Hello Luisa. To find a living person there is a very good site: http://www.theukelectoralroll.co.uk. Fees vary according to the amount of information you have, but as you have forename and surname it would cost only £3.15 for a month of unlimited searches in the U.K. Geraldine

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: leestroud_1 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.dor.general/6239.1.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Hi Rosemary thanks for that good idea, I didnt think about the papers, and as Im in Australia now wouldnt have thought of it. Thanks for your help Luisa Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: leestroud_1 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.dor.general/6239.2.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Thankyou very much for your reply and help. I will look into these options and see if I have them on my list. I know your right he could live anywhere which will make it harder. But I will keep on looking thanks again Luisa Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

Dear Ellie, I'm not searching these lines but I think you have 2 separate Thomas' & their marriages mixed up: Thomas ACKERMAN (sic) to Ann BUDDEN (widow) on 15 November 1825 at Bridport (not Broadwindsor) Witnesses: George P Curme & James House (The name Parker isn't mentioned). (Possibly Thomas ACKERMAN s/o Stephen & Sarah baptised on 1 January 1803 at Bridport) There is a separate marriage listed: Thomas AKERMAN (sic) to Ann PARKER by banns at Broadwindsor on 2 November 1823 Witness: John Bishop (There is no mention of this Ann being a widow). (Possibly Thomas AKERMAN s/o Samuel & Ann baptised on 13 April 1800 at Broadwindsor) It seems that this is your Ann - If so, there are the following baptisms listed: Ann PARKER d/o Henry & Sarah BUDDEN on 5 January 1795 @ Askerswell (Askerswell is about 4 miles from Bridport) Ann PARKER d/o John & Sarah BUDDEN in 1797 (day / month not given) @ Portesham (Portesham is about 10 miles from Bridport) (There is a marriage in 1819 for an Ann PARKER at Portesham - so if this is her, not your Ann) I take it that the birthdate of 1795 has been calculated from the 1841 census where she is with Thomas & children in Broadwinsor. However ages of adults on this census were rounded down to the nearest 5 years, so given an age of 45, she could have been born between 1792 - 1795. There is also the following (but both are a long way from Bridport): Ann PARKER d/o George & Elizabeth on 21 October 1795 at Sherborne Anne (sic) PARKER twin daughter of John & Jane PARKER on 4 September 1791 at Sturminster Newton There is a burial at Broadwinsor which I believe may be her: Ann AKERMAN (aged 46) buried on 10 January 1842 at Broadwinsor. This gives a birthyear of 1794/1795, making the baptism at Askerswell the most likely. Info: FMP (via Dorset FHS - taken from the parish records at Dorset History Centre) If you do manage to confirm that this is your Ann, then there appears to be only one other PARKER baptism at Askerswell which may be her sister: Mary d/o Henry & Sarah PARKER (of North Eggardon) on 3 March 1785 - Info: Dorset OPC site at www.opcdorset.org Regards Vanessa Dorset ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ellen Amabel Delaney" <liedd@btinternelet.com> To: <DORSET-L@rootsweb.com>; <dorsetlookups@fsmail.net> Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 5:47 PM Subject: [DOR] Ann Budden born 1796 marrked a parker and then thomas Akerman > hello everyone > > i wonder if anyone could help me i am trying to find out the parents and > sisters and brothers of an Ann Budden born about 1796. She married in > 1825 at Broadwindsor a Thomas Akerman and it stated on the records that > she was a widow Parker (budden). If any one has any ideas or is > researching the budden family line please let me know. Thank you kind > regards ellen

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: alisonrprior Surnames: WHITE Classification: birth Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.dor.general/6239.2/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Dear Luisa There are a few Graham WHITEs born in Dorset but with a wider age band than you mention: 1) WHITE, Graham A Registration District: Poole County: Dorset Year of Registration: 1963 Quarter of Registration: Apr-May-Jun Mother's Maiden Name: Warnke Volume No: 7C Page No: 1085 2) WHITE, Graham P Registration District: Poole County: Dorset Year of Registration: 1963 Quarter of Registration: Oct-Nov-Dec Mother's Maiden Name: Gooby Volume No: 7C Page No: 983 3) Name: WHITE, David G Registration District: Sturminster County: Dorset Year of Registration: 1964 Quarter of Registration: Jul-Aug-Sep Mother's Maiden Name: Marston Volume No: 7C Page No: 1110 4) WHITE, Gregory G Registration District: Weymouth County: Dorset Year of Registration: 1964 Quarter of Registration: Jul-Aug-Sep Mother's Maiden Name: Cherico Volume No:7C Page No: 1174 5) WHITE, Charles William G Registration District: Sturminster County: Dorset Year of Registration: 1970 Quarter of Registration: Jul-Aug-Sep Mother's Maiden Name: Gibson Volume No: 7C Page No: 334 6) WHITE, Byron Graeme Registration District: Poole County: Dorset Year of Registration: 1972 Quarter of Registration: Oct-Nov-Dec Mother's Maiden Name: Marshall Volume No: 7C Page No: 238 Of ourse he could have come to Dorset from any of the surrounding counties in which case you have an even bigger search on your hands. HTH Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

hello everyone i wonder if anyone could help me i am trying to find out the parents and sisters and brothers of an Ann Budden born about 1796. She married in 1825 at Broadwindsor a Thomas Akerman and it stated on the records that she was a widow Parker (budden). If any one has any ideas or is researching the budden family line please let me know. Thank you kind regards ellen

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: jonwarrn Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.dor.general/6238.1.2.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Hi Could this be Jesse? Collection: Illinois, Deaths and Stillbirths, 1916-1947 (on Record Search, Family Search website) Name: Jesse Stockley Death Date: 25 February 1934 Death Place: Lake Forest, Lake, Illinois. Gender: Male Age: 71 Birth Date: 3 Dec 1862 Birthplace: England Occupation: caretaker & gardner Spouse: Isabel Stockley Burial Date: 28 Feb 1934 Burial Place: Lake Forest, Lake, Ill. Cemetery: Lake Forest (Also on here the death of his wife in 1930) likely marriage? Collection: Illinois, Cook County Marriages, 1871-1920 Groom: Jesse Stockley Groom's Age: 29 Bride: Isabel Barker Bride's Age: 28 Marriage Date: 24 Jun 1891 Marriage Place: Chicago, Cook, Illinois - the image of this is on Record Search I think Jesse has gone down as Joseph on the 1900 US census of Lake Bluff, Lake, Illinois. Occupation, Gardner. A son, Chas M aged 1. Both he and his wife (Isabella) said to have emigrated 1887. His birthdate in that census is Nov 1862. In 1910 also has a daughter, Josephine. Kind regards John Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: lauraathawes Surnames: Stockley Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.dor.general/6238.1.2/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Hi, Thankyou for the help. Managed to find Eliza Stockley and Emily Ann Stockley. Eliza married Edwin Ferris and Emily Ann bacame Annie and is at the Central London District School on all of the census records. But no sign of Edwin, Jesse or David. I've checked various sites and still can't even find a death for any of them. Was thinking that perhaps they moved abroad?? If any one is kind enough could they have a look for me as i don't have access to this. Edwin Stockley born 1854 Corfe Castle, Dorset last seen on 1871 census record. David Stockley born 1860 Corfe Castle, Dorset last seen on 1871 census record Jesse Stockley born 1862 Corfe Castle, Dorset last seen on 1881 census record. Many thanks Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

Hi Christel, Had a quick look for your Ettie BOWRING My first thought was that it might be Harriet / Harriett - but I couldn't find anything, however I came across this (might be worth checking out?) Roxetta Mary BOWRING - Dec 1/4 1888 Dorchester District GRO Ref: 5a - 317 I know the birthyear is a few years earlier than you were looking but thought the name was unusual and I could see how it might be shortened to Etta / Ettie. I can't find Roxetta / Rosetta on the 1891 or 1901 census'. Is Ettie on the 1911 census - I can't find her doing a free search? It appears that Rosetta (sic) Mary BOWRING married in 1910. Kindest Regards Vanessa ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christel Muncaster" <christelhelen@yahoo.co.uk> To: "dorset mailing list" <dorset@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, September 19, 2010 10:53 AM Subject: [DOR] BOWRING/BOWERING family > Hello > > I am trying to find details of Ettie Bowring, daughter of William Bowring > and Eliza Travers. She was born c1892 in Upwey. I can't find an > Ettie/Henrietta/Esther who will fit (is Ettie short for anything else?). I > also checked in the Dorchester district. > Could it be Matilda Alice [Dec 1891 dorchester] or Edith Millicent [Jun > 1891 weymouth]? I don't have either of them in the tree currently, can > anyone rule them out? > Since I don't know her "real" name I am struggling to find out what > happens to her ... > > Many thanks for any clues you can give me, > > Christel

Richard Although in many cases private baptisms (or half-baptisms) were held when an infant was perhaps thought too weak to survive, this is not always the reason they were held. It became quite fashionable in the 19th Century, especially amongst the wealthier classes to request a private baptism, for perfectly healthy infants, and for them later to be received into the church. Regards Jon Baker Dorset OPC Co-ordinator www.opcdorset.org -----Original Message----- The 'received into' statement, as you probably know, occurs within the established church when a child is brought to church at a later date, having been privately baptised at home because he or she is not expected to live. --- On Tue, 21/9/10, Richard Lamb <lambikins@ozemail.com.au> wrote: > > But a quick question if I may re baptisms and " Received > into the Church" ... I have a baptism entry in one  > parish register for a child with name and parents names and > 30 Mar 1763 ..........and in a neighbouring ( literally next > door) parish register under baptisms another entry for that > child also with name and parents names and also 30 Mar > 1763  plus born  "27 Sep 1762" and " received into > Church" > > I was just wondering if it had any significance and any > explanation would be gratefully received

That certainly sounds feasible, Jim, given the note against the transcription that the records were badly faded. Vicki - there is another researcher investigating this line - have a look at http://ngb.chebucto.org/NGBRIF/nlgrif-j.shtml. Brian Fisher in Nova Scotia has a note of the marriage of Henry Willman (Welman) and Grace Janes. If you can still contact him, he may already have the information you need. I have however found a copy of a Return of Marriages showing information from the Register. This must have been produced post 1940, given the pre-printed partial date at the head of the form so is not contemporary with the marriage. There is no indication as to the reason for the Return being prepared so long after the period in question. This Return does quite clearly state 'New Town Pool.', but of course this is just the transcriber's belief as to what the original said. After 'Pool.' there is possibly 'Eng' or maybe 'Eny'. Looking at other letters I would suggest the former. I have sent a copy of the image (from http://search.labs.familysearch.org/recordsearch/start.html?datestamp=120466 1798765#w=0&p=waypoint&s=waypointsOnly&c=fs%3A1793777 - follow the Hermitage link in the left hand menu to page 35 in the Marriage scans) direct to Vicki, along with wife Grace's entry in the Death Index. The actual death records have yet to be scanned, so there is no further help here at present. I cannot see that the Marriage Register has been scanned by the LDS so possibly an approach to the Newfoundland Archives might prove fruitful (see http://www.therooms.ca/contacts.asp). Russell -----Original Message----- From: dorset-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:dorset-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Jim Parsons Sent: 21 September 2010 12:21 To: dorset@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [DOR] New Louen Poole Dorset Just a little way south of Hermitage Bay, Newfoundland, is Poole Cove, Newfoundland. If New Louen is a corruption of Newfoundland, it is quite possible that the spouse came from here and the England is either incorrect or indicates place of birth. Given that Hermitage is also in Dorset, and in 1872 many of the "Pariswh Clerks" were only semi literate, could this be an explanation? Jim http://www.payman.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

Hi all Could I say thank you re my Brooks Poole query a week ago to Lynne and Vanessa. But a quick question if I may re baptisms and " Received into the Church" ... I have a baptism entry in one parish register for a child with name and parents names and 30 Mar 1763 ..........and in a neighbouring ( literally next door) parish register under baptisms another entry for that child also with name and parents names and also 30 Mar 1763 plus born "27 Sep 1762" and " received into Church" I was just wondering if it had any significance and any explanation would be gratefully received.......thanks --------------------- Richard Lamb

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: jonwarrn Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.dor.general/6237.6.3.2.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Hi There is a baptism at Netherbury, 7 October 1792, Ann Robbins (born 29 Aug), parents Robert and Jane Much later, 21st August 1826 a removal order from Beaminster Robert Robins and Jane his wife to Netherbury -this is held at Dorset History Centre, ref PE/BE/OV 4/2/128 If Jethro's first son was Robert and he was then in Beaminster, it might fit in a bit with this? John Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

New Louen , spoke with Poole Historians at the Museum, no one has ever heard of this name, also spoke with my brother who was an Accountant at Bournemouth University for over 20yrs, the University already has contacts with Newfoundland, they also have never heard of “New Louen Poole Dorset” , is it a place in Newfoundland ? a Ship ? a House Name ? or an Error ? maybe we will never know, regards Jean in Poole Dorset

Hi Richard, When a child was born and not expected to live, a baptism was conducted almost immediately either by the midwife or by the vicar. This was entered into the baptism register and usually marked (though not always) as a private baptism. Part of the normal baptism ceremony was for a child to be received into the church by the congregation, but of course this couldn't happen in this case. If the child survived, this latter part of the ceremony was conducted some weeks later and this is when you see baptisms marked as "received into the church". Of course this doesn't mean that the child didn't subsequently die. The only thing you can usually assume from such entries is that the child was probably born close to the first baptism date and was not expected to live. Hope this helps. Sandra ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Lamb" <lambikins@ozemail.com.au> To: <DORSET@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 8:54 AM Subject: [DOR] Question re Baptisms and a thanks also > Hi all > > Could I say thank you re my Brooks Poole query a week ago to Lynne and > Vanessa. > > But a quick question if I may re baptisms and " Received into the Church" > ... I have a baptism entry in one parish register for a child with name > and parents names and 30 Mar 1763 ..........and in a neighbouring ( > literally next door) parish register under baptisms another entry for that > child also with name and parents names and also 30 Mar 1763 plus born > "27 Sep 1762" and " received into Church" > > I was just wondering if it had any significance and any explanation would > be gratefully received.......thanks > --------------------- > Richard Lamb > > *************************************** > > When replying to this message, please spare a thought for your fellow list > members, and anyone searching the archives in the future. SNIP everything > which is not essential for comprehension or continuity (including the > footers which will be put back anyway!) > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > DORSET-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > _______________________________________ > No infections found in this incoming message > Scanned by iolo System Shield® > http://www.iolo.com > _______________________________________ No infections found in this outgoing message Scanned by iolo System Shield® http://www.iolo.com

Just a little way south of Hermitage Bay, Newfoundland, is Poole Cove, Newfoundland. If New Louen is a corruption of Newfoundland, it is quite possible that the spouse came from here and the England is either incorrect or indicates place of birth. Given that Hermitage is also in Dorset, and in 1872 many of the "Pariswh Clerks" were only semi literate, could this be an explanation? Jim http://www.payman.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk --- On Mon, 20/9/10, Russell Ridout <ridout77@nildram.co.uk> wrote: > From: Russell Ridout <ridout77@nildram.co.uk> > Subject: Re: [DOR] New Louen Poole Dorset > To: dorset@rootsweb.com > Date: Monday, 20 September, 2010, 12:35 > The two New Louen Poole Eng > references I found on Google relate to the same > marriage in Hermitage Bay, Newfoundland.  I suspect > that they are based on > the same transcription so to settle this it will probably > be necessary to > look at the original document. > > There was a separate reference to 'New Louen, Conn' on the > ellisisland.org > website, but looking at the original Ship's Manifest proved > that this was an > error and it should have been New London, Conn. > > There is a 'New London Tavern' in Lagland Street, Poole but > although this > appears in the 1889 issue of Kelly's Directory, I cannot > see any adjacent > area which might be referred to 'New London' although it > may have been a > customary rather than official designation in a similar > sense to 'The (Big) > Smoke' for London. > > Intriguingly on the same marriage page > (http://ngb.chebucto.org/Parish/herm-marr-01.shtml) > there is an entry for a > Richard Penny in 1877.  He was born 'Newton, > England'.  Given the link > between Dorset and Newfoundland this could be a contraction > of Sturminster > Newton, but as this is some distance from Poole I do not > think that this is > not connected with 'New Louen'. > > I look forward to hearing what suggestions come from your > visit to Poole > Museum. > > Russell > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dorset-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dorset-bounces@rootsweb.com] > On > Behalf Of Jean > Sent: 20 September 2010 10:40 > To: Rootsweb Dorset > Subject: [DOR] New Louen Poole Dorset > > I keyed in New Louen Poole Eng on google and there are many > references to > that name, mostly people from newfoundland with ref to > where their ancestors > come from. > Have never heard of the name, I donot think it is newtown, > its in the > borough of poole, am puzzled, is it a ship ? regards Jean > in Poole. > > PS AM MEETING TOMORROW WITH POOLE HISTORIANS  AT POOLE > MUSEUMTO FIND MORE > ABOUT "New Louen Poole Eng"  Jean in POOLE > > > *************************************** > > When replying to this message, please spare a thought for > your fellow list members, and anyone searching the archives > in the future.  SNIP everything which is not essential > for comprehension or continuity (including the footers which > will be put back anyway!) > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DORSET-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the > subject and the body of the message >

Is the signature of the minister the same? I wonder if one of the churches was in a daughter parish at the time of the baptism, and they later became 2 separate parishes. It's not uncommon to see similar double entries in London registers and usually it is because the baptism has been performed in the church of St XXXX in the parish of St YYYY, or even in a chapel of rest within a parish. The 'received into' statement, as you probably know, occurs within the established church when a child is brought to church at a later date, having been privately baptised at home because he or she is not expected to live. Alternatively, were both churches C of E? Sometimes a non conformist churches is described as being within the parish of a C of E church because geographically that is where it was. HB --- On Tue, 21/9/10, Richard Lamb <lambikins@ozemail.com.au> wrote: > From: Richard Lamb <lambikins@ozemail.com.au> > Subject: [DOR] Question re Baptisms and a thanks also > To: DORSET@rootsweb.com > Date: Tuesday, 21 September, 2010, 8:54 > Hi all > > Could I say thank you re my Brooks Poole query a week ago > to Lynne and Vanessa.  > > But a quick question if I may re baptisms and " Received > into the Church" ... I have a baptism entry in one  > parish register for a child with name and parents names and > 30 Mar 1763 ..........and in a neighbouring ( literally next > door) parish register under baptisms another entry for that > child also with name and parents names and also 30 Mar > 1763  plus born  "27 Sep 1762" and " received into > Church" > > I was just wondering if it had any significance and any > explanation would be gratefully received.......thanks > --------------------- > Richard Lamb > > *************************************** > >

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: CarolineAmundson Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.dor.general/6237.6.3.2/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Unfortunitly death certificates did not start until 1869 in Canada, before that we have only church records. Which I have, it only gives his name, age and date of death. I have pretty well all info for him and his family from 1830 on, its just his birth and before that is left to complete his file :( oh well will just have to keep digging. Thanks Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: CarolineAmundson Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.dor.general/6237.6.3.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Yes I have the military record. It states Netherbury Dorset! :) Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: CarolineAmundson Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.dor.general/6237.6.2.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Thanks for your response. I have contacted Marg. Henderson before, we never heard back :( This was a few years ago. The yorkshire birth, has been passed down though the last few generations of family, it was a "thought" that someone had. The only documention out there that has been found is his military records which states Netherbury Dorset. As far as I know Im the only one who has come accross this record as I am a direct decendant. My mom and I are the only direct decendants working on his tree. We have contacted many out there who have him on their tree but we get the same response that they copied it from another tree and so on :S So I guess this will stay a mystery for now. Some day maybe I will break this wall! :) Thanks so much for looking! Caroline Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.