Hi Roy, I'm with you! My husband growing up was often teased and called Jackson, having no idea why, and overheard his Aunt calling him "Joan's little bastard", but never knew anything about his father until I started delving into the family tree. His mother Joan who was not impressed with my sleuthing but finally understood our need to know, told us who his father was, my hubby was 39 and we had three children. Because of my delving we had the opportunity to meet his lovely grandmother before she died, his father, who came and stayed with us for a few weeks, his half brothers and sisters, and two beautiful Aunts! He now knows who he is. I think it is so much better to know where you came from, better or worse! Cheers Di Haywood Fremantle Western Australia.

I promised to keep you informed of my application for information from the 1939 National Registration Database, and here is my report. I posted my application two days ago, first class and have just received this email: ----------------------------- Dear [Applicant's name] Thank you for contacting the NHS IC Contact Centre Thank you for your enquiry 'Log Reference request ' received on 19/03/2010 09:44 . Your enquiry has been logged and we will do our best to resolve this as soon as possible. Please quote reference number NIC-43916-XRQZ6 on all future communications regarding this enquiry. We are continually measuring our level of customer service and we may invite you to participate in a very short survey. This survey is anonymous and will be sent to you on resolution of your enquiry. No individual will be identified and responses will only be viewed in aggregate. If you do not wish to participate please advise us by e-mailing [email address given] Kind Regards Contact Centre Team The NHS Information Centre for Health and Social care [Contact details follow] ----------------------------------------- I am retaining my ability to comment on the service provided! Polly

Just in case someone was planning to do this look-up for me, I have had the answer this morning. If it is of interest to anyone, there is no personal info attached to the Oaths for Excise Officers.Geraldine Morris _________________________________________________________________ Got a cool Hotmail story? Tell us now http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/

I am wondering Charani if you would mind looking for any Webbers in the Hearth Taxes, especially in the area around Upton, Many thanks in anticipation, Cathy

Hi Geraldine, I don't remember your time frame. I'm asking as there are three people I've been seeking -- two from the late 1700s; one in the 1820s. Also, where was the information found? Thanks, Marsha Stringer (nee MEERE) stringer@mstringer.net USA www.bittonfamilies.com -----Original Message----- Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 6:48 AM To: bristol_and_district@rootsweb.com Subject: [B&D] B.R.O. look-up ROBERTS EXCISE OFFICER Just in case someone was planning to do this look-up for me, I have had the answer this morning. If it is of interest to anyone, there is no personal info attached to the Oaths for Excise Officers.Geraldine Morris

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: FFHS-NEWS Changes at The National Archives Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:41:33 -0000 From: News from the Federation of Family History Societies Two announcements from TNA today ? (a) car park charges to apply from 27 April; (b) from Monday, 19 April 2010 a new online process to order copies of documents that are not already downloadable from TNA?s website. Car park charges There will be flat-rate charge of £5 per day. Annual pre-pay tickets, offering a substantial discount, will also be available. Visitors who drive to The National Archives without having booked and paid for a space will not be able to access the car park. Full details can be found from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/news/446.htm. Copies of documents This new streamlined service will provide an instant quote based on the average cost of copying similar documents and means customers will no longer have to wait ten days for a quote. As some documents can contain hundreds of pages, where a customer does not know which pages within a document they need copies of, a search fee of £45 will be introduced to recover the cost of searching for the information. The full announcement can be seen at www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/news/445.htm. Roger Lewry FFHS Archives Liaison 18 March 2010 -------- Original Message ends -------- -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

Roy Stockdill wrote: > You know that I am always calm, but I am also consistent in my views! And you also take a delight in being controversial <G> You are as you are and entitled to your own views. People don't have to agree with you and I know from GenBrit there are plenty who don't, me included. I think this has gone as far as it can. Tomorrow's another day and good for a discussion of a different colour, more research, more queries - and more look ups regarding the Hearth Tax :)) Sleep well :)) -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

On 18 Mar 2010 at 20:54, Charani wrote: > Roy Stockdill wrote: > > > I am, frankly, always amazed when I see family historian arguing in > > favour of censorship! We should be the very last persons to impose > > censorship, since family history is all about the TRUTH and honesty > > in relationships. We should tell it like it is, warts and all, and > > not get caught up in privacy paranoia. > > I think your views on privacy and respect are well known. If they > aren't then I'd suggest the curious search the archives of GenBrit to > satisfy themselves. > > I also think you'll be in the minority with your views on this list > <G> > > If this discussion is to continue, please keep it calm folks otherwise > I will use the fire extinguisher. I don't really want to have a lot > of researchers dripping all over the place though, especially as it > isn't very warm tonight. > You know that I am always calm, but I am also consistent in my views! I cannot accept censorship in any shape or form, especially when it is self imposed by genealogists and family historians who really should know better. I am in touch with many of my cousins around the world and whenever I publish something about the family and living members, the only complaints I ever get are from those I haven't mentioned! I really do not pretend to understand the paranoia over privacy that has turned us into one of the most secretive nations in the world. We are sadly obsessed with it. Can listers really not see that when they themselves choose to observe censorship and become obsessed with their privacy, then that only encourages the bureaucrats in government to impose even more of it upon us, denying us the right to information that should be freely available to all? As a former Fleet Street journalist/executive and also the former editor for 10 years of the GOONS' Journal of One Name Studies, you can hardly expect me to be anything else other than an opponent of censorship. And censorship always seem to me to be worse when demands for it it come from members of our own genealogical community. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

Roy Stockdill wrote: > I am, frankly, always amazed when I see family historian arguing in favour of > censorship! We should be the very last persons to impose censorship, since family > history is all about the TRUTH and honesty in relationships. We should tell it like it is, > warts and all, and not get caught up in privacy paranoia. I think your views on privacy and respect are well known. If they aren't then I'd suggest the curious search the archives of GenBrit to satisfy themselves. I also think you'll be in the minority with your views on this list <G> If this discussion is to continue, please keep it calm folks otherwise I will use the fire extinguisher. I don't really want to have a lot of researchers dripping all over the place though, especially as it isn't very warm tonight. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

>>My grandmother wasn't at her normal home address.<< Well I'm not 100% sure where mine was living in 1939, so I have put where I *think* she was living with a ? mark. However I know that she died there in 1962, so I put that date and the address in that "last known address" slot....:-) >>I think it was a case, like you said, of them not really knowing what they were doing to begin with. It was a bonus for me though <G><< Yes you were lucky there, especially if you got it for free...<VBG>! >>Thanks :)) It'll help others to know what they are likely to get if the decide to take the plunge.<< Yes I decided I could justify the expense against my tutoring fees as I need an example to show my students...<even bigger G>! >>I hope you find the answer :))<< Somehow I expect her to be living on her own. But we shall see... Polly

>>I don't know whether you are aware of this, Polly, but Guy Etchells<< Yes fully aware Roy, thank you, and duly appreciative! Polly

On 18 Mar 2010 at 18:41, Chris Jefferies wrote: > I was just going to say the same thing. I don't like this obsession > about freedom of information and the right to know information which > was not intended to be made public until after the persons death. I > think the 100 year rule for the census is good thing. The majority of > the people in this 1939 "census" will be dead but anyone over 70 will > be listed and they have a right to privacy. > Many of us would argue equally that an obsession with secrecy is unhealthy. And bureaucrats in the UK have a very long and dishonourable tradition of being obsessed with secrecy, which is not at all a good thing for democracy. Have you never seen "Yes Minister" and "Yes Prime Minister", those wonderful TV series that highlighted the machinations of the Sir Humphreys of this world? I have already given the list details of a case in my own family where my parents and my father's siblings conspired to keep from me for many years the knowledge that I had a half-sister, whom I was prevented from knowing. We only met and got to know each other when we were both in middle age and I still sometimes get angry when I think of all the years we wasted when we could have been friends and getting to know one another. As a matter of interest, you may care to know that the censuses up to 1911 NEVER had a 100-year closure rule imposed on them and some of us have argued that they could have been released much earlier. Thanks to my friend Guy Etchells, who challenged The National Archives with a Freedom of Information appeal, we were able to get it released last year two years early. It's Guy who is also behind the move to get the 1939 national registration released. I am, frankly, always amazed when I see family historian arguing in favour of censorship! We should be the very last persons to impose censorship, since family history is all about the TRUTH and honesty in relationships. We should tell it like it is, warts and all, and not get caught up in privacy paranoia. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

<<<<< stands by with fire extinguisher at the ready!! -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

I was just going to say the same thing. I don't like this obsession about freedom of information and the right to know information which was not intended to be made public until after the persons death. I think the 100 year rule for the census is good thing. The majority of the people in this 1939 "census" will be dead but anyone over 70 will be listed and they have a right to privacy. Chris Jefferies Cheltenham Glos -----Original Message----- From: bristol_and_district-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bristol_and_district-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Adrian Bruce Sent: 18 March 2010 4:51 PM To: bristol_and_district@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [B&D] 1939 National Registration Update <<snipped>> since it seems a ludicrous piece of nonsense on the part of the bureaucrats to withold details of where someone was living and who with more than 70 years ago. <<snipped>> Sorry - but I do not agree with this. We have no way of knowing whether those people would have revealed these details to their family and friends - they could have been living with someone, away from home, and never have wished that information to come out. If they didn't, we have no right to reveal it now while they are still alive. We all of us have heard of elderly relatives who go silent on certain topics - we have no right to force their truth out behind their backs while they can still be affected. Adrian B ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BRISTOL_AND_DISTRICT-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: 9.0.791 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2754 - Release Date: 03/18/10 07:33:00

Pat Cook wrote: > Thanks for looking Charani, the WESTRONs could possibly be > connected, I have found about 6 ways of spelling > WESTERN/WESTON/WESTERON etc; Jo WESTERON in West Luckham 2 hearths Ex [~ over the "x"] John WESTERON in Porlock 4 heaths One is only a private oven and noe [sic] hearth [Charge made for 3 hearths] Garrett WESTERON in Porlock 4 hearths he hath beaten up one [Charge made for 3 hearths] -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

On 18 Mar 2010 at 16:51, Adrian Bruce wrote: > <<snipped>> since it seems a ludicrous piece of nonsense on the part > of the bureaucrats to withold details of where someone was living and > who with more than 70 years ago. <<snipped>> > > Sorry - but I do not agree with this. We have no way of knowing > whether those people would have revealed these details to their family > and friends - they could have been living with someone, away from > home, and never have wished that information to come out. If they > didn't, we have no right to reveal it now while they are still alive. > > We all of us have heard of elderly relatives who go silent on certain > topics - we have no right to force their truth out behind their backs > while they can still be affected. > You will hardly be surprised to hear that I cannot agree with you. I consider that there is far too much paranoia in family history about the past and suppressing it very often does far more harm than revealing it. I will give you a classic example concerning myself..... When I first got into genealogy and family history over 35 years ago my mother, who was living with my wife and I, having been widowed for a second time, pleaded with my wife to try and get her to stop me! Why? Because she was terrified that I would discover (1) that I had been born before my parents were married, my father still being married at the time to his first wife; (2) that I had a half-sister whom my dad had fathered by another relationship. Inevitably, I ignored her pleadings and went ahead. Of course, I turned up the facts very quickly. My being born out of wedlock would scarcely turn a single hair today! My mother was horrified but I was far more angry when I discovered that not only she but my father's brother and two sisters, my uncle and aunts, had known all about my sister and had kept in touch with her, sending her birthday and Christmas presents, presumably as a means of expiating the family guilt. My half-sister and I did eventually meet when we were both in our 40s and since then we have built up a good relationship, even though she lives in Australia. She has stayed with us here in England and we have stayed with her in Oz. We have also been to family reunions together in America and Canada. She told me she had always known about me all her life but nobody had ever told me about her. The anger about being robbed of knowing my only sister for over half my life stayed with me for a very long time and I felt it hard to forgive my father and mother and his siblings, even though all were by then long dead. The guilt and shame felt by the older generations about family secrets is not necessarily a good thing at all. As family historians, we should be the very last people to apply self censorship and cover up unpleasant facts. A while ago I did a series on celebrity family trees for the magazine, Practical Family History, for which I still write most months. One of my subjects was Baroness Betty Betty Boothroyd, the former Speaker of the House of Commons. I discovered in my researches that her grandmother had had an illegitimate child before her marriage to Betty's grandfather. Very tentatively, I asked her whether I could mention it. Like the honest and down-to-earth Yorkshirewoman that she is, she snorted at me down the phone and said "Good lord, yes, tell it like it is, warts and all!" That is the kind of attitude I like to hear! I have little time for mealy-mouthed paranoia over things that happened a long time ago. Family history is about honesty and reporting facts as they were, however much it might upset great aunt Maude or whoever. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

Pat Cook wrote: > If you still have any energy, and time, would appreciate a check on the following please > CRUDGE WESTERN HELLINGS > > I would expect the WESTERN's to be Halberton, but could be anywhere. There are no CRUDGEs, HELLINGs or WESTERNs listed, sorry :(( The closest are three WESTERONs. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

<<snipped>> since it seems a ludicrous piece of nonsense on the part of the bureaucrats to withold details of where someone was living and who with more than 70 years ago. <<snipped>> Sorry - but I do not agree with this. We have no way of knowing whether those people would have revealed these details to their family and friends - they could have been living with someone, away from home, and never have wished that information to come out. If they didn't, we have no right to reveal it now while they are still alive. We all of us have heard of elderly relatives who go silent on certain topics - we have no right to force their truth out behind their backs while they can still be affected. Adrian B

Charani Thank you very much for your responses to my two requests. Cheers Ian L ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charani" <familyhunter@family-hunter.co.uk> To: "IAN LOGAN" <ian@logann.orangehome.co.uk>; <bristol_and_district@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2010 3:01 PM Subject: Re: [B&D] Dwelly's Hearth Tax 1664-65 POOLE > > IAN LOGAN wrote: > >> 3. My POOLE line has been traced back reliably to Clement POOLE bap >> approx 1740 ( m Elizabeth/Betty JAMES 1765 Lilstock). I am trying to >> find possible links to another well researched POOLE tree which goes back >> to William POOLE who married Margaret WHITE in 1582 in Overstowey. Their >> descendents lived in Stogursey, Crowcombe, Nether Stowey, Woolavington >> and nearby parishes. I would ber interested in any POOLEs listed for >> these areas - ie mainly the Cannington hundred but also North Petherton, >> Williton & Freemanors, Huntspill & Puriton. > > Lewis in Lexworthy, one hearth, Ex (~ over "x") > > Rich in Chilton, one hearth, not rated to Church or poore [sic] by reason > of his povertie [sic] > > Wm in Holford, one hearth, Ex (~ over "x") > > > -- > Charani (UK) > OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM > Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM > http://wsom-opc.org.uk > >

NEIL GLOSTER wrote: > Would you please add Gloster to your requests in your generous lookup > offer . Sorry, no GLOSTERs listed :(( -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk