Dear All, I have received an enquiry via the website as follows. I have replied to the lady saying that I have never heard of Queen Victoria ever having visited Woodchurch. I would presume also that she would have acted as Godmother and not done the actual baptism herself! Any suggestions anyone? Is anyone actually researching the Hook family of Woodchurch? Thanks, Josie I am looking for information on a woman named Mary Ida Hook. She was born in 1844. It has been said she was baptised by Queen Victoria at Little Mary's Wood Church. (I am wondering if it might be Woodchurch.) I would assume that perhaps Queen Victoria performed "mass" baptisms but do not know what the explanation might be. I see from your (very nice) site that you have some Hook families in the area and wonder if she might be related. MANY thanks. I have been trying to figure this out for years. There is a Mary Hook in your baptism records of 11 April 1847. I have been told by another genealogist that this is probably her, but it sure doesn't match the "Queen Victoria Story" and Little Mary's Wood Church (whatever or wherever that is). She could have been baptised when she was three years old, but I wouldn't know WHY if she was already baptised. On THAT Mary, she has a brother named William, and I SUSPECT that a William (b. England) that shows up near her family later in the U.S. census could be related. Maybe that is my Mary, but the Queen Victoria thing is so fascinating to me that I can't seem to give up trying to find what it means. MANY thanks for your response and help. You can't imagine how frustrating this has been over the years, and it's doubly hard trying to do it from such a far distance.

Non-Woodchurch-Gen: Though I know nothing about whether Queen Victoria ever visited Woodchurch, she did spend a lot of time on the Royal Yacht, Victoria & Albert II, where my grandfather was the sick berth steward and dispenser. He had previously been sick berth steward on the Royal Yacht Osborne. There is, therefore, some level of truth in my father's claim that the Queen had given him the title of "Chief Dispensing Chemist to Her Majesty's Navy", (possibly a humorous aside rather than an official title, though.) Do not discount your family stories - it took me years to find out my grandfather's real relationship to Her Majesty! I believe the Woodchurch parish church is dedicated to All Saints, not Mary. Have you tried searching Genuki for this parish? FamilySearch has a William HOOK chr. Tenterden, Kent, s/o Richard HOOK & Elizabeth BARNES (m. 15 Nov 1838 at Tenterden) on 19 Oct 1842; he has siblings Richard, 30 Jun 1839; Caroline, 14 Feb 1841; George, 30 Jun 1844; Sion, 4 Mar 1849; Alfred, 6 Jul 1849; and Elizabeth, 21 Jul 1850 & 8 Sep 1850. The latter two baptisms are probably a private one soon after birth and a public reception later, which often happened when an infant was in danger of dying soon after birth. No Mary, though. I'm interested in this as I haven't been able so far to find the lineage of Lydia BARNES, my 3ggm who married Joseph KING on 5 Nov 1789 at Woodchurch. Richard HOOK (father) was probably chr. 9 May 1816 Ebony, Kent s/o William & Elizabeth HUNTLEY m. 12 Sep 1810 at Tenterden (patron submission - Richard was 22 at marriage). There is an Elizabeth BARNES chr 9 May 1819 (d. 10 Mar 1853) at Ebony, Kent, d/o Samuel BARNES and Mary MASTERS, who has no apparent siblings, but whose parents married 20 May 1817 at Tenterden, so Elizabeth could have been born earlier than 1819 (she was 21 at marriage). Another IGI patron submission is the following: Mary HOOK, b. 11 Aug 1842, Kent, England; d. 19 Jun 1854 Penfield, Monroe, New York, d/o George King HOOK and Catherine Anna CHECKSFIELD. The middle name KING is also one of my direct lines, so will need to do more research on this one! The same patron probably submitted George and Catherine's marriage bef. 1836 in Kent, and his birth as 16 Feb 1816 at Tenterden and death 24 Nov 1862 at Penfield, Monroe, NY. If the birth date is correct, he was definitely not a sibling of the aforementioned Richard HOOK, but could well have been a cousin. With all patron submissions, it is difficult to know how much of the information is supported by searchable records, so local research would be very helpful in this case. I also have an indirect connection to HOOK as there is a John KING/Margaret HOOK marriage at Woodchurch on 5 Jun 1840, John being another grandson of Joseph KING and Lydia BARNES. Regards Martin Willcocks Taylorsville, UT, USA. Josie Mackie wrote: >Dear All, >I have received an enquiry via the website as follows. I have replied to the lady saying that I have never heard of Queen Victoria ever having visited Woodchurch. I would presume also that she would have acted as Godmother and not done the actual baptism herself! Any suggestions anyone? Is anyone actually researching the Hook family of Woodchurch? >Thanks, >Josie > > > > > I am looking for information on a woman named Mary Ida Hook. She was born in 1844. It has been said she was baptised by Queen Victoria at Little Mary's Wood Church. (I am wondering if it might be Woodchurch.) > >I would assume that perhaps Queen Victoria performed "mass" baptisms but do not know what the explanation might be. > >I see from your (very nice) site that you have some Hook families in the area and wonder if she might be related. MANY thanks. I have been trying to figure this out for years. >There is a Mary Hook in your baptism records of 11 April 1847. I have been told by another genealogist that this is probably her, but it sure doesn't match the "Queen Victoria Story" and Little Mary's Wood Church (whatever or wherever that is). She could have been baptised when she was three years old, but I wouldn't know WHY if she was already baptised. > >On THAT Mary, she has a brother named William, and I SUSPECT that a William (b. England) that shows up near her family later in the U.S. census could be related. Maybe that is my Mary, but the Queen Victoria thing is so fascinating to me that I can't seem to give up trying to find what it means. > >MANY thanks for your response and help. You can't imagine how frustrating this has been over the years, and it's doubly hard trying to do it from such a far distance. > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-KEN-WOODCHURCH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >

eng-ken-woodchurch-bounces@rootsweb.com wrote: > Dear All, > I have received an enquiry via the website as follows. I > have replied to the lady saying that I have never heard of > Queen Victoria ever having visited Woodchurch. I would > presume also that she would have acted as Godmother and not > done the actual baptism herself! Any suggestions anyone? Is > anyone actually researching the Hook family of Woodchurch? Thanks, > Josie > This has to be complete tosh. The Mary baptised in 1847 is Mary Jane, not Mary Ida and the 1851 and 1861 censuses confirm her birth date as c1847. There is no sign of a brother William. The Church as we all know is All Saints, not St Marys. FreeBMD shows no Mary Ida Hook at all. There is a Mary Ida Stocker born 1843 in London. Sigh.... Peter Walker Hollyer~Holyer~Hollier One Name Study Web: http://www.hollyer.name Blog: http://hollyer.blogspot.com/ DNA: http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Hollyer