Hello Wendy With the help of Hugh Kearsey I have sorted out the problem with the Swerford microfiche. I regret that I inadvertently misadvised you in my previous message about the two blocks of baptisms. In fact the situation is that on microfiche 2 there are a number of Burials (unheaded) terminating in 1812 followed by Baptisms for 1813 and onwards. Working backwards (and for this you may slap my wrist!) I had assumed that the 1812(etc) data preceding the 1813 baptisms were baptisms also. I was wrong. Please accept my apologies for the wild goose chase and my thanks for finding WHEELERs that I would never otherwise have discovered. Len

Hello Len - > With the help of Hugh Kearsey I have sorted out the problem with the > Swerford microfiche. > I regret that I inadvertently misadvised you in my previous message about > the two blocks of baptisms. > In fact the situation is that on microfiche 2 there are a number of Burials > (unheaded) terminating in 1812 followed by Baptisms for 1813 and onwards. > Working backwards (and for this you may slap my wrist!) I had assumed that the > 1812(etc) data preceding the 1813 baptisms were baptisms also. I was wrong. > Please accept my apologies for the wild goose chase and my thanks for > finding WHEELERs that I would never otherwise have discovered. It was an intriguing question, asked in good faith! I'm glad you & Hugh were able to work out what had been the source of the confusion, and remove the mystery. Fiche aren't the easiest of things to peer at and navigate! Not to worry about the wild goose chase - and I'm certainly glad the OFHS data wasn't inaccurate. There are plenty of wild goose chases in genealogy - indeed, one researcher on the GOONS (Guild of One-Name Studies www.one-name.org) list is researching WILDGOOSE - so has "Still on a Wildgoose Chase" as her tagline ;-) -- Wendy