Thanks to those who replied to my message. A few of you I have contacted off-line. Garry __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4530 (20091021) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com

Hi Garry..Can't help with researcher but we have in our tree, Sophia Stratton 22 ( daughter of Mathew , ag lab) ,married Loveden Lambourne 23, in Stanford in the Vale Berks, 1880. In 1881 they were living at Southside Street West, Stanford in the Vale and had a child, Price Charles Lambourne, best wishes Shirley ----- Original Message ----- From: "Garry F Bell" <gazza@woosh.co.nz> To: <berkshire@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:21 PM Subject: [BRK] Faringdon > Hi > > My STRATTON research has taken me from Newbury to Faringdon - a Parish I > know nothing about. Is it still in the County of Berkshire? I do not > know what area of Faringdon I am looking for either. > > I am looking for details of possible STRATTON burials in the Parish. Is > anything available on-line or has been published. > > In any case can anyone suggest a Researcher or someone who could do a > little research for me? > > With thanks > Garry > Auckland, NZ > > > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus > signature database 4527 (20091020) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > > http://www.eset.com > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BERKSHIRE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

And, Margaret, I have just realised most important of all - if your CDs have christenings - I am after a christening of a Thomas STRATTON (son of Thomas and Elizabeth) between 1832 and 1837. Again with thanks Garry > I have the FHS CD's for the Faringdon Area, if you let me know rough dates I will look through them for you > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4527 (20091020) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com

Margaret That would be great. I am looking for burials of STRATTON, Thomas between 1841 and 1851 (incl) and his wife Elizabeth between 1834 and 1841 (incl). I hope this not too much of an arduous task. With thanks Garry > u let me know rough dates I will look through them for you > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4527 (20091020) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com

Hi My STRATTON research has taken me from Newbury to Faringdon - a Parish I know nothing about. Is it still in the County of Berkshire? I do not know what area of Faringdon I am looking for either. I am looking for details of possible STRATTON burials in the Parish. Is anything available on-line or has been published. In any case can anyone suggest a Researcher or someone who could do a little research for me? With thanks Garry Auckland, NZ __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4527 (20091020) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com

The STRATTON family were quite prominent in 17th century Shrivenham, which is a few miles south of Faringon I have a few details of them but not of later generations Be careful, there is a "descent" of US origin which shows Strattons of USA to have come from the Shrivenham family via London - this is fatally flawed in the connection between Shrivenham and London, but it is very widely circulated - you'll hit copies of it when you use Google Cheers Simon -----Original Message----- From: berkshire-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:berkshire-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Garry F Bell Hi My STRATTON research has taken me from Newbury to Faringdon - a Parish I know nothing about. Is it still in the County of Berkshire? I do not know what area of Faringdon I am looking for either. I am looking for details of possible STRATTON burials in the Parish. Is anything available on-line or has been published.

Faringdon is in the part of north Berkshire that was transferred to Oxfordshire in 1974. There is a reasonable amount of transcribed material available from Oxfordshire FHS. Check out their website. You don't mention the period, but there are at least two 'Changing Face of Faringdon' books of old photographs which may be of interest. Again check the OFHS site for details. HTH --- On Wed, 21/10/09, Garry F Bell <gazza@woosh.co.nz> wrote: > From: Garry F Bell <gazza@woosh.co.nz> > Subject: [BRK] Faringdon > To: berkshire@rootsweb.com > Date: Wednesday, 21 October, 2009, 9:21 > Hi > > My STRATTON research has taken me from Newbury to Faringdon > - a Parish I > know nothing about. Is it still in the County of Berkshire? > I do not > know what area of Faringdon I am looking for either. > > I am looking for details of possible STRATTON burials in > the Parish. Is > anything available on-line or has been published. > > In any case can anyone suggest a Researcher or someone who > could do a > little research for me? > > With thanks > Garry > Auckland, NZ > > > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of > virus signature database 4527 (20091020) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > > http://www.eset.com > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BERKSHIRE-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the > subject and the body of the message >

I have the FHS CD's for the Faringdon Area, if you let me know rough dates I will look through them for you Margaret ________________________________ From: Garry F Bell <gazza@woosh.co.nz> To: berkshire@rootsweb.com Sent: Wednesday, 21 October, 2009 9:21:29 Subject: [BRK] Faringdon Hi My STRATTON research has taken me from Newbury to Faringdon - a Parish I know nothing about. Is it still in the County of Berkshire? I do not know what area of Faringdon I am looking for either. I am looking for details of possible STRATTON burials in the Parish. Is anything available on-line or has been published. In any case can anyone suggest a Researcher or someone who could do a little research for me? With thanks Garry Auckland, NZ __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4527 (20091020) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BERKSHIRE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello, I am interested in any LEWIS, CREAKER and CRAKER families in Wallingford in the 1700 and earlt 1800's. Thanks for any help. Janet (NZ)

Hi Sharon, Yes I have a few photos of the old houses on Fish St (now St Mary's St) that I scavenged off the internet. I am writing a small document about this part of my family so just wanted to include a few photos to spice things up. A piccy of the actual house they lived in would be especially good but, in the absence of being to work out which one it is, a couple of shots of the houses near to it will have to suffice. On a slightly different tack the church of St Mary le More at the end of Fish St is pictured here:- http://www.flickr.com/photos/chiltern_images/3019285215/in/set-7215760881691 5615/ Over the years hundreds of burials took place there and yet it is a very small churchyard. Did the yard used to be much bigger or did they "re-cycle" the graves there particularly frequently? Thanks > on 18/10/09 8:14 PM, Sharon Anchors <sharon.anchors@ntlworld.com> wrote: > >> Hi, There are still old houses standing in the Kine Croft & a public house >> at the end of the houses by the green. >> Sharon. > > ------ End of Forwarded Message

Quite so Phil I suspect its another of our successful exports <g> (I think we have had pubs a wee bit longer :-) Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) Hello Kim, Pub crawls are well known here in the UK. When Newbury had almost 100 pubs it would have taken an awful lot of crawling to get round them all! Phil

Hi Phill As I said previously, it depended upon the interpretation of the parties involved The instructions are clear enough The head of household should include *all* who resided in his/her household at 12 midnight on census day, that included all boarders or lodgers and servants etc If there was a separate or subdivided part of the same building (as in this particular case) there should be a separate schedule However as in all things people misunderstood and entered everyone on one schedule or in other cases entered a lodger as being separate when in fact he was living in the same household So in the case of "rooms" rented out to separate families there should be one per room, in the case of lodgers/boarders living in the same household they should all be on one with the family they are living with Its worth restating the difference between a lodger and boarder Boarder = 1. a. One who boards, or has his food, or food and lodging, at the house of another for compensation; one who lives in a boarding-house or with a family as one of its members, at a fixed rate Lodger = c. One who resides as an inmate in another person's house, paying a certain sum periodically for the accommodation. Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) >I think it was boarders who would be included with the main family, but > lodgers had separate schedules (or should have). > Multiple dwellings in the same building where, of course, not unusual and > enumerators did not always follow a logical (to us) route - so tracing > addresses from census books is always a very hit and miss affair. > Phil

All The next meeting of the Oxfordshire Family History Society will take place on Monday 26 October 2009 at the usual venue at Exeter Hall, Oxford Road, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1AB. Doors open at 7.15pm for coffee, help with both genealogy and computers, and the bookstall, exchange journals and the library. The subject of the talk is "Great Western Railway Shareholders' Index", which will be presented by Frank Hardy. Our speaker tells me that his talk will look at how the Society of Genealogists (SoG) came to have possession of these volumes, and precisely what they are. He will then describe what the SoG has done with them - the indexing of 270 volumes of 150 folios each. Finally, Frank will describe how the index - which is huge - will be made available to the world at large. Our speaker Frank Hardy has been researching his own family history for over thirty years, and has been a member of the SoG for some twenty-eight years. Frank has been a member of various SoG committees since 1990, and is one of the team of members who do advice work within the SoG's Library. Professionally, he is a retired railway civil engineer, with a career spanning almost fifty years. All members, potential members and their guests are welcome. For directions as to how to get to the Exeter Hall, please see :- _http://www.ofhs.org.uk/ExeterHall.html_ (http://www.ofhs.org.uk/ExeterHall.html) For a list of future OFHS meetings, please see :- _http://www.ofhs.org.uk/meetings.html_ (http://www.ofhs.org.uk/meetings.html) Any queries, please contact me off-list. Paul Gaskell Publicity Officer Oxfordshire Family History Society _www.ofhs.org.uk_ (http://www.ofhs.org.uk/)

I think it was boarders who would be included with the main family, but lodgers had separate schedules (or should have). Multiple dwellings in the same building where, of course, not unusual and enumerators did not always follow a logical (to us) route - so tracing addresses from census books is always a very hit and miss affair. Phil -----Original Message----- From: berkshire-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:berkshire-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Nivard Ovington Sent: 18 October 2009 13:38 To: "baldrick"; berkshire@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [BRK] Fish St Wallingford 1851 Census Entry Each schedule is for each house/dwelling or part thereof Generally one per family unit including anyone living with them (including lodgers & borders, if they were in a separate room/part of the building they should have their own schedule but like a lot of things, people misunderstood so entered everyone in the building on one schedule on occasion Rules were only as good as the interpretation of them For enumerators instructions see :- <http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~framland/census/directions. htm> In 1851 there should be a line after each household drawn across the page, in your example schedules 49 & 50 are two schedules in one dwelling You can sometimes work out the house numbers by checking other census years that may be marked with them comparing the families to see if people stayed in the same area Its sometimes worth checking the enumeration description as house number runs are sometimes noted but not in this case Also worth checking for landmarks like Pubs, Churches etc (if enumerated) and comparing to other census years In the case of those living over shops the shop part is rarely enumerated (as they were not inhabited) so its hard to tell those that are Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > No I do not know the house number. All it says on census HO107 piece > 1690 folio 270 page 14 are the "schedule no's" and has one family per > "schedule". Does each of these "schedules" represent a separate house, > room or are they all piled into the same room like you often see on > Who do you think that you are? > > Thanks ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BERKSHIRE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello Kim, Pub crawls are well known here in the UK. When Newbury had almost 100 pubs it would have taken an awful lot of crawling to get round them all! Phil -----Original Message----- From: berkshire-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:berkshire-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Kim Spangrude Sent: 13 October 2009 16:27 To: berkshire@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [BRK] Newbury Breweries Kim here, in Salt Lake City, Utah - really wish I were in England to partake with the good folk of Newbury in their Newbury Brewery lecture; and it would be so interesting to imagine my ancestors partaking of the ale from these very breweries. Here in the states we have what is called a "Pub Crawl", that is, going from pub to pub trying out their specialties. Indeed, one crawls by the time they are at the end of the event. On Oct 13, 2009, at 5:16 AM, Phil Wood wrote: > Hello all, > Those of you living close to Newbury may be interested to hear that > the > Newbury District Field Club (Newbury’s local history society) is > starting a > series of evening lectures to complement their afternoon meetings. > The first talk, at 7.30pm on 27 October in the Parish Room at St > John’s > Church (corner of St John’s Rd and Newtown Rd) is entitled: > A History of Newbury’s Breweries > The speaker is yours truly. I have been researching the pubs and > inns of > the town for some time now, during which I have learnt a lot about the > breweries that supplied them. > Cost £1 members, £3 non-members (membership only £7). > More information: www.ndfc.org.uk > Hope to see some of you there. > Phil > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BERKSHIRE-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and > the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BERKSHIRE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi, There are still old houses standing in the Kine Croft & a public house at the end of the houses by the green. Sharon. ----- Original Message ----- From: ""baldrick"" <baldricktheturnip@inspiralmail.com> To: <berkshire@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 8:00 PM Subject: Re: [BRK] Fish St Wallingford 1851 Census Entry > Thanks Nivard, > > That was a very useful; I never noticed they drew the dividing lines with > different lengths depending on the circumstance. > > With hindsight it seems obvious that they were living in at least their > own > flat, if not house, and not piled into some communal room like the ones in > inner cities. > > I did as you suggested and compared the people up and down the street in > 1851 and 1861, and also looked a bit more into the history of some of the > buildings in the street. Unfortunately, it looks like they may have been > living just south of the old County Police station which was built in the > 1850s. Apparently quite a few older buildings were demolished to make way > for it, and a few other buildings were also put up next to it. Seeing as > my > family were living in Fish St in 1851, but had moved to Kine Croft by > 1861, > it may well be that their house in Fish St was one of the ones demolished, > so no longer exists. C'est la vie! > > Thanks again :-) > > on 18/10/09 1:38 PM, Nivard Ovington <ovington1@sky.com> wrote: > >> >> Each schedule is for each house/dwelling or part thereof >> >> Generally one per family unit including anyone living with them >> (including >> lodgers & borders, if they were in a separate room/part of the building > they >> >> should have their own schedule but like a lot of things, people >> misunderstood so entered everyone in the building on one schedule on >> occasion >> >> Rules were only as good as the interpretation of them >> >> For enumerators instructions see :- >> >> > <http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~framland/census/directions. >> htm> >> >> In 1851 there should be a line after each household drawn across the >> page, >> in your example schedules 49 & 50 are two schedules in one dwelling >> >> You can sometimes work out the house numbers by checking other census > years >> that may be marked with them comparing the families to see if people > stayed >> in the same area >> >> Its sometimes worth checking the enumeration description as house number >> runs are sometimes noted but not in this case >> >> Also worth checking for landmarks like Pubs, Churches etc (if enumerated) >> and comparing to other census years >> >> In the case of those living over shops the shop part is rarely enumerated >> (as they were not inhabited) so its hard to tell those that are >> >> Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) >> >>> No I do not know the house number. All it says on census HO107 piece >>> 1690 folio 270 page 14 are the "schedule no's" and has one family per >>> "schedule". Does each of these "schedules" represent a separate house, >>> room or are they all piled into the same room like you often see on >>> Who do you think that you are? >>> >>> Thanks > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BERKSHIRE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Thanks Nivard, That was a very useful; I never noticed they drew the dividing lines with different lengths depending on the circumstance. With hindsight it seems obvious that they were living in at least their own flat, if not house, and not piled into some communal room like the ones in inner cities. I did as you suggested and compared the people up and down the street in 1851 and 1861, and also looked a bit more into the history of some of the buildings in the street. Unfortunately, it looks like they may have been living just south of the old County Police station which was built in the 1850s. Apparently quite a few older buildings were demolished to make way for it, and a few other buildings were also put up next to it. Seeing as my family were living in Fish St in 1851, but had moved to Kine Croft by 1861, it may well be that their house in Fish St was one of the ones demolished, so no longer exists. C'est la vie! Thanks again :-) on 18/10/09 1:38 PM, Nivard Ovington <ovington1@sky.com> wrote: > > Each schedule is for each house/dwelling or part thereof > > Generally one per family unit including anyone living with them (including > lodgers & borders, if they were in a separate room/part of the building they > > should have their own schedule but like a lot of things, people > misunderstood so entered everyone in the building on one schedule on > occasion > > Rules were only as good as the interpretation of them > > For enumerators instructions see :- > > <http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~framland/census/directions. > htm> > > In 1851 there should be a line after each household drawn across the page, > in your example schedules 49 & 50 are two schedules in one dwelling > > You can sometimes work out the house numbers by checking other census years > that may be marked with them comparing the families to see if people stayed > in the same area > > Its sometimes worth checking the enumeration description as house number > runs are sometimes noted but not in this case > > Also worth checking for landmarks like Pubs, Churches etc (if enumerated) > and comparing to other census years > > In the case of those living over shops the shop part is rarely enumerated > (as they were not inhabited) so its hard to tell those that are > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > >> No I do not know the house number. All it says on census HO107 piece >> 1690 folio 270 page 14 are the "schedule no's" and has one family per >> "schedule". Does each of these "schedules" represent a separate house, >> room or are they all piled into the same room like you often see on >> Who do you think that you are? >> >> Thanks

>From Jackson's Oxford Journal, Saturday, July 24, 1824; Issue 3717. MARRIED On Wednesday last was married, at St. Margaret's church, Westminster, by the Very. Rev. the Dean of Rochester, William BOWLES, Esq., Of Fitzharris House, Berks., to Caroline Anne, only daughter of Simon STEPHENSON, Esq., of Great Queen-street, Westminster. On Thursday last was married, at the Friends' Meeting House, Reading, Berks, John TYLER, of Sun-street, London, to Eliza, only daughter of Hannah HORNIMAN, King-street, Reading. DIED On Monday the 12th inst. died, in the 81st year of his age, at his house in Castle-street, Reading, the Rev. William MILTON, A. M. Vicar of Heckfield, Hants, and formerly Fellow of New college, Oxford University.

>From Public Advertiser ( London, England ), Monday, November 4, 1776; Issue 13122. BANKRUPT Richard HORNIMAN, of Abingdon in Berkshire, Grocer, to surrender Nov. 8, 16, Dec. 14, at Guildhall. Attorney Mr. GOODMAN, Bull and Mouth-street, London.

Each schedule is for each house/dwelling or part thereof Generally one per family unit including anyone living with them (including lodgers & borders, if they were in a separate room/part of the building they should have their own schedule but like a lot of things, people misunderstood so entered everyone in the building on one schedule on occasion Rules were only as good as the interpretation of them For enumerators instructions see :- <http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~framland/census/directions.htm> In 1851 there should be a line after each household drawn across the page, in your example schedules 49 & 50 are two schedules in one dwelling You can sometimes work out the house numbers by checking other census years that may be marked with them comparing the families to see if people stayed in the same area Its sometimes worth checking the enumeration description as house number runs are sometimes noted but not in this case Also worth checking for landmarks like Pubs, Churches etc (if enumerated) and comparing to other census years In the case of those living over shops the shop part is rarely enumerated (as they were not inhabited) so its hard to tell those that are Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > No I do not know the house number. All it says on census HO107 piece > 1690 folio 270 page 14 are the "schedule no's" and has one family per > "schedule". Does each of these "schedules" represent a separate house, > room or are they all piled into the same room like you often see on > Who do you think that you are? > > Thanks