Hi Bev, You can always check on-line availability of Somerset PR transcriptions at http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/ian.sage where you may find a couple of things to interest you. Ian -----Original Message----- From: eng-somerset-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:eng-somerset-bounces@rootsweb.com]On Behalf Of Stuart Powell Sent: 29 June 2008 17:39 To: som list Subject: [ENG-SOM] Nunney PRs are the somerset Nunney, prs online anywhere? Bev ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-SOMERSET-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.101 / Virus Database: 270.4.1/1519 - Release Date: 25/06/2008 16:13

Hi Richard, It sounds more likely that we have a connection since they are all in Catcott area. Note this family in the 1851 Census: HO107/1925 folio 616 page 9 James Westlake; Head; U(sic); 48; Yeoman ; Somerset P?rington Joseph Westlake; Son; U; 26; Yeomans Son ; Somerset Catcott Burtle Betsey Westlake; Daur; U; 22; Yeomans Daughter ; Somerset Catcott Burtle Robert Westlake; Son; U; 20; Farm Labourer (crossed out); Somerset Catcott Burtle Jane Westlake; Daur; U; 18; Yeoman Daughter ; Somerset Catcott Burtle John Westlake; Son; U; 12; ; Somerset Catcott Burtle James Westlake; Son; U; 7; ; Somerset Catcott Burtle I think it is this James aged 7 who married Elizabeth Day. This may be the family of your Jane though she is younger than you suggest so maybe not. However, checking the 1861 Census, Jane Lee, wife of Charles, is listed as aged 28. Household living in Edington, Somerset: Charles Lee 33 Jane Lee 28 Samuel Lee 6 Edmund J Lee 3 Arthur Lee 1 Source Citation: Class: RG9; Piece: 1627; Folio: 46; Page: 11; So I think perhaps you haven't found the right birth for her - unless there is another Jane married to Charles Lee? Cheers, Cathy At 11:23 PM 28/06/2008, you wrote: >Hi Again, > The only connection I have about Westlake is on the marriage cert > of (Sarah) Jane Westlalke and Charles Lee. Fathers' nnames were > Charles Lee and James Westlake. They were married in the presence > of Thomas Lee and Betsy Westlake in the parish church in the > district of Catcott in the Counte of Somerset on Dec 25, 1851. > This may be of some help. > >Helen <peony23@comcast.net> wrote: > I can't even find my Westlake family in parish records. >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Richard Lee" >To: >Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 7:26 AM >Subject: Re: [ENG-SOM] DAVIES, WESTLAKE > > > > Hi Helen, > > Sarah Jane Westlake born 12/29/1827 was a daughter of a James Westlake > > and married Charles Lee Born 7/23/1827. There may be a connection. > > Richard > > Cathy wrote: > > Hi Helen, > > > > Perhaps you'd get more response if you didn't assume everyone was as > > far back in their research as you are and gave a little more of the lines. > > > > I have a side interest in WESTLAKE but from much later. > > > > Emily Ann WESTLAKE, daughter of James WESTLAKE and Elizabeth DAY, > > married James Henry FOOTE in Henstridge, Somerset in 1890. > > > > James was born in Catcott Burtle about 1844 and was the son of James > > born about 1803 in Parington. > > > > Interested in contact with anyone connected to these people. > > > > Cathy > > > > At 05:42 AM 28/06/2008, you wrote: > >>Because we have new listers, I am asking again if there are any > >>descendants of Michael DAVIES (DAVIS) and Mary WESTLAKE who married > >>in Middlezoy on 12 May 1777. > >> > >>Helen, USA

are the somerset Nunney, prs online anywhere? Bev

Hi Bev, Nunney pr's are available at the following two sites: David Smarts Frome Research site http://www.fromeresearch.org.uk/ Frome Hundred Site http://www.fromeresearch.org.uk/ Happy Hunting! Vicki Danielson Moderator of The Hundreds Freereg Coordinator for Bath On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 12:39 PM, Stuart Powell <bevfarthing@hotmail.com> wrote: > are the somerset Nunney, prs online anywhere? > > > Bev > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ENG-SOMERSET-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I don't think this charge is unreasonable; one of my primary desires is that our historical archives are kept in good condition and looked after by well rewarded, well trained archivists. If, in this present climate of pressure on government and local government spending, it is necessary to pay what, in all fairness, is a very modest fee to copy records in order to support the archives, then I for one am prepared to do it. It is only reasonable, that whilst society through its taxes, pay the bulk of the cost of maintaining the archives, that those who access the archives and use the resources of reading rooms, archivist's time, etc. should pay something extra. Perhaps it would be better to charge a £2.00 entrance fee to use the archives, but that probably breaks the rules of free public access to museums etc. Bob > > Message: 6 > Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 12:09:39 +0200 > From: "walsby" <walsby@wanadoo.fr> > Subject: Re: [ENG-SOM] Som. Rec. Office to charge for use of cameras > To: <eng-somerset@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <001201c8d9d0$55c9e9a0$c6affac1@PC302132836219> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > To produce a photocopy incurs the cost of machine wear, paper, and > personnel cost (my > experience of Somerset record office is that the staff do take more care > to give you > a good copy than some other record offices). So you pay for goods and > services. > > There is no cost to the archive service for a researcher to use a camera. > "Falling > in line with other offices that already charge" is the same excuse that > motroists > offer when caught speeding - everyone else does it, so why shouldn't I ? > It's no > excuse at all. > > Michael Walsby > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "J Collingridge" <sparrer@gmail.com> > To: <eng-somerset@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 12:04 PM > Subject: Re: [ENG-SOM] Som. Rec. Office to charge for use of cameras > > >> >> walsby wrote: >> >> >>> I wonder how they justify such a charge. Would they rather have >>> documents exposed to photocopying ? >>> >>> Or is it simply to make money, in which case can we expect the cost >>> to rise each year ? >>> >>> It certainly doesn't help relationships between researchers and >>> archivists. >> >> No, I don't think it does help, but the record office is falling in >> line with other offices that already charge. It'll no doubt catch a >> few researchers out as well. >> >> I don't know that it's a money making exercise, although it probably >> will rise year on year. It would appear to be more a money >> replacement exercise since so many people now use digital cameras >> rather than ask for photocopies. >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> ENG-SOMERSET-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in >> the subject and the body of the message >> > > > > > ------------------------------ > > To contact the ENG-SOMERSET list administrator, send an email to > ENG-SOMERSET-admin@rootsweb.com. > > To post a message to the ENG-SOMERSET mailing list, send an email to > ENG-SOMERSET@rootsweb.com. > > __________________________________________________________ > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ENG-SOMERSET-request@rootsweb.com > with the word "unsubscribe" without the quotes in the subject and the body > of the > email with no additional text. > > > End of ENG-SOMERSET Digest, Vol 3, Issue 426 > ******************************************** >

To produce a photocopy incurs the cost of machine wear, paper, and personnel cost (my experience of Somerset record office is that the staff do take more care to give you a good copy than some other record offices). So you pay for goods and services. There is no cost to the archive service for a researcher to use a camera. "Falling in line with other offices that already charge" is the same excuse that motroists offer when caught speeding - everyone else does it, so why shouldn't I ? It's no excuse at all. Michael Walsby ----- Original Message ----- From: "J Collingridge" <sparrer@gmail.com> To: <eng-somerset@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 12:04 PM Subject: Re: [ENG-SOM] Som. Rec. Office to charge for use of cameras > > walsby wrote: > > >> I wonder how they justify such a charge. Would they rather have >> documents exposed to photocopying ? >> >> Or is it simply to make money, in which case can we expect the cost >> to rise each year ? >> >> It certainly doesn't help relationships between researchers and >> archivists. > > No, I don't think it does help, but the record office is falling in > line with other offices that already charge. It'll no doubt catch a > few researchers out as well. > > I don't know that it's a money making exercise, although it probably > will rise year on year. It would appear to be more a money > replacement exercise since so many people now use digital cameras > rather than ask for photocopies. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ENG-SOMERSET-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message >

walsby wrote: > To produce a photocopy incurs the cost of machine wear, paper, and personnel cost (my > experience of Somerset record office is that the staff do take more care to give you > a good copy than some other record offices). So you pay for goods and services. Which is normal. > There is no cost to the archive service for a researcher to use a camera. I think that is the crux of the matter. The Record Office is actually losing revenue, albeit a very small amount. Photocopies cost 40p per page. A daily camera use permit is £2.00. If people are using a camera then the chances are they are going to make more than 5 shots. After that they are in pocket. There will still be people who will want photocopies. I know when I've been at the Record Office, there's invariably been three or four people there using cameras, myself included, even though I'm transcribing documents. That said, I also get photocopies. The last batch I had done (which cost me over £100) included some bound indentures which couldn't be completely copied. That means my husband is going to have to come to the record office with me to take images of the missing parts. There'll be more than £2s worth of images needed. Unfortunately, I'm not going to be able to sort the documents out before the change comes in. > "Falling > in line with other offices that already charge" is the same excuse that motroists > offer when caught speeding - everyone else does it, so why shouldn't I ? It's no > excuse at all. I don't think that's a valid comparison. There's an inherent risk that someone will be killed by a speeding driver. There's no such danger from a camera permit :)) "Falling in line" is a reason not an excuse and I think it will become common across all Record Offices that currently allow the use of cameras. The alternative is a blanket ban on cameras. One of the archivists at SRO did tell me there are concerns about the possible damage photocopying does to documents. So it may well be that all photocopying of documents will stop. Where are the choices then? Transcription or camera. That means there will be a drop in revenue which has to be made up somehow. No doubt the Record Office believes that £2pd/£8pw/£50pa is adequate given the savings on paper and electricity they'll make, esp with the cost of electricity set to rise significantly during the remainder of the year. I think, overall, researchers will be better off. It's not as if the photocopying of documents has been totally withdrawn (yet). -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

Martin Southwood wrote : Be aware that as of August, the Somerset Record Office will be charging for you to use your camera; a daily license will be £2.00, weekly one £8, and a yearly one £50 ==== I wonder how they justify such a charge. Would they rather have documents exposed to photocopying ? Or is it simply to make money, in which case can we expect the cost to rise each year ? It certainly doesn't help relationships between researchers and archivists. Michael Walsby researching SHARP, STANDERWICK

walsby wrote: > I wonder how they justify such a charge. Would they rather have > documents exposed to photocopying ? > > Or is it simply to make money, in which case can we expect the cost > to rise each year ? > > It certainly doesn't help relationships between researchers and > archivists. No, I don't think it does help, but the record office is falling in line with other offices that already charge. It'll no doubt catch a few researchers out as well. I don't know that it's a money making exercise, although it probably will rise year on year. It would appear to be more a money replacement exercise since so many people now use digital cameras rather than ask for photocopies.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: grove27 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.som.general/12945.3.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Hilda was in the death list you sent earlier - died 1924 age 3 Williton. Thanks for all your help Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: crusoe123 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.som.general/12945.3/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Cannot find a marriage for Hilda, who was registered on the birth register as Hilda R. Elsie is registered on births register as Elsie J. There is a marriage in Aldershot in the March quarter of 1943, which is probably her. This was during the war, and Aldershot would have a lot of Soldiers. Elsie J Swanger married Henry G Loewen in Aldershot March 1943 Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

Martin Southwood wrote: > Be aware that as of August, the Somerset Record Office will be > charging for you to use your camera; a daily license will be £2.00, > weekly one £8, and a yearly one £50! Thanks for that, I think. They've been busy encouraging researchers to use cameras and now they are, the RO are going to charge them :(( Still it's cheaper than asking them to photocopy documents at 40p per page and there are some documents (eg in books or multipage wills and indentures) that they won't copy because they are bound. I suppose using a portable scanner will come under the same heading. Is it OK to pass this on to another list? -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

Morning all, Be aware that as of August, the Somerset Record Office will be charging for you to use your camera; a daily license will be £2.00, weekly one £8, and a yearly one £50! Cheers, Martin Southwood

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: MericeL Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.som.general/12946.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Hi, Why not visit an LDS {Mormon Church} Family History Centre and look at the parish records for Charlton Mackrell Somerset??? Regards MericeL Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: grove27 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.som.general/12945.2.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Thank you for your responses. Much appreciated. You are right, is an unusual name, but is a long standing name in Somerset, mostly around the Wiveliscombe area Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: crusoe123 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.som.general/12945.2/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Births Mar 1897 Wingrove Matilda Ellen Kensington 1a 117 I think that this is the birth of Matilda Ellen Swanger. She could have been born in the previous December, because you were given 6 weeks in which to register a birth. Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Author: crusoe123 Surnames: Classification: queries Message Board URL: http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.britisles.england.som.general/12945.1/mb.ashx Message Board Post: Cannot find exactly what you are looking for. Swanger is an unusual name, not many of them. Between 1901 and 1952 the following are deaths in various parts of England and Wales. ALL SWANGERS. Christian name, age at death, place of death and quarter and year in which the death was registered. William 58 Wandsworth June 1902 Frederick 0 Prestwick September 1905 John 69 Croydon December 1906 Reginald J.G. 0 Stratford June 1907 Joseph 60 Plymouth December 1908 Annie 45 Prestwich March 1911 Alfred 62 Christchurch June 1911 Sarah 4 Prestwich June 1912 John 57 Bristol March 1913 Elizabeth A 84 Ttenterdon Dec 1914 Sarah A 63 Bristol June 1915 Thomas 66 Southwark Dec 1915 Mary J 74 Williton March 1916 Emily 78 Taunton Sept 1916 Amanda G 64 Christchurch Dec 1917 Louisa 67 Blaby Dec 1919 William H 1 Bristol Jun 1920 Hilda H 3 Williton Sep 1924 Mary O 78 Fulham Dec 1926 Thomas H 56 Camberwell Sept 1933 Elizabeth A 91 Greenwich June 1938 Grace H 56 Lewisham March 1941 Arthur W. 59 Staines March 1943 Arthur E 56 Bristol June 1943 Henry 53 Bristol June 1943 Eleanor M 54 Marylebone September 1944 Kate 67 Bristol December 1944 Ada M. 58 Bristol December 1945 Mary 84 Brighton September 1949 William 83 Salford March 1951 There is a death recorded which I believe will be Matilda. The registrations after 1984 are listed in a different manner, and they are easier to follow:- Name: SWANGER, Matilda Ellen Registration District: West Somerset County: Somerset Year of Registration of Death: 1990 Month of Registration: January Date of Birth: 23 December 1897 Volume No: 23 Page No: 1722 Reg No: 190 Important Note: The author of this message may not be subscribed to this list. If you would like to reply to them, please click on the Message Board URL link above and respond on the board.

http://www.chardmuseum.co.uk/Chards_Pubs/ 2008/6/28 CHarl <swkgen@shaw.ca>: > Hi, > I have ancestors who in the 1881 census resided in the Carpenters Arms in > the High Street Chard. > Does anyone know if there are any pictures of the high street at that time? > I am sure the beer house is no longer there but if anyone is familiar with > the high street could they tell me where in the high street the Carpenters > Arms was and if there are any pictures of that area of the high street. > > Regards > Colin > BC > Canada > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ENG-SOMERSET-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- Jim - http://www.payman.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk Owner - Somerset Hundreds Groups (Contact Off List for Details) see also: http://www.fromeresearch.org.uk and http://www.opcdorset.com

Dear Colin, Have a look at this page. The Carpenters Arms is mentioned. http://www.chardmuseum.co.uk/Chards_Pubs/ Liz -----Original Message----- Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 21:36:55 +0200 Subject: [ENG-SOM] Chard Photos From: CHarl <swkgen@shaw.ca> To: ENG-SOMERSET-L@rootsweb.com Hi, I have ancestors who in the 1881 census resided in the Carpenters Arms in the High Street Chard. Does anyone know if there are any pictures of the high street at that time? I am sure the beer house is no longer there but if anyone is familiar with the high street could they tell me where in the high street the Carpenters Arms was and if there are any pictures of that area of the high street. Regards Colin BC Canada ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-SOMERSET-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Colin There are some photos of Chard in the Francis Frith collection at http://www.francisfrith.com/search/england/somerset/chard/chard.htm Or why don't you try asking the Online Parish Clerk (OPC) for Chard through http://wsom-opc.org.uk/Data/Parish_Gaz.php?k=259 Regards Jan OPC for Old Cleeve, Leighland and Treborough ----- Original Message ----- From: "CHarl" <swkgen@shaw.ca> To: <ENG-SOMERSET-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 8:36 PM Subject: [ENG-SOM] Chard Photos > Hi, > I have ancestors who in the 1881 census resided in the Carpenters Arms in > the High Street Chard. > Does anyone know if there are any pictures of the high street at that > time? > I am sure the beer house is no longer there but if anyone is familiar with > the high street could they tell me where in the high street the Carpenters > Arms was and if there are any pictures of that area of the high street. > > Regards > Colin > BC > Canada > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ENG-SOMERSET-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >