Hi Sandra and Jon i have tried to get Jon to join AA ancestryaid.co.uk but unfortunately he cant as it is to do with Flash players sorry if im advertising :( Shan Manager for Ancesty Aid www,ancestryaid.co.uk -------Original Message------- From: Sandra J Smith Date: 08/19/05 20:04:44 To: ENG-HAMPSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [ENG-HANTS] Re: [Ham] ] A Question - divorce / Widowed Jon, I am so sorry, I didnt realise that your sight was non-existant. You are to be congratulated though, in following your pursuits in this way, and if I can help at all I would be only too pleased to do so . Kind regards Sandra J P NIXEY wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Sandra J Smith" <sandra.s@ntlworld.com> >To: <ENG-HAMPSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> >Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 2:59 PM >Subject: Re: [ENG-HANTS] Re: [Ham] ] A Question - divorce / Widowed > > > > >>The fact that they are digital images shouldnt deter you though, as the >>image, once downloaded, can be blown up to a huge size. >> >> > > >Thanks Sandra, my problem is the fact that my sight is non-existent, the >image could be blown up so that each letter was 5 feet high, but I still >wouldn't be able to see it. Hence the reason for me being totally reliant >on transcriptions. >Obviously I'm going to need some sighted assistance in finding this record >of George Parsons. thanks for your help once again, > >Kindest regards, Jon > > > > > ============================== Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx

Jon, I am so sorry, I didnt realise that your sight was non-existant. You are to be congratulated though, in following your pursuits in this way, and if I can help at all I would be only too pleased to do so . Kind regards Sandra J P NIXEY wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Sandra J Smith" <sandra.s@ntlworld.com> >To: <ENG-HAMPSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> >Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 2:59 PM >Subject: Re: [ENG-HANTS] Re: [Ham] ] A Question - divorce / Widowed > > > > >>The fact that they are digital images shouldnt deter you though, as the >>image, once downloaded, can be blown up to a huge size. >> >> > > >Thanks Sandra, my problem is the fact that my sight is non-existent, the >image could be blown up so that each letter was 5 feet high, but I still >wouldn't be able to see it. Hence the reason for me being totally reliant >on transcriptions. >Obviously I'm going to need some sighted assistance in finding this record >of George Parsons. thanks for your help once again, > >Kindest regards, Jon > > > > >

1851 Census H107 1516 page 1226 15 Clerkenwell Green, St John Clerkenwell, London Jane FREEMAN, unmarried, age 19, Servant, born Dogmersfield, Hants 1851 Census H107 1504 page 37 15 Union Street, St John Hackney, London Benjamin GODFREY, widower, age 36, Blacksmith, born Southampton, Hants Benjamin GODFREY, son, age 12, born Walthamstow, Essex Mary GODFREY, dau, age 10, born Hackney James GODFREY, son, age 7, born Hackney Charlotte GODFREY, dau, age 5, born Hackney Joseph GODFREY, son, age 2, born Hackney 1851 Census H107 1504 page 78 High Street, Hackney, London Frances COWARD, Lodger, unmarried, age 61, Nurse, born Winchester, Hants Linda Tasmania, Australia

1851 Census H107 1516 page 1260 onwards Clerkenwell Workhouse, St James Clerkenwell, London Jane STIGWOOD, Pauper, widow, age 82, Keeps a Shop, born looks like Sisley?, Hants Elizabeth MACKLIN, Pauper, widow, age 54, Washer Woman, born Portsea, Hants Samuel PARKS, Pauper, widower, age 55, Master Carpenter, born Beaulieu, Hants Linda Tasmania, Australia

----- Original Message ----- From: "Sandra J Smith" <sandra.s@ntlworld.com> To: <ENG-HAMPSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 2:59 PM Subject: Re: [ENG-HANTS] Re: [Ham] ] A Question - divorce / Widowed > The fact that they are digital images shouldnt deter you though, as the > image, once downloaded, can be blown up to a huge size. Thanks Sandra, my problem is the fact that my sight is non-existent, the image could be blown up so that each letter was 5 feet high, but I still wouldn't be able to see it. Hence the reason for me being totally reliant on transcriptions. Obviously I'm going to need some sighted assistance in finding this record of George Parsons. thanks for your help once again, Kindest regards, Jon -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.12/77 - Release Date: 8/18/05

Thanks Sandra I can now have a look see Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sandra J Smith" <sandra.s@ntlworld.com> To: <ENG-HAMPSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 3:07 PM Subject: Re: [ENG-HANTS] Re: [Ham] ] A Question - divorce / Widowed > Bob, > > The link for the Records of Seamen is: > http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documentsonline/default.asp > The index is free and it costs £3.50 to download the actual image. But > bear in mind that only 20% is currently available. > The incomplete original GRO indexes can be viewed at FreeBMD and then can > be supplemented from www.1837online.com, although the latter costs 10p per > page to view. Alternatively. LDS family history centres have the fiche > available for viewing, as do many central libraries and County Record > Offices in the UK - free of course. However, the GRO indexes were created > from copies of copies of the originals, with all the fallability of the > indexing process. > Regards > Sandra > bob.newell@ntlworld.com wrote: > >> I noticed you are referring to actual records of seaman online could you >> give me the link for this registry and also link for the GRO >> >> Bob >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sandra J Smith" >> <sandra.s@ntlworld.com> >> To: <ENG-HAMPSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 7:44 AM >> Subject: Re: [ENG-HANTS] Re: [Ham] ] A Question - divorce / Widowed >> >> >>> Jon. >>> What a complication!! >>> My first action here would be to check the ship's muster rolls for >>> George Parsons. You put ?? as his ship - does this mean you dont know >>> the name or you cant read it in the register? From the ship's musters >>> you can trace his naval career from ship to ship and it should tell you >>> if he was lost at sea. Without a body, Elizabeth would have had to wait >>> seven years in order to have him declared deceased and then be free to >>> marry again. >>> The new database on the national archives site (Register of Seamen's >>> Services) is far from complete, but there is an entry for a George >>> Parsons enlisting in 1824. Let me know if you cant find the database - >>> it is on the documents online section of the site. >>> >>> You say you havent been able to trace the marriage of Elizabeth Parsons >>> or Elizabeth Childs to George Aubrey/Allberry. Have you checked the GRO >>> indexes rather than just FreeBMD which is far from complete? Also, >>> because of the 7 year rule the marriage may well have taken place a lot >>> later than you thought. Of course, it is possible that they never >>> married - just set up home together. >>> >>> Divorce was a very rare event at this time, usually only available to >>> the very wealthy by Private Members Bills in Parliament. I would think >>> that divorce was not the reason for the disposal of her various >>> partners! >>> >>> Another small point - deceased father's were not always recorded on the >>> marriage certificate. It depended on whether the question was actually >>> asked. The only conclusion you can draw from the marriage cert is that >>> the father is dead if recorded as deceased, any other scenario, he could >>> be either living or deceased. >>> >>> I'd be very interested to know if you ever sort this one out. It is >>> possibly one of the most complicated scenarios I have heard of in 40 >>> years of genealogical research!! >>> Regards >>> Sandra >>> >>> J P NIXEY wrote: >>> >>>> thanks to everyone who replied on this subject. >>>> >>>> I've thought about it some more and there could be another reason why >>>> she >>>> called herself widowed. >>>> >>>> I'll paint the picture as I'm currently aware of it. I'll just use the >>>> year >>>> rather than exact dates for ease. >>>> >>>> In 1825, George Parsons who was aboard HMS ?? married Elizabeth childs >>>> at St >>>> Marys, Portsea. so far, I have only been able to find 2 children, >>>> Elizabeth >>>> b1832/d1832, and Sarah Jane b1835, both girls born in fareham. >>>> In 1843, Elizabeth had another daughter, Rhoda, the father being George >>>> Allberry and Elizabeth's surname was Parsons on Rhoda's birth >>>> certificate. >>>> rhoda was chr with the surname Aubrey. >>>> Elizabeth had a son James in 1846, surname spelled as Aldbury, and this >>>> time >>>> Elizabeth's surname matched George's. James was chr with the surname >>>> Aubrey. >>>> So it would appear that George and Elizabeth were married between 1843 >>>> and >>>> 1846, although there's not a sign of a marriage anywhere. Neither is >>>> there a >>>> sign of George Parsons' death, could he have been lost at sea, presumed >>>> dead? Did Elizabeth simply take on George's surname as she couldn't >>>> marry >>>> him because she couldn't prove her husband was dead? >>>> In 1847 another son is born, Henry, surname spelled Aubery, and he was >>>> to >>>> become my wife's great grandfather. >>>> In 1851 the family name appears as Allbray on the census for Fareham, >>>> and >>>> George is alive and well working as a labourer. >>>> In 1858 Henry was chr at St Johns, Forton, gosport with the surname >>>> Albury. >>>> his father George is recorded as a labourer from Fareham, with no >>>> mention of >>>> him being deceased. There appears to be almost a year's discrpancy with >>>> regards Henry's date of birth, the chr details saying Dec 4 1848, and >>>> Dec 17 >>>> 1847 on his birth certificate. >>>> In 1861 Elizabeth shows up at Gosport with the surname of williams, and >>>> she >>>> is recorded as a widow. All 3 children, Rhoda, James and Henry also >>>> have the >>>> Williams surname. >>>> there is no record yet found of a marriage between an Elizabeth >>>> Childs/Parsons/Albray (or variant) and someone by the name of Williams, >>>> although on her death certificate in 1887, Elizabeth is recorded as the >>>> widow of the late Genge Williams. I can't find any trace on him either! >>>> In 1868 Rhoda married henry Hawkins, and her father is recorded as >>>> George >>>> Albray, again no mention of him being deceased. >>>> In 1871 Henry married Charlotte Harvey, and this is the first time that >>>> George albray is recorded as deceased. From 1843 through to 1858, >>>> george was >>>> always recorded as a labourer, but on Henry's marriage certificate he >>>> was >>>> recorded as a seaman. >>>> I've thought about the possiblity of George Parsons and George albray >>>> being >>>> the same person, and even maybe Genge Williams, but, if that is the >>>> case, >>>> why would Rhoda's birth certificate have her parents as George Allberry >>>> and >>>> Elizabeth Parsons? >>>> Did george albray just disappear off the scene between 1858 and 1861, >>>> and >>>> Elizabeth decide to change her surname for some reason, and if so who >>>> on >>>> earth is Genge Williams? did the widow comment refer to George Parsons, >>>> not >>>> george albray? >>>> So many questions, and yet, so far, not a single answer. >>>> >>>> If anyone has picked up any possible senarios after reading this, I'd >>>> love >>>> to hear from them, before I totally lose my mind! lol >>>> >>>> Kind regards to everyone, >>>> >>>> Jon >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> ============================== >>> View and search Historical Newspapers. Read about your ancestors, find >>> marriage announcements and more. Learn more: >>> http://www.ancestry.com/s13969/rd.ashx >>> >> >> >> ============================== >> Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the >> areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. >> Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx >> >> >> > > > ============================== > New! Family Tree Maker 2005. Build your tree and search for your ancestors > at the same time. Share your tree with family and friends. Learn more: > http://landing.ancestry.com/familytreemaker/2005/tour.aspx?sourceid=14599&targetid=5429 >

Bob, The link for the Records of Seamen is: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documentsonline/default.asp The index is free and it costs £3.50 to download the actual image. But bear in mind that only 20% is currently available. The incomplete original GRO indexes can be viewed at FreeBMD and then can be supplemented from www.1837online.com, although the latter costs 10p per page to view. Alternatively. LDS family history centres have the fiche available for viewing, as do many central libraries and County Record Offices in the UK - free of course. However, the GRO indexes were created from copies of copies of the originals, with all the fallability of the indexing process. Regards Sandra bob.newell@ntlworld.com wrote: > I noticed you are referring to actual records of seaman online could > you give me the link for this registry and also link for the GRO > > Bob > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sandra J Smith" > <sandra.s@ntlworld.com> > To: <ENG-HAMPSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 7:44 AM > Subject: Re: [ENG-HANTS] Re: [Ham] ] A Question - divorce / Widowed > > >> Jon. >> What a complication!! >> My first action here would be to check the ship's muster rolls for >> George Parsons. You put ?? as his ship - does this mean you dont >> know the name or you cant read it in the register? From the ship's >> musters you can trace his naval career from ship to ship and it >> should tell you if he was lost at sea. Without a body, Elizabeth >> would have had to wait seven years in order to have him declared >> deceased and then be free to marry again. >> The new database on the national archives site (Register of Seamen's >> Services) is far from complete, but there is an entry for a George >> Parsons enlisting in 1824. Let me know if you cant find the database >> - it is on the documents online section of the site. >> >> You say you havent been able to trace the marriage of Elizabeth >> Parsons or Elizabeth Childs to George Aubrey/Allberry. Have you >> checked the GRO indexes rather than just FreeBMD which is far from >> complete? Also, because of the 7 year rule the marriage may well >> have taken place a lot later than you thought. Of course, it is >> possible that they never married - just set up home together. >> >> Divorce was a very rare event at this time, usually only available to >> the very wealthy by Private Members Bills in Parliament. I would >> think that divorce was not the reason for the disposal of her various >> partners! >> >> Another small point - deceased father's were not always recorded on >> the marriage certificate. It depended on whether the question was >> actually asked. The only conclusion you can draw from the marriage >> cert is that the father is dead if recorded as deceased, any other >> scenario, he could be either living or deceased. >> >> I'd be very interested to know if you ever sort this one out. It is >> possibly one of the most complicated scenarios I have heard of in 40 >> years of genealogical research!! >> Regards >> Sandra >> >> J P NIXEY wrote: >> >>> thanks to everyone who replied on this subject. >>> >>> I've thought about it some more and there could be another reason >>> why she >>> called herself widowed. >>> >>> I'll paint the picture as I'm currently aware of it. I'll just use >>> the year >>> rather than exact dates for ease. >>> >>> In 1825, George Parsons who was aboard HMS ?? married Elizabeth >>> childs at St >>> Marys, Portsea. so far, I have only been able to find 2 children, >>> Elizabeth >>> b1832/d1832, and Sarah Jane b1835, both girls born in fareham. >>> In 1843, Elizabeth had another daughter, Rhoda, the father being George >>> Allberry and Elizabeth's surname was Parsons on Rhoda's birth >>> certificate. >>> rhoda was chr with the surname Aubrey. >>> Elizabeth had a son James in 1846, surname spelled as Aldbury, and >>> this time >>> Elizabeth's surname matched George's. James was chr with the surname >>> Aubrey. >>> So it would appear that George and Elizabeth were married between >>> 1843 and >>> 1846, although there's not a sign of a marriage anywhere. Neither is >>> there a >>> sign of George Parsons' death, could he have been lost at sea, presumed >>> dead? Did Elizabeth simply take on George's surname as she couldn't >>> marry >>> him because she couldn't prove her husband was dead? >>> In 1847 another son is born, Henry, surname spelled Aubery, and he >>> was to >>> become my wife's great grandfather. >>> In 1851 the family name appears as Allbray on the census for >>> Fareham, and >>> George is alive and well working as a labourer. >>> In 1858 Henry was chr at St Johns, Forton, gosport with the surname >>> Albury. >>> his father George is recorded as a labourer from Fareham, with no >>> mention of >>> him being deceased. There appears to be almost a year's discrpancy with >>> regards Henry's date of birth, the chr details saying Dec 4 1848, >>> and Dec 17 >>> 1847 on his birth certificate. >>> In 1861 Elizabeth shows up at Gosport with the surname of williams, >>> and she >>> is recorded as a widow. All 3 children, Rhoda, James and Henry also >>> have the >>> Williams surname. >>> there is no record yet found of a marriage between an Elizabeth >>> Childs/Parsons/Albray (or variant) and someone by the name of Williams, >>> although on her death certificate in 1887, Elizabeth is recorded as the >>> widow of the late Genge Williams. I can't find any trace on him either! >>> In 1868 Rhoda married henry Hawkins, and her father is recorded as >>> George >>> Albray, again no mention of him being deceased. >>> In 1871 Henry married Charlotte Harvey, and this is the first time that >>> George albray is recorded as deceased. From 1843 through to 1858, >>> george was >>> always recorded as a labourer, but on Henry's marriage certificate >>> he was >>> recorded as a seaman. >>> I've thought about the possiblity of George Parsons and George >>> albray being >>> the same person, and even maybe Genge Williams, but, if that is the >>> case, >>> why would Rhoda's birth certificate have her parents as George >>> Allberry and >>> Elizabeth Parsons? >>> Did george albray just disappear off the scene between 1858 and >>> 1861, and >>> Elizabeth decide to change her surname for some reason, and if so >>> who on >>> earth is Genge Williams? did the widow comment refer to George >>> Parsons, not >>> george albray? >>> So many questions, and yet, so far, not a single answer. >>> >>> If anyone has picked up any possible senarios after reading this, >>> I'd love >>> to hear from them, before I totally lose my mind! lol >>> >>> Kind regards to everyone, >>> >>> Jon >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ============================== >> View and search Historical Newspapers. Read about your ancestors, find >> marriage announcements and more. Learn more: >> http://www.ancestry.com/s13969/rd.ashx >> > > > ============================== > Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the > areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. > Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx > > >

Hi Jon, The digital images on the National Archives are actual images , not transcriptions. The fact that they are digital images shouldnt deter you though, as the image, once downloaded, can be blown up to a huge size. I import images in to Paint Shop Pro and just keep enlarging until I can read. (No I am not blind, but age has certainly taken its toll on my eyesight.) As far as the ship's name is concerned, have you considered emailing Portsmouth Record Office and asking if they would check the original entry for you? I am sure, if you explained the situation, they might do a one-off check. The microfiche, which Knightroot uses are notoriously difficult to read at times, so the original may well be easier for someone to read. Regards Sandra J P NIXEY wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Sandra J Smith" <sandra.s@ntlworld.com> >To: <ENG-HAMPSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> >Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 7:44 AM >Subject: Re: [ENG-HANTS] Re: [Ham] ] A Question - divorce / Widowed > >You said: > >"What a complication!!" > >Hi Sandra, you're telling me!! lol > > >"You put ?? as his ship - does this mean you dont know > > >>the name or you cant read it in the register?" >> >> > >Tony and Linda Knight very kindly sent me the entry for their marriage from >the parish records in May 1825, and they obviously couldn't read which >vessel he was with at that time. Being totally blind, I don't stand an >earthly's in seeing it any better? lol > > >"The new database on the national archives site (Register of Seamen's >Services) is far from complete, but there is an entry for a George Parsons >enlisting in 1824." > > >That sounds a good possiblity, I must say. Are these records digital images >or transcriptions? Transcriptions are within reach of my text reader, sadly >digital images aren't. > > >"You say you havent been able to trace the marriage of Elizabeth Parsons or >Elizabeth Childs to George Aubrey/Allberry. Have you checked the GRO >indexes rather than just FreeBMD which is far from complete?" > > >I haven't personally checked myself due to the digital image problem again, >but a friend in Southampton did search 1837online for me, but there was no >index even remotely close to being them. I am keeping my "eyes" open on Free >BMD though, just in case. > > >"because of the 7 year rule the marriage may well have taken place a lot >later than you thought. Of course, it is possible that they never married - >just set up home together." > >I must say the latter of these two suggestions seems far more likely at the >moment? On James and Henry's birth certificates though, Elizabeth's details >are clearly written down as Elizabeth Aldbury (or Aubery) late Parsons >formerly childs. That's almost like a legal declaration that she is married >to George, but, as you know, nothing is apparent to prove that. > > >"The only conclusion you can draw from the marriage cert is that the father >is dead if recorded as deceased" > > >Yes, so from henry's marriage cert, I at least know that the very latest >George was alive was 1871. However, with Elizabeth changing her surname to >Williams in 1861 for whichever reason, out of choice or another marriage, >I'm pretty certain I'm looking prior to 1861, and possibly after Henry's >baptism in 1858. > > >"> I'd be very interested to know if you ever sort this one out. It is >possibly one of the most complicated scenarios I have heard of in 40 years >of genealogical research!!" > > >Believe me Sandra, when or if this lot gets sorted, the whole wide world >will know! lol >thanks for your reply and very helpful suggestions, it's all very much >appreciated! > >Kindest regards, Jon > > > > >

----- Original Message ----- From: "Sandra J Smith" <sandra.s@ntlworld.com> To: <ENG-HAMPSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 7:44 AM Subject: Re: [ENG-HANTS] Re: [Ham] ] A Question - divorce / Widowed You said: "What a complication!!" Hi Sandra, you're telling me!! lol "You put ?? as his ship - does this mean you dont know > the name or you cant read it in the register?" Tony and Linda Knight very kindly sent me the entry for their marriage from the parish records in May 1825, and they obviously couldn't read which vessel he was with at that time. Being totally blind, I don't stand an earthly's in seeing it any better? lol "The new database on the national archives site (Register of Seamen's Services) is far from complete, but there is an entry for a George Parsons enlisting in 1824." That sounds a good possiblity, I must say. Are these records digital images or transcriptions? Transcriptions are within reach of my text reader, sadly digital images aren't. "You say you havent been able to trace the marriage of Elizabeth Parsons or Elizabeth Childs to George Aubrey/Allberry. Have you checked the GRO indexes rather than just FreeBMD which is far from complete?" I haven't personally checked myself due to the digital image problem again, but a friend in Southampton did search 1837online for me, but there was no index even remotely close to being them. I am keeping my "eyes" open on Free BMD though, just in case. "because of the 7 year rule the marriage may well have taken place a lot later than you thought. Of course, it is possible that they never married - just set up home together." I must say the latter of these two suggestions seems far more likely at the moment? On James and Henry's birth certificates though, Elizabeth's details are clearly written down as Elizabeth Aldbury (or Aubery) late Parsons formerly childs. That's almost like a legal declaration that she is married to George, but, as you know, nothing is apparent to prove that. "The only conclusion you can draw from the marriage cert is that the father is dead if recorded as deceased" Yes, so from henry's marriage cert, I at least know that the very latest George was alive was 1871. However, with Elizabeth changing her surname to Williams in 1861 for whichever reason, out of choice or another marriage, I'm pretty certain I'm looking prior to 1861, and possibly after Henry's baptism in 1858. "> I'd be very interested to know if you ever sort this one out. It is possibly one of the most complicated scenarios I have heard of in 40 years of genealogical research!!" Believe me Sandra, when or if this lot gets sorted, the whole wide world will know! lol thanks for your reply and very helpful suggestions, it's all very much appreciated! Kindest regards, Jon -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.12/77 - Release Date: 8/18/05

I noticed you are referring to actual records of seaman online could you give me the link for this registry and also link for the GRO Bob ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sandra J Smith" <sandra.s@ntlworld.com> To: <ENG-HAMPSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 7:44 AM Subject: Re: [ENG-HANTS] Re: [Ham] ] A Question - divorce / Widowed > Jon. > What a complication!! > My first action here would be to check the ship's muster rolls for George > Parsons. You put ?? as his ship - does this mean you dont know the name > or you cant read it in the register? From the ship's musters you can > trace his naval career from ship to ship and it should tell you if he was > lost at sea. Without a body, Elizabeth would have had to wait seven years > in order to have him declared deceased and then be free to marry again. > The new database on the national archives site (Register of Seamen's > Services) is far from complete, but there is an entry for a George Parsons > enlisting in 1824. Let me know if you cant find the database - it is on > the documents online section of the site. > > You say you havent been able to trace the marriage of Elizabeth Parsons or > Elizabeth Childs to George Aubrey/Allberry. Have you checked the GRO > indexes rather than just FreeBMD which is far from complete? Also, > because of the 7 year rule the marriage may well have taken place a lot > later than you thought. Of course, it is possible that they never > married - just set up home together. > > Divorce was a very rare event at this time, usually only available to the > very wealthy by Private Members Bills in Parliament. I would think that > divorce was not the reason for the disposal of her various partners! > > Another small point - deceased father's were not always recorded on the > marriage certificate. It depended on whether the question was actually > asked. The only conclusion you can draw from the marriage cert is that > the father is dead if recorded as deceased, any other scenario, he could > be either living or deceased. > > I'd be very interested to know if you ever sort this one out. It is > possibly one of the most complicated scenarios I have heard of in 40 years > of genealogical research!! > Regards > Sandra > > J P NIXEY wrote: > >>thanks to everyone who replied on this subject. >> >>I've thought about it some more and there could be another reason why she >>called herself widowed. >> >>I'll paint the picture as I'm currently aware of it. I'll just use the >>year >>rather than exact dates for ease. >> >>In 1825, George Parsons who was aboard HMS ?? married Elizabeth childs at >>St >>Marys, Portsea. so far, I have only been able to find 2 children, >>Elizabeth >>b1832/d1832, and Sarah Jane b1835, both girls born in fareham. >>In 1843, Elizabeth had another daughter, Rhoda, the father being George >>Allberry and Elizabeth's surname was Parsons on Rhoda's birth certificate. >>rhoda was chr with the surname Aubrey. >>Elizabeth had a son James in 1846, surname spelled as Aldbury, and this >>time >>Elizabeth's surname matched George's. James was chr with the surname >>Aubrey. >>So it would appear that George and Elizabeth were married between 1843 and >>1846, although there's not a sign of a marriage anywhere. Neither is there >>a >>sign of George Parsons' death, could he have been lost at sea, presumed >>dead? Did Elizabeth simply take on George's surname as she couldn't marry >>him because she couldn't prove her husband was dead? >>In 1847 another son is born, Henry, surname spelled Aubery, and he was to >>become my wife's great grandfather. >>In 1851 the family name appears as Allbray on the census for Fareham, and >>George is alive and well working as a labourer. >>In 1858 Henry was chr at St Johns, Forton, gosport with the surname >>Albury. >>his father George is recorded as a labourer from Fareham, with no mention >>of >>him being deceased. There appears to be almost a year's discrpancy with >>regards Henry's date of birth, the chr details saying Dec 4 1848, and Dec >>17 >>1847 on his birth certificate. >>In 1861 Elizabeth shows up at Gosport with the surname of williams, and >>she >>is recorded as a widow. All 3 children, Rhoda, James and Henry also have >>the >>Williams surname. >>there is no record yet found of a marriage between an Elizabeth >>Childs/Parsons/Albray (or variant) and someone by the name of Williams, >>although on her death certificate in 1887, Elizabeth is recorded as the >>widow of the late Genge Williams. I can't find any trace on him either! >>In 1868 Rhoda married henry Hawkins, and her father is recorded as George >>Albray, again no mention of him being deceased. >>In 1871 Henry married Charlotte Harvey, and this is the first time that >>George albray is recorded as deceased. From 1843 through to 1858, george >>was >>always recorded as a labourer, but on Henry's marriage certificate he was >>recorded as a seaman. >>I've thought about the possiblity of George Parsons and George albray >>being >>the same person, and even maybe Genge Williams, but, if that is the case, >>why would Rhoda's birth certificate have her parents as George Allberry >>and >>Elizabeth Parsons? >>Did george albray just disappear off the scene between 1858 and 1861, and >>Elizabeth decide to change her surname for some reason, and if so who on >>earth is Genge Williams? did the widow comment refer to George Parsons, >>not >>george albray? >>So many questions, and yet, so far, not a single answer. >> >>If anyone has picked up any possible senarios after reading this, I'd love >>to hear from them, before I totally lose my mind! lol >> >>Kind regards to everyone, >> >>Jon >> >> >> >> > > > ============================== > View and search Historical Newspapers. Read about your ancestors, find > marriage announcements and more. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13969/rd.ashx >

Jon. What a complication!! My first action here would be to check the ship's muster rolls for George Parsons. You put ?? as his ship - does this mean you dont know the name or you cant read it in the register? From the ship's musters you can trace his naval career from ship to ship and it should tell you if he was lost at sea. Without a body, Elizabeth would have had to wait seven years in order to have him declared deceased and then be free to marry again. The new database on the national archives site (Register of Seamen's Services) is far from complete, but there is an entry for a George Parsons enlisting in 1824. Let me know if you cant find the database - it is on the documents online section of the site. You say you havent been able to trace the marriage of Elizabeth Parsons or Elizabeth Childs to George Aubrey/Allberry. Have you checked the GRO indexes rather than just FreeBMD which is far from complete? Also, because of the 7 year rule the marriage may well have taken place a lot later than you thought. Of course, it is possible that they never married - just set up home together. Divorce was a very rare event at this time, usually only available to the very wealthy by Private Members Bills in Parliament. I would think that divorce was not the reason for the disposal of her various partners! Another small point - deceased father's were not always recorded on the marriage certificate. It depended on whether the question was actually asked. The only conclusion you can draw from the marriage cert is that the father is dead if recorded as deceased, any other scenario, he could be either living or deceased. I'd be very interested to know if you ever sort this one out. It is possibly one of the most complicated scenarios I have heard of in 40 years of genealogical research!! Regards Sandra J P NIXEY wrote: >thanks to everyone who replied on this subject. > >I've thought about it some more and there could be another reason why she >called herself widowed. > >I'll paint the picture as I'm currently aware of it. I'll just use the year >rather than exact dates for ease. > >In 1825, George Parsons who was aboard HMS ?? married Elizabeth childs at St >Marys, Portsea. so far, I have only been able to find 2 children, Elizabeth >b1832/d1832, and Sarah Jane b1835, both girls born in fareham. >In 1843, Elizabeth had another daughter, Rhoda, the father being George >Allberry and Elizabeth's surname was Parsons on Rhoda's birth certificate. >rhoda was chr with the surname Aubrey. >Elizabeth had a son James in 1846, surname spelled as Aldbury, and this time >Elizabeth's surname matched George's. James was chr with the surname Aubrey. >So it would appear that George and Elizabeth were married between 1843 and >1846, although there's not a sign of a marriage anywhere. Neither is there a >sign of George Parsons' death, could he have been lost at sea, presumed >dead? Did Elizabeth simply take on George's surname as she couldn't marry >him because she couldn't prove her husband was dead? >In 1847 another son is born, Henry, surname spelled Aubery, and he was to >become my wife's great grandfather. >In 1851 the family name appears as Allbray on the census for Fareham, and >George is alive and well working as a labourer. >In 1858 Henry was chr at St Johns, Forton, gosport with the surname Albury. >his father George is recorded as a labourer from Fareham, with no mention of >him being deceased. There appears to be almost a year's discrpancy with >regards Henry's date of birth, the chr details saying Dec 4 1848, and Dec 17 >1847 on his birth certificate. >In 1861 Elizabeth shows up at Gosport with the surname of williams, and she >is recorded as a widow. All 3 children, Rhoda, James and Henry also have the >Williams surname. >there is no record yet found of a marriage between an Elizabeth >Childs/Parsons/Albray (or variant) and someone by the name of Williams, >although on her death certificate in 1887, Elizabeth is recorded as the >widow of the late Genge Williams. I can't find any trace on him either! >In 1868 Rhoda married henry Hawkins, and her father is recorded as George >Albray, again no mention of him being deceased. >In 1871 Henry married Charlotte Harvey, and this is the first time that >George albray is recorded as deceased. From 1843 through to 1858, george was >always recorded as a labourer, but on Henry's marriage certificate he was >recorded as a seaman. >I've thought about the possiblity of George Parsons and George albray being >the same person, and even maybe Genge Williams, but, if that is the case, >why would Rhoda's birth certificate have her parents as George Allberry and >Elizabeth Parsons? >Did george albray just disappear off the scene between 1858 and 1861, and >Elizabeth decide to change her surname for some reason, and if so who on >earth is Genge Williams? did the widow comment refer to George Parsons, not >george albray? >So many questions, and yet, so far, not a single answer. > >If anyone has picked up any possible senarios after reading this, I'd love >to hear from them, before I totally lose my mind! lol > >Kind regards to everyone, > >Jon > > > > >

thanks to everyone who replied on this subject. I've thought about it some more and there could be another reason why she called herself widowed. I'll paint the picture as I'm currently aware of it. I'll just use the year rather than exact dates for ease. In 1825, George Parsons who was aboard HMS ?? married Elizabeth childs at St Marys, Portsea. so far, I have only been able to find 2 children, Elizabeth b1832/d1832, and Sarah Jane b1835, both girls born in fareham. In 1843, Elizabeth had another daughter, Rhoda, the father being George Allberry and Elizabeth's surname was Parsons on Rhoda's birth certificate. rhoda was chr with the surname Aubrey. Elizabeth had a son James in 1846, surname spelled as Aldbury, and this time Elizabeth's surname matched George's. James was chr with the surname Aubrey. So it would appear that George and Elizabeth were married between 1843 and 1846, although there's not a sign of a marriage anywhere. Neither is there a sign of George Parsons' death, could he have been lost at sea, presumed dead? Did Elizabeth simply take on George's surname as she couldn't marry him because she couldn't prove her husband was dead? In 1847 another son is born, Henry, surname spelled Aubery, and he was to become my wife's great grandfather. In 1851 the family name appears as Allbray on the census for Fareham, and George is alive and well working as a labourer. In 1858 Henry was chr at St Johns, Forton, gosport with the surname Albury. his father George is recorded as a labourer from Fareham, with no mention of him being deceased. There appears to be almost a year's discrpancy with regards Henry's date of birth, the chr details saying Dec 4 1848, and Dec 17 1847 on his birth certificate. In 1861 Elizabeth shows up at Gosport with the surname of williams, and she is recorded as a widow. All 3 children, Rhoda, James and Henry also have the Williams surname. there is no record yet found of a marriage between an Elizabeth Childs/Parsons/Albray (or variant) and someone by the name of Williams, although on her death certificate in 1887, Elizabeth is recorded as the widow of the late Genge Williams. I can't find any trace on him either! In 1868 Rhoda married henry Hawkins, and her father is recorded as George Albray, again no mention of him being deceased. In 1871 Henry married Charlotte Harvey, and this is the first time that George albray is recorded as deceased. From 1843 through to 1858, george was always recorded as a labourer, but on Henry's marriage certificate he was recorded as a seaman. I've thought about the possiblity of George Parsons and George albray being the same person, and even maybe Genge Williams, but, if that is the case, why would Rhoda's birth certificate have her parents as George Allberry and Elizabeth Parsons? Did george albray just disappear off the scene between 1858 and 1861, and Elizabeth decide to change her surname for some reason, and if so who on earth is Genge Williams? did the widow comment refer to George Parsons, not george albray? So many questions, and yet, so far, not a single answer. If anyone has picked up any possible senarios after reading this, I'd love to hear from them, before I totally lose my mind! lol Kind regards to everyone, Jon -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.12/75 - Release Date: 8/17/05

Hello Listers Here are some entries from a film of the St Mary Bourne BTs which I hope will be of help to someone. Baptism 1834 March 16: Robert, son of John & Sarah TOLLARD or TOLLAND of St Mary Bourne, a convict. At the bottom of the page is a note, "This child Robert was born 3 years after John Tollard was sent abroad as a convict." Burial 1834 March 17: Alfred PHILLIPS, St Mary Bourne, aged 2 years. Note: "The mother of this child is the wife of a convict." Baptism 1838 January 7: Britannia Hannah, dau of Thomas and Arabella BUNCE, gipsy. Note: "The parents belong to this parish but the child was born near Marlborough, Wiltshire." Sandra, Brisbane -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 267.10.10 - Release Date: 15/08/2005

Hello Everyone Greetings from Brisbane, Australia. I have just joined the Hampshire list and am researching the following names: ALLEY - Alverstoke GOODYEAR - St Mary Bourne Anyone else looking for these? Sandra -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 267.10.10 - Release Date: 15/08/2005

1851 Census H107 1516 page 1217 2 Clerkenwell Green, St John Clerkenwell, London Eli WINDELBANK, age 42, Master Tailor, born Cosham, Hampshire Deborah WINDELBANK, wife, age 31, born Margate, Kent Amelia WINDELBANK, dau, age 14, born Clerkenwell Eli WINDELBANK, son, age 13, scholar, born Clerkenwell William WINDELBANK, son, age 6, scholar, born Clerkenwell Harry WINDELBANK, son, age 2, born Clerkenwell Daniel WINDELBANK, son, age 4 months, born Clerkenwell Linda Tasmania, Australia

Could anyone please help with baptism or birth details for any of the following children of Thomas & Mary Ann GARDNER: Eliza Ellen GARDNER b.1860 Portsea Arthur Henry GARDNER b.1863 Portsea James Thomas GARDNER b.1867 Portsea Annie Maria GARDNER b.1870 Portsea Rose Hannah GARDNER b.1872 Portsmouth Ada Mary GARDNER b.1875 Portsmouth Albert Edward GARDNER b.1877 Portsmouth Lillie Louisa GARDNER b. 1879 Soberton or Portsmouth Best wishes, Alan Siddorn

Janet, I am sure if you wrote to Bournemouth Council, they will almost certainly be able to provide you with a potted history of your man. Although the baths have long gone, it is possible that the commemorative stone might have been salvaged, or at least the inscription recorded. If it had been relocated they wopuld certainly know where. Their address can be found on their website: http://www.bournemouth.gov.uk/ Regards Sandra Chris and Caroline wrote: > Bournemouth was part of the County of Hampshire Janet till the > boundary changes around 1974. > But I expect people on this list can help, but why not join the Dorset > list as well, take two bites of the cherry so to speak. > Chris > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "janet cook" > <janet.cook3@btinternet.com> > To: <ENG-HAMPSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 4:19 PM > Subject: [ENG-HANTS] Wlliam Wilkinson of Bournemouth > > >> I am new to the list and I am nor sure is if this is the correct list >> or if I should join the Dorset list. >> >> My Great grandfathers brother WILLIAM WILKINSON was born Wandsworth >> London around 1881 but I am told he became a Railwayman like his >> father, and was a Bournemouth councillor and JP I have tried google >> with no success. >> >> I am also told by 3 older separate family members that the Public >> baths at Bournemouth that have now also gone had a commemorative >> stone he laid. >> >> I do remember relatives vaguely in the Bournemouth area in the late >> 1950's but no detail and I think they must have been his family >> rather than him, does anyone have any clues or suggestions were to >> try please. Thank you >> >> >> ============================== >> Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the >> last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: >> http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx >> >> > > > > ============================== > New! Family Tree Maker 2005. Build your tree and search for your > ancestors at the same time. Share your tree with family and friends. > Learn more: > http://landing.ancestry.com/familytreemaker/2005/tour.aspx?sourceid=14599&targetid=5429 > > > >

Bournemouth was part of the County of Hampshire Janet till the boundary changes around 1974. But I expect people on this list can help, but why not join the Dorset list as well, take two bites of the cherry so to speak. Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: "janet cook" <janet.cook3@btinternet.com> To: <ENG-HAMPSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 4:19 PM Subject: [ENG-HANTS] Wlliam Wilkinson of Bournemouth >I am new to the list and I am nor sure is if this is the correct list or if >I should join the Dorset list. > > My Great grandfathers brother WILLIAM WILKINSON was born Wandsworth > London around 1881 but I am told he became a Railwayman like his father, > and was a Bournemouth councillor and JP I have tried google with no > success. > > I am also told by 3 older separate family members that the Public baths at > Bournemouth that have now also gone had a commemorative stone he laid. > > I do remember relatives vaguely in the Bournemouth area in the late 1950's > but no detail and I think they must have been his family rather than > him, does anyone have any clues or suggestions were to try please. Thank > you > > > ============================== > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > >

I am new to the list and I am nor sure is if this is the correct list or if I should join the Dorset list. My Great grandfathers brother WILLIAM WILKINSON was born Wandsworth London around 1881 but I am told he became a Railwayman like his father, and was a Bournemouth councillor and JP I have tried google with no success. I am also told by 3 older separate family members that the Public baths at Bournemouth that have now also gone had a commemorative stone he laid. I do remember relatives vaguely in the Bournemouth area in the late 1950's but no detail and I think they must have been his family rather than him, does anyone have any clues or suggestions were to try please. Thank you

Sandra's comment about the report from Oxford Laboratories bears out the old saying that "You are certain of your mother but only suspect your father". Colyn. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sandra J Smith" <sandra.s@ntlworld.com> To: <ENG-HAMPSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2005 7:11 PM Subject: [ENG-HANTS] James Henry Groves Mystery > > With the recent report coming out from the Oxford Laboratories about the > number of men raising children which unbeknown to them are not > biologically theirs, I ask myself "Has anything changed?" > Regards > Sandra