Christine, I find myself wanting more information that I feel you already know.. What census years did you look up, where did you find her and who else was in the household? You told us she married in 1891, but didn't give a spouse. So we would have to go and look. It's important you convey all you know to relieve those trying to help of doing the same lookups that you've already done. I can see five Mary SHEMILT births on FreeBMD between 1865-1875. Leaving out Mary Elizabeth and Mary Ann, there are two Mary's and one Mary Ellen. The Mary Ellen is registered at Stone in Sep 1873. If you know her age from 1891 census, just before her marriage, it might fit the 1873 birth, making her 18. I'm guessing she might give fictitious data because she was under age. Again, if you provided data from censuses from 1881 through to 1911, we would know that. If the data fits, I'd suggest you should obtain a copy of the 1873 birth from GRO, which should give names and ages of parents. Peter in Sydney

Thank you for your fast response, Mary Ellen 1873 is not mine, she also married in 1891 to a Brown, I have tracked her and her subsequent children. I was hopeful at first and as I gleaned more information it became more obvious that she was not mine,I have a photograph of Mary Ellen (Alma )both as a young woman and then in her later life. My husband knew his grandmother who was killed in a road accident, she never talked of her early life, in fact my father in law (the youngest of fourteen children) also knew nothing at all about her. There is a man here who has created a SHEMILT family tree but has shown little or no interest in my lady, he says that it is not possible for her to be a SHEMILT, however i am in communication with some Shemilt people who say that according to her photographs she is definately a birth SHEMILT. The man that she married was John Shelmerdine, they married at St Mark's Gorton, Manchester September 1891, I can't connect the witnesses so I presume that they were witnesses of convenience also. Once I can establish that she is a legitimate SHEMILT then I can extend my studies. Thanking you for your interest Christine ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Booth" <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> To: <eng-shropshire-plus@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2011 11:52 AM Subject: Re: [ENG-SHROP] Mary SHEMILT > Christine, > > I find myself wanting more information that I feel you already know.. > > What census years did you look up, where did you find her and who else > was in the household? You told us she married in 1891, but didn't give a > spouse. So we would have to go and look. > > It's important you convey all you know to relieve those trying to help > of doing the same lookups that you've already done. > > I can see five Mary SHEMILT births on FreeBMD between 1865-1875. > Leaving > out Mary Elizabeth and Mary Ann, there are two Mary's and one Mary Ellen. > The Mary Ellen is registered at Stone in Sep 1873. > > If you know her age from 1891 census, just before her marriage, it > might > fit the 1873 birth, making her 18. I'm guessing she might give fictitious > data because she was under age. Again, if you provided data from censuses > from 1881 through to 1911, we would know that. > > If the data fits, I'd suggest you should obtain a copy of the 1873 > birth > from GRO, which should give names and ages of parents. > > Peter in Sydney > > > > > REMEMBER - The question you are asking may have already been answered. > Threaded Archives at - > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/ENG-SHROPSHIRE-PLUS/Archives > > Searchable Archives at - > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/ENG-SHROPSHIRE-PLUS/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ENG-SHROPSHIRE-PLUS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message