Ancestry certainly only appear the have digitised records that LMA/Guildhall hold the original of, rather than film. However, they do have the records of St Mary Bryanstone Square, and the two registers covering marriages 1885-92 are not shown as unfit for conservation. Sadly, to look for logic or consistency in what Ancestry has and has not digitised is a complete waste of time. All one can do is try to find things which have been misplaced. Of course, people like me are merely "slowcoaches" in the words of one contributor (to this site if nowhere else) who uncritically welcomes what Ancestry has done because it has opened up lots of records to them however inaccurately and with whatever abysmal and misleading ignorance. I and the volunteers who help me will continue to be as accurate we can, in trying to bring these records to the users, however slow that makes us. Cliff Webb --- On Sun, 3/1/10, J K gen <gen2mail@googlemail.com> wrote: From: J K gen <gen2mail@googlemail.com> Subject: Re: [SRY] LONDON MARRIAGES & BANNS 1754-1921 To: eng-surrey@rootsweb.com Date: Sunday, 3 January, 2010, 15:53 There is another problem within the Marylebone area. There is a gap on Ancestry for St Mary Bryanstone Square 1885 is filmed (part) then it starts again in 1892. Maybe when this set was filmed the originals were in conservation? If indeed the originals are at LMA. Is there some kind of "rule" whereby Ancestry only film LMA/Guildhall records where they hold the originals (as well as microfilm) rather than just microfilm? You could try tracking the career of your curate to see precisely which parish he was working in 1888? JK > > > I know this is not a "SURREY" subject but on looking for a marriage > > entry in the St Marylebone Parish Church register for 15th January 1888 > > I expected to see my grandparents' entry, however, it's not there. > > > > The pages are consecutively numbered and none appear to be missing. > > > > I have a copy of their marriage certificate from the St Marylebone > > Register Office with clearly written dates etc. > > > > Is there an explanation why a civil copy exists and not a parish one? > > > > George > > Rainham, Kent. > *************************************** Send your List messages using **PLAIN TEXT** and always **TRIM AWAY** superfluous old messages in replies. List Admin can be contacted at:  Eng-Surrey-admin@rootsweb.com.   ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-SURREY-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message