulty I am finding with this branch of my tree since it is close to the borders of Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire and Buckinghamshire with children often born in one county and christened in another adds another level of complexity to contend with. With no access to the relevant census information and a mixed level of coverage by the IGI of the three counties, I was also hoping by this posting I might be able to locate somebody else researching the same people With regard to the length of time between the initial posting and this reply the answer is quite straightforward - I only receive the daily digests - I am having to research my tree over 8 counties (most at the other end of England to me) and so decided that the digest was the most sensible way of doing this Many thanks for all the help received with this and previous postings and hope to be in a position to help fellow researchers as and when Rick Smith

I looked at Rick's initial request and my immediate reaction, right or wrong, was that he was asking for his research to be done for him. I quick look at the IGI, available free to all, made it pretty obvious what had happened - late baptism - but perhaps folk with less experience might not pick up on that. But as Rick didn't say what his research had been we had no idea if he'd been through censuses or not. But then I saw that Peter had beaten me to the reply, giving more detail and guidance than I would have given. If Rick had found the baptism of the wife then presumably he knew her parents. It was asking for their grandparents which caused me to wonder why he couldn't do that himself. Of course for a belt and braces job he could always purchase the marriage certificate, which would confirm fathers' names. Yes, perhaps Peter was a bit impatient with his follow up to his initial post, but not unduly so. I for one am grateful for the effort he puts into this list, and can but admire his patience on many occasions. I share his approach that the list should be for helping people do their own research, rather than just handing it to them on a plate. David On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Gus Tysoe <gustysoe@tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > Despite having - as I'd thought - pasted Marlene's address into my quick > reply, it'd seem the pasting failed... > > My apologies for continuing this On-List, as I fully realise it's > Off-Topic. > > Gus > > > > > The List Guidelines > > http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ > > The Bedfordshire Surnames List > > http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html<http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/%7Ehughw/bedf.html> > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BEDFORD-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Despite having - as I'd thought - pasted Marlene's address into my quick reply, it'd seem the pasting failed... My apologies for continuing this On-List, as I fully realise it's Off-Topic. Gus

Hello Marlene, I've just posted the following to Norina & Bev - yours came in as I was doing so, otherwise I'd've included you as well. ************* As I was the one who basically started this general thread in the first place - by politely (if firmly) stating *why* I wouldn't be answering the "poor lady" - I feel it's only fair that I should respond. But I'm doing it Off-List, as this subject is Off Topic because: 1) We'll *all* quite likely be getting a slap on the wrist - at least - from the Listowner for breaching the List Rules; and 2) I have no wish for it to develop into any sort of Flame War. Taking the 2 cases in order: 1) The "poor lady" had posed the question - poorly - 8 months ago, and promptly received a deeply-detailed answer which included a suggestion as to how best to frame questions in future. She had clearly taken no notice of this, and - effectively - restated the question in the same way. I'd've been perfectly happy had she lied and said that (say) she'd had a computer crash and lost her earlier data - in which case I'd've copied the earlier reply to her as it stood, and added the extra detail she'd wanted. 2) The "poor man" had posed his query to *at least* two lists at around 9.30am UK time - from a UK address - which gives the impression that he was unlikely to be 'at work', and thus probably able to check his mail at varying times throughout the day. He received a detailed reply within 3 hours, and a second before [UK] sunset - but as yet I've still seen no response. I don't see where you get the "obsession with money" from... There's been no mention of any money being requested - the information having been freely given in both cases - but it *is*, I believe, worthwhile now and then to remind the Seekers of Free Information that they *are* getting good value... And, yes, I'm also a Hoper for Free Information from the various Lists I've joined - and am happy to (in a way) "pay" for it by answering others' enquiries where I have knowledge of the subject, or if their enquiry sounds interesting. Freely... Gus ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marlene Shipman" <marlene.s@xtra.co.nz> To: <bedford@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 9:23 AM Subject: Re: [BDF] THOMAS MORGAN & SARAH HALE - c1840 Heath & Reach > Hi > It is sometimes difficult given the worldwide timeframes we are workimg > in, > folk working, and family responsibilities etc. I care for a disabled > person > nad it is sometimes 48 Hours or more before I can reply.Even though I may > have read the message.it's impossible to reply immediately and make sense > of > any suggestions. Especially as I no longer have access to Censii and would > have to get a Caregiver in order to check at the Library. My circumstances > are only one of a dozen possible scenarios. > I agree with Norina & Bev - surely we want to help with whatever level of > experience or resources we have available? Freely? > OR not answer? > Marlene

Hi Give the poor man a chance to read his emails, inwardly digest the info & find the time to look! As far as I am concerned these forums are for helping people with problems that they are stuck on. Okay some may want something for nothing but as that cannot be distinguished by an email then who are we to judge. We don't know peoples circumstances. I give all info freely and only expect a thank you in return. As for the poor lady who dared to re ask a question perhaps all she was fishing for was researchers with similiar interests, she wasn't asking for any specifics. We have all done that in one form or another. Lastly what is this obsession with money! If your time is that valuable then don't answer the queries! Recent answers on this forum have been very off putting for people who may want to post a query but are wary of the dressing down for doing so. Kind Regards Norina > From: pbo08596@bigpond.net.au > To: bedford@rootsweb.com > Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:48:11 +1100 > Subject: [BDF] THOMAS MORGAN & SARAH HALE - c1840 Heath & Reach > > > Perhaps I'm too impatient. I didn't see any response to my discovery of > this family. So I followed my suggestions just to see if the information was > good. > > As I said, batches for Heath and Reach show five children of William > Morgan and Ann Atwell were all christened on the same day. Another two were > christened the following year. From later census data children were Thomas > c1821, Sarah c1824, Mary c1825, Francis c1828, Anthony c1830, William > c1834 and Elizabeth c 1832. A later sister Ruth was born c1842 > > I suggested Thomas would still be with parents in 1841 census as he did > not marry until December Qtr. Unfortunately this was not the case as he was > working elsewhere. But in 1851, Mary, Anthony and William are living with > their brother Thomas and his wife Sarah and children. > > Anthony is the key. In 1841, he is found with parents William and Ann > and all the other children, except Thomas and Francis who sadly died in Dec > qtr 1838. > > In 1851, you get a bonus. William & Ann and children Sarah, Elizabeth & > Ruth are living with Ann's widowed mother Sarah Atwell aged 80 born > Soulsbury, Bucks. > > William birthplace is given as Stewkley, Bucks but on Google it now > comes up as part of Leighton Buzzard. In 1841, he's shown as born in > Bedfordshire. Ann's birthplace is given as Heath and Reach. > > People should appreciate that this reply and the associated research has > taken nearly 90 minutes. I can get paid up to $50 an hour doing my > professional research. > > So please follow up on suggestions. > > Either that or attend a course or pay a professional. > > Peter in Sydney > > > > > The List Guidelines > > http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ > > The Bedfordshire Surnames List > > http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BEDFORD-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message _________________________________________________________________ Tell us your greatest, weirdest and funniest Hotmail stories http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/

Rick, That shouldn't be so hard. So let's think logically on the problem. I presume you've looked on www.familysearch.org but there are no Thomas Morgan christening in Bedfordshire for that timeframe. As over 90% of Bedford Parish Records are on IGI, he is either not christened, non conformist or born elsewhere. If you Google "Hugh Wallis" and look at batches for Heath and Reach, there are no Morgan christenings before about 1837. But if you examine them closely you'll see five children of William and Ann christened on the same day 30th June 1837. There's another two on 25th Nov 1838. I'd be looking for William and Ann in 1841 census. I'd almost be willing to bet you will find a range of ages for the children. Irrespective of that, Thomas and Sarah's marriage was Dec qtr 1841. So for 1841 census you should find them both still living with their respective parents. Give that a go and post the result. Peter

Sue, I can see a number of posts on this subject going back to 1996. So not sure we can add much more. It looks like you've taken over from your mother or your aunt. WWI records were largely destroyed in WW2 bombings. Only a very small percentage remain. Some are on Ancestry. There are also some medal cards, but as most are service medals, basically all they reveal is that he served, which you know already. There is a private member tree at Ancestry for son Claude born 1921. If you don't have a subscription, perhaps you can get somebody who has to try and make contact. I think your main query concerns Althea. The only likely birth in Bedfordshire 1900-1920 is Althea Bennett born 1905, but she married in 1934, 5 years before he died. Of course she could have been separated from her husband by 1839, but I'd probably discount her. Assuming she wasn't a married woman and she wasn't around a year after his death, you're probably looking for any Althea marriage 1939-1940 in Bedfordshire or any of the London counties. Even if you find one, how you'd ever prove their relationship is a problem. I'd also recommend you re-check some of your assumptions. Unless I have the wrong births, Kenneth Underwood is registered 12/1929 mother's name Garrett while Patricia Craft was registered 6/1929, a bare six months earlier. Even allowing for registration quarters, it gets pretty tight for Susan to be the mother of both. I also notice that Brenda's birth on FreeBMD has mother's maiden name as Underwood and Dorothy has Garrett. I couldn't get the images on Ancestry as it's undergoing maintenance. Not sure if that's helped. But I think you'rr asking a question that we really can't answer from basic records. Peter in Sydney

Hi, Looking for any information on Claude Charles Underwood. Claude Charles Underwood was born 22 April, 1897 in Luton, Bedfordshire to Charles Underwood and Kate North. He was supposedly in WW1. He was supposedly a POW in the Middle East. He was supposedly a motor mechanic/lorry driver/ or in the Guards. He was supposedly injured in France. I, nor an Army researcher, can find any record of him in WW1. He married Susan Annie Jane Garrett in Lidlington, Bedford 27 November 1920. (He supposedly bought her an expensive watch back from France when he came home injured. I say supposedly because although Dad saw the watch, the story could be false, there was a watch, but where it may have come from....................... Claude Charles and Susan went on to have 5 children (although Annie had a son earlier on 7 November 1918 who was fatherless, but I believe Claude was the father), Claude Henry Charles 1921 Lionel Harold 1922 Dennis Andrew 1926 Gerald Douglas 1927 Kenneth 1929 Claude and Susan separated, but never divorced, around 1930. Susan went into a de facto (current day term) relationship and had 4 more children. In 1939 Claude is living in London and is a driver. He is killed in an accident at Hendon on his way to work and the inquest lists his NOK as his wife ALTHEA Underwood. They may or may not have had more children. There was a story that Claude was 'going round with a redhead" in the early 1930's, maybe this was Althea. Can anyone fill in the 1930's gap please? If there are any rellies out there, do you have a photo that you are willing to share? Claude Charles Undaerwood was my grandfather. I would appreciate any help. Thanks Sue Given - Australia

In a message dated 18/02/2010 7:32:08 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, pbo08596@bigpond.net.au writes: I presume you've looked on www.familysearch.org but there are no Thomas Morgan christening in Bedfordshire for that timeframe. As over 90% of Bedford Parish Records are on IGI, he is either not christened, non conformist or born elsewhere. OR: One of the 10%, Christened but not registered Christened under another name Part of the register lost, damaged or illegible Transcription or entry error Born here but christened elsewhere etc. Graham

Assuming my research is correct Thomas Morgan was born in 1821 in Heath and Reach married Sarah Hale in 1841 in Potsgrove. Sarah was christened in 1822 at Thorley in Hertfordshire Confirmation of their respective parents and grandparents much appreciated Rick Smith Austwick, North Yorkshire

Liz, I'm afraid that I have to agree with Gus. I get paid to do professional research. I did all the work last year for free and you don't appear to have followed up one suggestion like 1901 and 1911 census. Now you're asking the same question with the same lack of detail. Dig out my previous response. You should be able to find all UK BDM events up to 2006 on Quarterly Indexes or Ancestry. Peter

The problem with those streets is that they were built when few people - and not those living there - had motor cars, so there is far too much on-street parking on streets with a very marked cambre. Not unpleasant houses, probably built for workers rather than professional people, but generally well-maintained. Joan. Eunice Cubbage wrote: > Thanks to everyone who responded to my message about the > above streets. It was really first-hand knowledge of what the > streets were like now I was after, and thanks especially to Dave > for the photos of York Street. > > Much appreciated. > > Eunice > > > > The List Guidelines > > http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ > > The Bedfordshire Surnames List > > http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BEDFORD-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?utm_campaign=en&utm_source=en-ha-emea-uk-syn-gm&utm_medium=ha&utm_term=map should allow you to decide what scale you need, and there are other, historical maps I've seen online. Joan. Lurke St. car park may have hoodies, but fewer people jump off it than the others. eve@varneys.org.uk wrote: > c > >> Further to previous replies, Bower Street still remains intact but >> Howard Street are was redeveloped in about 1968 according to addresses >> in some Kellys directories I have; the street remains starting from >> Mill Street end. but it is shorter it is shorter than it was; the >> other end is now the Lurke Street multi-floor carpark. >> > > Urggh. What an unfortunate mname for a car park. I get images of > hoodies hanging round with bricks, ready to break the car winbdows > and steal; the contents. > > Seriously, there is probably a good histroical map to be googled - son > many have been put on the net, via multimap and other sources. > > > > > The List Guidelines > > http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ > > The Bedfordshire Surnames List > > http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BEDFORD-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >

Thanks to everyone who responded to my message about the above streets. It was really first-hand knowledge of what the streets were like now I was after, and thanks especially to Dave for the photos of York Street. Much appreciated. Eunice

c > Further to previous replies, Bower Street still remains intact but > Howard Street are was redeveloped in about 1968 according to addresses > in some Kellys directories I have; the street remains starting from > Mill Street end. but it is shorter it is shorter than it was; the > other end is now the Lurke Street multi-floor carpark. Urggh. What an unfortunate mname for a car park. I get images of hoodies hanging round with bricks, ready to break the car winbdows and steal; the contents. Seriously, there is probably a good histroical map to be googled - son many have been put on the net, via multimap and other sources.

Well given that I appear to have upset a number of listers by a repeated request I will unsubscribe from this list. Liz _________________________________________________________________ We want to hear all your funny, exciting and crazy Hotmail stories. Tell us now http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/

Eunice, Simply go to a map site like Google or Multimap and put in the addresses. Most have a satellite view. Both address came up straight away on Google maps. Looking at the satellite view, Howard Street looks like a new supermarket, but Bower St still contains residential dwellings. Whether they are original buildings or new I can't tell. Peter

Further to previous replies, Bower Street still remains intact but Howard Street are was redeveloped in about 1968 according to addresses in some Kellys directories I have; the street remains starting from Mill Street end. but it is shorter it is shorter than it was; the other end is now the Lurke Street multi-floor carpark. Regards John - of Bromham, 4 miles from Bedford. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eunice Cubbage" <eunice@cubbage.plus.com> To: <BEDFORD@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 10:17 PM Subject: [BDF] Fulford/Bower Street/Howard Street > Hi > > I have joined the Bedford list in the hope of getting some help from > someone with local knowledge - my grandfather, William John FULFORD, was > living at 39, Howard Street at the time of the 1891 census, and my Dad > was born at 116 Bower Street in 1917. > > I was thinking I would like to visit Bedford to have a look at these 2 > streets to see where my Fulford ancestors lived. > > Can anyone tell me if there are old houses in either of these streets, > or have they been redeveloped ? If anyone has any photos of Howard > Street or Bower Street I'd love to see them. > > Thanks for reading > > Eunice > > > > The List Guidelines > > http://bedfordrootsweb.blogspot.com/ > > The Bedfordshire Surnames List > > http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BEDFORD-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.435 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2690 - Release Date: 02/15/10 19:35:00