In a message dated 01/07/2009 16:45:50 GMT Daylight Time, v.lee@ntlworld.com writes: Can anyone help with the marriage of Matlida Davison's parents, I know she was born 29 dec 1842 in Tynemouth and Christened 12 feb 1843 and her father was Robert Davison and mother was Mary ? Val: You don't mention Mary's maiden surname. If you don't already know it then you should take steps to obtain Matilda's birth certificate from the local registrar (1843 March Quarter). That shoujld give you the information. It will make it so much easier to be certain any Robert Davison/Mary marriage you find is the correct one. There does not seem to be any such marriage at a likely period at Tynemouth or nearby. Such marriages do exist but they are all some distance from Tynemouth - and I've only looked at a marriage index for Northumberland; Co Durham should also be taken into consideration, as should the "Davidson" spelling. The quite different surname "Dawson" should also be allowed for, as a "w" and a"vi" can be indistinguishable in many people's handwriting. Geoff Nicholson

Hello Geoff Hello Geoff Thank you for the informative message. Unfortunately there are other place that have also had valuable information destroyed by fire over the years. Will carry on researching other lines and hopefully one day someone may recognise the names. Cheers Garry . ----- Original Message ----- From: <NEGenealogy@aol.com> To: <ENG-DURHAM@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 2:02 AM Subject: Re: [ENG-DURHAM] STOREY, Phoebe > > In a message dated 30/06/2009 00:09:35 GMT Daylight Time, > suegarry@paradise.net.nz writes: > > Phoebe STOREY married to John DODDS on 15 Dec 1782 at St Peteres > Monkwearmouth and they had the following children > > William b 1783 > Mary b 1784 > John b 1788 > Marjorie b 1791 > James b 1792 > Robert b 1795 > > Phoebe may be the daughter of George STOREY and Mary born 13 Apr 1763. > > > > > A major difficulty in tracing any Monkwearmouith family during the years > before 1791 is that the parish registers were all lost in a fire in that > year. Of course, the BTs still exist, but only back to thje 170s and for > the > first few of those years they are in a poor condition. An attempt was > made > in the early 1790s to reconstruct the burnt registers, using information > from Family Bibles etc, but only a small proportion of the originally > large > number of entries was ever retrieved in that way. That information is > now > held in four unindexed, non-chronological volumes, kept in Durham County > Record Office alongside the post-1791 parish registers. > > Over the last 30-plus years I have heard several times that "so-and-so > is compiling a chronological and/or indexed transcript of those > notebooks", sometimes including information from the BTs or with marriage > information > from the Durham Diocesan Marriage Bonds or with burial information from > the pitifully few surviving MIs. However, I have never heard of anyone > finishing the job! > > The effect of all that is to make the checking of statements about > Monkwearmouth families pre-1791 very difficult and, indeed, when a search > of > the registers over a few years - to check whether an entry which appears > to > "fit" is the only one to do so, or just one out of many possibilities, > for > instance - is needed, it can be impossible to do. The recent putting of > the BTs on-line is a great help here, but it can only add roughly one > more > generation. > > Geoff Nicholson > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ENG-DURHAM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hello The names mentioned below are the only ones that I currently have. Cheers Garry ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barb & Dusty Miller" <bardus@xtra.co.nz> To: <NEGenealogy@aol.com> Cc: "Durham List" <ENG-DURHAM@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 8:51 AM Subject: Re: [ENG-DURHAM] STOREY, Phoebe > Hi, > I have a STOREY family is Durham. > > Dorothy C STOREY bn 1922 Darlington Durham who marr Leslie MILLER d in > 2001 > > Is she any relation? > > Nicole MILLER > New Zealand > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <NEGenealogy@aol.com> > To: <ENG-DURHAM@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 2:02 AM > Subject: Re: [ENG-DURHAM] STOREY, Phoebe > > >> >> In a message dated 30/06/2009 00:09:35 GMT Daylight Time, >> suegarry@paradise.net.nz writes: >> >> Phoebe STOREY married to John DODDS on 15 Dec 1782 at St Peteres >> Monkwearmouth and they had the following children >> >> William b 1783 >> Mary b 1784 >> John b 1788 >> Marjorie b 1791 >> James b 1792 >> Robert b 1795 >> >> Phoebe may be the daughter of George STOREY and Mary born 13 Apr 1763. >> >> >>

Hello, In 1906, my grandparents immigrated from Yorkshire to Canada.  Searching through ships records, I have found they returned to England in 1954 for a visit.  While in the UK, the ships records show they stayed at "12 Buttermore Ave, Aklam, Middlesboro', Yorks".  I am hoping that someone might have access to records that show who may have lived at that address in 1954. Thank you for your help, Scott B, Canada __________________________________________________________________ Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! http://www.flickr.com/gift/

Hi, I have a STOREY family is Durham. Dorothy C STOREY bn 1922 Darlington Durham who marr Leslie MILLER d in 2001 Is she any relation? Nicole MILLER New Zealand ----- Original Message ----- From: <NEGenealogy@aol.com> To: <ENG-DURHAM@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 2:02 AM Subject: Re: [ENG-DURHAM] STOREY, Phoebe > > In a message dated 30/06/2009 00:09:35 GMT Daylight Time, > suegarry@paradise.net.nz writes: > > Phoebe STOREY married to John DODDS on 15 Dec 1782 at St Peteres > Monkwearmouth and they had the following children > > William b 1783 > Mary b 1784 > John b 1788 > Marjorie b 1791 > James b 1792 > Robert b 1795 > > Phoebe may be the daughter of George STOREY and Mary born 13 Apr 1763. > > > > > A major difficulty in tracing any Monkwearmouith family during the years > before 1791 is that the parish registers were all lost in a fire in that > year. Of course, the BTs still exist, but only back to thje 170s and for > the > first few of those years they are in a poor condition. An attempt was > made > in the early 1790s to reconstruct the burnt registers, using information > from Family Bibles etc, but only a small proportion of the originally > large > number of entries was ever retrieved in that way. That information is > now > held in four unindexed, non-chronological volumes, kept in Durham County > Record Office alongside the post-1791 parish registers. > > Over the last 30-plus years I have heard several times that "so-and-so > is compiling a chronological and/or indexed transcript of those > notebooks", sometimes including information from the BTs or with marriage > information > from the Durham Diocesan Marriage Bonds or with burial information from > the pitifully few surviving MIs. However, I have never heard of anyone > finishing the job! > > The effect of all that is to make the checking of statements about > Monkwearmouth families pre-1791 very difficult and, indeed, when a search > of > the registers over a few years - to check whether an entry which appears > to > "fit" is the only one to do so, or just one out of many possibilities, > for > instance - is needed, it can be impossible to do. The recent putting of > the BTs on-line is a great help here, but it can only add roughly one > more > generation. > > Geoff Nicholson > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ENG-DURHAM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users. It has removed 4868 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this message in their emails. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.download.com/Spamfighter/3000-2382_4-10764780.html

The "Dictionary of County Durham Place Names", by Victor Watts, gives a very comprehensive coverage of the derivation of the name 'Wear' and concludes that it seems there were two different ancient names Uisur(i)a, 'to flow', and Uedra 'bending one', a not infrequent phenomenon in the case of large rivers. Stan Mapstone -----Original Message----- From: NEGenealogy@aol.com To: ENG-DURHAM@rootsweb.com Sent: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 11:04 Subject: [ENG-DURHAM] Meaning of "Wear" In a message dated 01/07/2009 08:08:35 GMT Daylight Time, watsonb@iinet.com.au writes: So what did "wear" stand for .Was it old Danish for something? It is simply the name of the River. Pre- (Norman) conquest refrences are usually to "Weremutha" (Wearmouth) and a Roman-period map of Britain (by Ptolomy?) calls the river the "Vedra flumen", which is near-enough "River Wear". Like most local natural geographical features, its name is probably Celtic, reflecting that given to it by the first local inhabitants. Contrary to some strands of public opinion, few Danes ever settled locally. The influence of the Kingdom of York seems to have stopped at the Tees, and there are only a tiny few examples of Danish "-by" place-names north of that river (Raby is the best-known and Follingsby the nearest to the Sunderland area. Even Follingsby is a long way from Sunderland and it is probably significant that it is on the upper reaches (not now navigable) of the River Don, which joins the River Tyne at Jarrow Slake, where a Viking fleet is said to have once over-wintered. Geoff Nicholson Geoff Nicholson ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-DURHAM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ________________________________________________________________________ AOL Email goes Mobile! You can now read your AOL Emails whilst on the move. Sign up for a free AOL Email account with unlimited storage today.

In a message dated 01/07/2009 08:08:35 GMT Daylight Time, watsonb@iinet.com.au writes: So what did "wear" stand for .Was it old Danish for something? It is simply the name of the River. Pre- (Norman) conquest refrences are usually to "Weremutha" (Wearmouth) and a Roman-period map of Britain (by Ptolomy?) calls the river the "Vedra flumen", which is near-enough "River Wear". Like most local natural geographical features, its name is probably Celtic, reflecting that given to it by the first local inhabitants. Contrary to some strands of public opinion, few Danes ever settled locally. The influence of the Kingdom of York seems to have stopped at the Tees, and there are only a tiny few examples of Danish "-by" place-names north of that river (Raby is the best-known and Follingsby the nearest to the Sunderland area. Even Follingsby is a long way from Sunderland and it is probably significant that it is on the upper reaches (not now navigable) of the River Don, which joins the River Tyne at Jarrow Slake, where a Viking fleet is said to have once over-wintered. Geoff Nicholson Geoff Nicholson

Wear is a Celtic or pre-Celtic river name, probably meaning simply 'water', 'river'. Bishop Wearmouth ( the bishop of Durham's Wearmouth estate soth of the river) was originally known as 'South Wearmouth', Wiremuthe australem, circa 1040, Suth Wermutha in the 15th century, and finally Wermouth Episcopi, and Bishop Wermouthe 1582. It was called 'South' and 'Bishop' for distinction from Monkwearmouth on the north side of the river. Stan Mapstone -----Original Message----- From: Watson Family <watsonb@iinet.com.au> To: eng-durham@rootsweb.com Sent: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 7:06 Subject: [ENG-DURHAM] re Henry Clough non 1851 census Hi Geoff, re Bishopwearmouth Many thanks for all that detailed information. I really appreciate knowing all that as it helps understand how ancestors ended up where they did. So what did "wear" stand for .Was it old Danish for something? Many thanks for your help and advice cheers Marilyn from Western Australia ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-DURHAM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ________________________________________________________________________ AOL Email goes Mobile! You can now read your AOL Emails whilst on the move. Sign up for a free AOL Email account with unlimited storage today.

Hello all I Have been given some information regarding the abovementioned person which is as follows. Phoebe STOREY married to John DODDS on 15 Dec 1782 at St Peteres Monkwearmouth and they had the following children William b 1783 Mary b 1784 John b 1788 Marjorie b 1791 James b 1792 Robert b 1795 Phoebe may be the daughter of George STOREY and Mary born 13 Apr 1763. If this is the correct family then Marjorie DODDS married Robert WANDLASS 13 Feb 1819. Thier daughter Jane WANDLESS married William Reaid WATSON and in 1858 emigrated here to New Zealand. Any information on this family would be much appreciated. Kind Regards Garry Williams New Zealand

In a message dated 30/06/2009 00:09:35 GMT Daylight Time, suegarry@paradise.net.nz writes: Phoebe STOREY married to John DODDS on 15 Dec 1782 at St Peteres Monkwearmouth and they had the following children William b 1783 Mary b 1784 John b 1788 Marjorie b 1791 James b 1792 Robert b 1795 Phoebe may be the daughter of George STOREY and Mary born 13 Apr 1763. A major difficulty in tracing any Monkwearmouith family during the years before 1791 is that the parish registers were all lost in a fire in that year. Of course, the BTs still exist, but only back to thje 170s and for the first few of those years they are in a poor condition. An attempt was made in the early 1790s to reconstruct the burnt registers, using information from Family Bibles etc, but only a small proportion of the originally large number of entries was ever retrieved in that way. That information is now held in four unindexed, non-chronological volumes, kept in Durham County Record Office alongside the post-1791 parish registers. Over the last 30-plus years I have heard several times that "so-and-so is compiling a chronological and/or indexed transcript of those notebooks", sometimes including information from the BTs or with marriage information from the Durham Diocesan Marriage Bonds or with burial information from the pitifully few surviving MIs. However, I have never heard of anyone finishing the job! The effect of all that is to make the checking of statements about Monkwearmouth families pre-1791 very difficult and, indeed, when a search of the registers over a few years - to check whether an entry which appears to "fit" is the only one to do so, or just one out of many possibilities, for instance - is needed, it can be impossible to do. The recent putting of the BTs on-line is a great help here, but it can only add roughly one more generation. Geoff Nicholson

Allan There are four "Male" Robson birth registrations between 1837 and 1841 in Durham, including one in Sunderland - March 1839, v24, p263..... Perhaps worth a try.... Although do bear in mind that such Registrations, in my understanding, were the responsibility of the registrar to collect rather than the parent to submit until the 1870's, and that a Birth Registration cost money - perhaps the family couldn't afford to register John....... Good luck Geoff in sunny Sevilla > From: allandrobson@btinternet.com > To: ENG-DURHAM@rootsweb.com > Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:53:50 +0100 > Subject: [ENG-DURHAM] John Robson Mystery > > Hello All > Can anybody solve the following, this is a Reposting. > > John Robson born 1840 ish his parents appear to be John Robson born 1805 Corbridge and Eleanor Urwin born 1809 Byker, John was the 6th Child born to the above his Siblings as follows: > Robert born 1827 Cramlington > Jane born 1829 Walker > Mary Ann born 1831 Norton > Elizabeth born 1833 Norton > Douglas born 1835 Newcastle > John born 1840? > I have all the Baptisms of the above except John > > 1841 Census > Pemberton St, Hetton-le-Hole > Eleanor age 30 > Robert age 13 > Mary Ann age 9 > Elizabeth age 8 > Douglas age 5 > John age 1 > > Oct 1841 Margaret was born in Hetton I have birth Reg, no Baptism. > Sept 1843 Armstrong Urwin born Hetton > July 1846 Richard Born died in 1846 at Hetton, both Armstrong and Richard were baptised together at St Nicholas Hetton 8th July 1846, I also have there Birth Regs, still no sign of John and Margaret's Baptisms > > 1851 Census > Neasham Sq, Sunderland > John Robson age 46 Head born Corbridge > Eleanor age 41 born Byker > John aged 11 Born Sunderland > Magaret age 10 born Sunderland ( this is wrong she was born Hetton I have birth Reg) > Armstrong age 8 born Hetton > Thomas age 3 Months born Sunderland, I have his Birth Reg and Baptism > > 1861 Census > 20 Sussex St, Sunderland > John Robson age 23 Seaman Born Bishopwearmouth > Eleanor wife age 27 Born Sunderland > Douglas age 4 Months born Sunderland > > John Robson age 22 Married Eleanor Ann Hall age 26 on 15th Jan 1860 in Sunderland, I think he lied about his age to marry his wife was actually 29 when they married she knocked a few years off her age. > John died in May 1865 as a result of an Accident and was buried with Naval Honours. > > John is my direct Line, I have had all the John Robson Birth Regs checked from 1837 to 1841 he is not Registered and no luck with his baptism of him and his sister Margaret, it is a complete mystery why there is no record of him. > if anyone can help or come across his birth or Baptism please let me know it has been 9 years of Searching. > > Many Thanks > Allan Robson > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-DURHAM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello All Can anybody solve the following, this is a Reposting. John Robson born 1840 ish his parents appear to be John Robson born 1805 Corbridge and Eleanor Urwin born 1809 Byker, John was the 6th Child born to the above his Siblings as follows: Robert born 1827 Cramlington Jane born 1829 Walker Mary Ann born 1831 Norton Elizabeth born 1833 Norton Douglas born 1835 Newcastle John born 1840? I have all the Baptisms of the above except John 1841 Census Pemberton St, Hetton-le-Hole Eleanor age 30 Robert age 13 Mary Ann age 9 Elizabeth age 8 Douglas age 5 John age 1 Oct 1841 Margaret was born in Hetton I have birth Reg, no Baptism. Sept 1843 Armstrong Urwin born Hetton July 1846 Richard Born died in 1846 at Hetton, both Armstrong and Richard were baptised together at St Nicholas Hetton 8th July 1846, I also have there Birth Regs, still no sign of John and Margaret's Baptisms 1851 Census Neasham Sq, Sunderland John Robson age 46 Head born Corbridge Eleanor age 41 born Byker John aged 11 Born Sunderland Magaret age 10 born Sunderland ( this is wrong she was born Hetton I have birth Reg) Armstrong age 8 born Hetton Thomas age 3 Months born Sunderland, I have his Birth Reg and Baptism 1861 Census 20 Sussex St, Sunderland John Robson age 23 Seaman Born Bishopwearmouth Eleanor wife age 27 Born Sunderland Douglas age 4 Months born Sunderland John Robson age 22 Married Eleanor Ann Hall age 26 on 15th Jan 1860 in Sunderland, I think he lied about his age to marry his wife was actually 29 when they married she knocked a few years off her age. John died in May 1865 as a result of an Accident and was buried with Naval Honours. John is my direct Line, I have had all the John Robson Birth Regs checked from 1837 to 1841 he is not Registered and no luck with his baptism of him and his sister Margaret, it is a complete mystery why there is no record of him. if anyone can help or come across his birth or Baptism please let me know it has been 9 years of Searching. Many Thanks Allan Robson

Registering a birth cost nothing if it was within  42 days. Late registration after 42 days could cost seven shillings and sixpence. From the Act; "That after the Expiration of Forty-two Days following the Day of the Birth of any Child it shall not be lawful for any Registrar to register such Birth, save as herein-after is next mentioned............the Superintendent Registrar shall be entitled to have a Fee of Two Shillings and Sixpence from the Person requiring the same to be registered; and the Registrar, over and above the Fee herein-after enacted in respect of every birth registered by him, shall be entitled, unless the Delay shall have been occasioned by his Default, to have a Fee of Five Shillings from the person requiring the same to be registered;" There was a penalty for non-registration. not late registration in the 1874 Act. The Act of 1836 omitted to impose any penalty for failure by the parent to register a birth, an omission which was rectified only by the Births and Deaths Registration Act of 1874 which made such failure punishable by a fine of £2.00. Stan Mapstone -----Original Message----- From: Geoff Watson <geoffwatsone@hotmail.com> To: allandrobson@btinternet.com; eng-durham@rootsweb.com Sent: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 16:41 Subject: Re: [ENG-DURHAM] John Robson Mystery Allan and that a Birth Registration cost money - perhaps the family couldn't afford to register John....... Good luck Geoff in sunny Sevilla ________________________________________________________________________ AOL Email goes Mobile! You can now read your AOL Emails whilst on the move. Sign up for a free AOL Email account with unlimited storage today.

I got the entry? from the Bishopwearmouth, St. Michael & All? Angels Marriage Index 1837-1901, prepared for Durham County Record Office. There is obviously a mistake in the name. Stan Mapstone -----Original Message----- From: Janis Noonan <2zpool@charter.net> To: eng-durham@rootsweb.com Sent: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 17:37 Subject: Re: [ENG-DURHAM] re Bishopwearmouth BT's Your statement said the marriage was for Ann Barrass but it was Alice. ________________________________________________________________________ AOL Email goes Mobile! You can now read your AOL Emails whilst on the move. Sign up for a free AOL Email account with unlimited storage today.

Hi would SKS have the Bishopwearmouth BT's I have a marriage of Henry Clough and Ann Barrass that I would like to know more about. Where is Bishopwearmouth? The family seemed to be centred around Kelloe, Cohoe and Haswell then disappear after the 1851 census. Their daughter Margaret was born in Kelloe in 1839 and they were 1841 census at Coxhoe then 1851 census were at Haswell. Margaret and brother James migrated to Australia in 1856 Any help and advice is welcome Many thanks cheers Marilyn

Your statement said the marriage was for Ann Barrass but it was Alice. Alice Barrass was baptised in Newcastle All Saints 29 Oct 1806, born 3 Oct 1806, 1st daughter of William Barrass, Pitman, native of Chester Le Street, Co. Durham by his wife Elizabeth daughter of Mark Noble, pitman, of Tanfield Co. Durham. Heaton Northumberland was in the All Saints parish of Newcastle. Per 1851 census HO107/2392 folio 432 page 25. I have not found Henry Sr in the 1851 census. Says Alice was married so he must be around somewhere. The family also lived in Pittington Co. Durham as there were baptisms of Henry Clouff (Clough) son of Henry, collier, and Alice 5 July 1832. Henry died in mine explosion in Haswell 28 Sept 1844, age 12 along with brother Michael, age 14, they were buried 30 Sept 1844 (South Hetton Holy Trinity) Elizabeth Cluff baptised Pittington 31 May 1829 d/o Henry and Alice Alice and Ann Clough were baptised at Haswell in 1844 and 1846. Janis

Hi Marilyn, Looks as though you have the correct couple . . . . .! If you go to http://search.labs.familysearch.org/recordsearch/start.html?datestamp=1201904875546 Click on Europe > England Diocese of Durham Bishops' Transcripts ca 1790-1900 >Durham > Kelloe > 1762-1852 > page 276 of 723 there is the following baptism:- *1839, April 6th, Margaret 2nd dau of Henry CLOUGH and Alice (late BARRASS) East Hetton, Pitman. At Haswell > Page 68 of 173 are the burials for the three CLOUGH boys in 1844. At Haswell > Page 74 of 173 is the baptism for Alice in 1844. The family were indexed as CHEFF on Ancestry for the 1841 census, at Coxhoe, so not surprising that they were hard to find -). (I have helped out a neighbour where her ancestor was a coal miner, and this man only appeared in one out of three different census years. We thought the same thing, that he was down the mine on census night. The wife was listed as the first person in the household and down as 'wife' 'married' on two of the census nights.) Cheers Linda

Unfortunately Bishopwearmouth is not in the BTs at http://search.labs.familysearch.org/recordsearch/#c=1309819;t=browsable;w=0;p=collectionDetails Stan Mapstone -----Original Message----- From: NEGenealogy@aol.com To: ENG-DURHAM@rootsweb.com Sent: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 11:26 Subject: Re: [ENG-DURHAM] re Bishopwearmouth BT's Marilyn: Bishopwearmouth BTs should be freely available on-line from the Mormon web site, just as are BTs for the rest of Co Durham. Stan Mapstone ________________________________________________________________________ AOL Email goes Mobile! You can now read your AOL Emails whilst on the move. Sign up for a free AOL Email account with unlimited storage today.

From 1851 The instructions to the enumerator were that no person present on census night were to be omitted, and no person absent included. If individuals were working that night, or were travelling, they would be enumerated in the house to which they would normally return on the morning after they had finished their shift, or where they were to stay at the next stop on their journey.But in filling in the schedule did the householders always understand what information was required? Stan Mapstone -----Original Message----- From: Linda Price <lindavpri@optusnet.com.au> To: ENG-DURHAM@rootsweb.comENG-DURHAM@rootsweb.com; Watson Family <watsonb@iinet.com.au> Sent: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 2:07 Subject: Re: [ENG-DURHAM] re CLOUGH and BARASS (I have helped out a neighbour where her ancestor was a coal miner, and this man only appeared in one out of three different census years. We thought the same thing, that he was down the mine on census night. The wife was listed as the first person in the household and down as 'wife' 'married' on two of the census nights.) Cheers Linda ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-DURHAM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ________________________________________________________________________ AOL Email goes Mobile! You can now read your AOL Emails whilst on the move. Sign up for a free AOL Email account with unlimited storage today.

Hi Marilyn, Go To http://nd.durham.gov.uk/recordoffice/dro.nsf/vwebparishes/bishopwearmouth+st.+michael+and+all+angels which shows the location. There was a marriage of Henry Clough and Alice Barrass on 1st March 1828,? Bishopwearmouth St. Michael and All Angels. Stan Mapstone -----Original Message----- From: Watson Family <watsonb@iinet.com.au> To: eng-durham@rootsweb.com Sent: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 8:22 Subject: [ENG-DURHAM] re Bishopwearmouth BT's Hi would SKS have the Bishopwearmouth BT's I have a marriage of Henry Clough and Ann Barrass that I would like to know more about. Where is Bishopwearmouth? The family seemed to be centred around Kelloe, Cohoe and Haswell then disappear after the 1851 census. Their daughter Margaret was born in Kelloe in 1839 and they were 1841 census at Coxhoe then 1851 census were at Haswell. Margaret and brother James migrated to Australia in 1856 Any help and advice is welcome Many thanks cheers Marilyn ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-DURHAM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ________________________________________________________________________ AOL Email goes Mobile! You can now read your AOL Emails whilst on the move. Sign up for a free AOL Email account with unlimited storage today.