Hi Jan I haven't come across the term before, though there are obviously various guesses one might hazard. But I am very interested in the Chipps of Worcester, so perhaps we could exchange information on this family and its ramifications off list. Bye for now, Emily Neil & Jan Hearn wrote: > Hi, > I'm hoping someone may know what was meant by the term Commercial Woman/Lady please? Frances Eleanor HASKEW CHIPP was adopted by Edward CHIPP and Elizabeth HASKEW who married in Worcester City in 1857. The child is listed in1861 census as daughter of a Commercial Lady, born in Tewkesbury in that year. > Any suggestions and/or references to this family would be very much appreciated. > > Jan > in sunny Queensland > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-WORCESTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hi, I'm hoping someone may know what was meant by the term Commercial Woman/Lady please? Frances Eleanor HASKEW CHIPP was adopted by Edward CHIPP and Elizabeth HASKEW who married in Worcester City in 1857. The child is listed in1861 census as daughter of a Commercial Lady, born in Tewkesbury in that year. Any suggestions and/or references to this family would be very much appreciated. Jan in sunny Queensland

Angela, If you do a search using parent names of Edward Bevan and Susannah, you will find there are in fact four christenings recorded. James 1797, Rebecca 1799, Ann 1803 and Thomas 1805. Ann was in Bushley, but the rest were in Strensham. Unfortunately there are no Edward Bevan or Edward Morfield records in Worcestershire around that time. It seems significant that all the above records come from individual batches. Look at the sources. James is a submitted entry, the others are extracted. If you look at the Hugh Wallis site, it seems that available christening batches for Strensham go right up to 1906. But these are the only Bevan's in all the batches. So it's likely Edward and any later children were not christened. I think all you can do is look to find him in 1841 and 1851 census and see if there is a consistency of age and birthplace, or perhaps look for submitted family trees at Rootsweb or Ancestry. Peter in Sydney

Angela, I don't know if you just confined your searches to Worcestershire but from experience boat people pop up anywhere from Bristol right up to Liverpool and beyond with children baptised all along the way. Families are often found in two places at once on the censuses too, especially if the mother has had a new baby and stays put a while, giving all the family names to the enumerator - makes life interesting. Nuala ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan" <spellweaver@tinyworld.co.uk> To: <ENG-WORCESTER@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 1:05 AM Subject: [WOR] BEVAN FAMILY > Trying to find birth records for the children of Edward and Susannah > Bevan. > Edward Bevan was born in Bushley in 1773, and there is a marriage record > for Edward Bevan and Susannah Cole in Strensham, Worcestershire dated 29th > May 1797 (source IGI, so if anyone has access to the Parish records, I'd > welcome confirmation and any additional details such as marriage > witnesses, etc). There is a record of Ann Bevan born in Bushley in 1803, > daughter of Edward and Susannah Bevan, but no other births. > Specifically, I'm looking for EDWARD BEVAN b c 1807. > I have an 1830 Gaol record from Tewkesbury for Edward Bevan alias > Morfield, Waterman, who was tried and acquitted for larceny. As the family > were "on the boats" records can turn up anywhere close to the rivers, so > any help and ideas would be appreciated. > Angela > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ENG-WORCESTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Trying to find birth records for the children of Edward and Susannah Bevan. Edward Bevan was born in Bushley in 1773, and there is a marriage record for Edward Bevan and Susannah Cole in Strensham, Worcestershire dated 29th May 1797 (source IGI, so if anyone has access to the Parish records, I'd welcome confirmation and any additional details such as marriage witnesses, etc). There is a record of Ann Bevan born in Bushley in 1803, daughter of Edward and Susannah Bevan, but no other births. Specifically, I'm looking for EDWARD BEVAN b c 1807. I have an 1830 Gaol record from Tewkesbury for Edward Bevan alias Morfield, Waterman, who was tried and acquitted for larceny. As the family were "on the boats" records can turn up anywhere close to the rivers, so any help and ideas would be appreciated. Angela

I'm trying to help a friend with CHANCE/CHAUNCE ancestors in the early 17th century in Shepley, near Bromsgrove. Can anyone tell me which parish register would be the most likely to check for a baptism around 1618? Would it be Bromsgrove All Saints, Bromsgrove St. John the Baptist - or somewhere else entirely? Barbara

Photo found in Beechworth, Australia (Goldfields) of a William Hook. His middle name is difficult to read, either Walter or Peter. Born Worcester around the late 19th century. Would love to return this photo to his family. Sue, Australia.

On 8 Aug 2010 at 11:02, GREG COOPER wrote: > I wholeheartedly agree with the thoughts expressed below. > > Greg Cooper > > On 8 August 2010 08:00, <eng-worcester-request@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 19:54:23 +0100 > > From: "Alan" <spellweaver@tinyworld.co.uk> > > Subject: [WOR] Bushley registers > > To: <ENG-WORCESTER@rootsweb.com> > > Message-ID: <FF137CAB6A484F49AD8510FF2119328F@AlanPC> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > Just a quick note to let the list know that if anyone requires look > > ups in Bushley, I have a CD of some of the parish registers. I > > thought these sites were all about a mutual interest in genealogy, > > and not an opportunity to take a dig at the various on line > > providers. I'm eternally grateful to the people who have helped me > > in my research (Thanks Gus, for your help) and I'd be delighted if I > > could find a long lost relative or two, or help out someone else. > > Angela < < Believe me, I have no wish to start another controversy but I feel obliged to point out - with the greatest possible respect - that offering wholesale look-ups, whether from a CD, online websites to which one has a subscription, books, fiche or any other form of media is, almost certainly in all cases, a breach of the licence one agrees to when you purchase the data in question. This is not my opinion, it is a FACT of legality. Service providers object to the offering of look-ups from their products and I can see their point. They invest a lot of money in getting the data transcribed and indexed and lose income when people offer look-ups This is especially relevant when the provider is a family history society, since in the ever-burgeoning world of the internet FHSs are suffering at the moment with dwindling numbers and declining income. And we urgently need to keep them alive! Doing the odd look-up quietly is one thing. Offering them willy nilly en masse is quite another. I have stacks of parish registers, census returns etc on CD and they ALL stipulate that when you buy the product it is strictly for your own private research only. The Federation of Family History Societies, for instance, specifically forbids the offering of look-ups from the NBI and I happen to know, because I was involved with the FFHS a while back, that they have pursued people breaching the licence terms. While I agree totally that genealogy is about helping people, especially beginners, I do suggest we ought to be careful about precisely how far we go in possibly illegal action. You may blithely think "Oh, it doesn't matter, nobody will bother" but I suspect the time might come when the big commercial providers may decide that it does matter, in the same way that music download providers have pursued the internet pirates supplying illegal downloads. The world of legal licence terms and conditions relating to any commodity, whether it's genealogical data or otherwise, is a complex one and I would simply advise caution in advertising a willingness to do look-ups. My apologies to the Administrator for raising this but I do believe it's an important issue we would all do well to bear in mind. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

I wholeheartedly agree with the thoughts expressed below. Greg Cooper On 8 August 2010 08:00, <eng-worcester-request@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Bushley registers (Alan) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 19:54:23 +0100 > From: "Alan" <spellweaver@tinyworld.co.uk> > Subject: [WOR] Bushley registers > To: <ENG-WORCESTER@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <FF137CAB6A484F49AD8510FF2119328F@AlanPC> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Just a quick note to let the list know that if anyone requires look ups in > Bushley, I have a CD of some of the parish registers. > I thought these sites were all about a mutual interest in genealogy, and > not an opportunity to take a dig at the various on line providers. I'm > eternally grateful to the people who have helped me in my research (Thanks > Gus, for your help) and I'd be delighted if I could find a long lost > relative or two, or help out someone else. > Angela > > ------------------------------ > > To contact the ENG-WORCESTER list administrator, send an email to > ENG-WORCESTER-admin@rootsweb.com. > > To post a message to the ENG-WORCESTER mailing list, send an email to > ENG-WORCESTER@rootsweb.com. > > __________________________________________________________ > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ENG-WORCESTER-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-WORCESTER Digest, Vol 5, Issue 87 > ******************************************** >

Just a quick note to let the list know that if anyone requires look ups in Bushley, I have a CD of some of the parish registers. I thought these sites were all about a mutual interest in genealogy, and not an opportunity to take a dig at the various on line providers. I'm eternally grateful to the people who have helped me in my research (Thanks Gus, for your help) and I'd be delighted if I could find a long lost relative or two, or help out someone else. Angela

To add my own tuppence worth to Roys letter which I agree with in every way, I would like to say that I sent FMP a correction last week and not only had it been corrected, but I had been informed so within half an hour! Excellent service and much appreciated. Diana On 6 August 2010 22:25, Roy Stockdill <roy.stockdill@btinternet.com> wrote: > On 5 Aug 2010 at 16:02, Ann wrote: > > > Emily I agree as you say its just a bit of time as I have an annual > > sub to Ancestry. The 1911 census is on Find My Past at a price. if > > all the entries are as bad as the person I wanted then they ought to > > be paying us. ! The person I wanted was EDMUND SMERDON JORDAN. It came > > out as JORDAN. EDMUD SINERDON. !! < > > In my experience, which is extensive, the general level of transcriptions > at Findmypast > is much superior to that of Ancestry. Moreover, FMP is a British company > who employ > people with a real concern for genealogy, not an American outfit that seems > to regard > genealogy and family history as little more than a saleable commodity like > soap > powder and baked beans. > >

Can we please get back to what the list is for genealogy not pro's and cons of 1911 census ban button is ready -------------------------------------------------- From: "Roy Stockdill" <roy.stockdill@btinternet.com> Sent: Friday, August 06, 2010 1:25 PM To: "Worcester List" <ENG-WORCESTER@rootsweb.com> Subject: Re: [WOR] 1911 Census > On 5 Aug 2010 at 16:02, Ann wrote: > >> Emily I agree as you say its just a bit of time as I have an annual >> sub to Ancestry. The 1911 census is on Find My Past at a price. if >> all the entries are as bad as the person I wanted then they ought to >> be paying us. ! The person I wanted was EDMUND SMERDON JORDAN. It came >> out as JORDAN. EDMUD SINERDON. !! < > > In my experience, which is extensive, the general level of transcriptions > at Findmypast > is much superior to that of Ancestry. Moreover, FMP is a British company > who employ > people with a real concern for genealogy, not an American outfit that > seems to regard > genealogy and family history as little more than a saleable commodity like > soap > powder and baked beans. > > I have submitted a considerable number of transcription corrections to FMP > and have > never had one refused yet. Moreover, they usually implement them within a > few days, > whereas others have told me you are lucky to get a response from Ancestry > at all. > > Talking of errors, let us all remember that, for reasons of speed and > cost, the > censuses are transcribed and indexed by teams mostly in the Third World > whose first > language may well not even be English. Given this, on the whole they seem > to do a > pretty fair job! How many of us would care to transcribe and index a > census of India or > Sri Lanka? > > I well recall that when the 1881 census was transcribed, indexed and > published, first > on CD-ROM, that work was undertaken by teams of volunteers organised on a > county > basis who might be expected to be familiar with localised place names and > surnames. > It took YEARS to complete and was still riddled with errors !!! > > We must accept that if you want something done quickly and readily > available online - > and, let's face it, we all do - then the project will have to be farmed > out to people > unfamiliar with the names and areas they are working on. It's inevitable, > so let's stop > complaining and make sure we submit corrections when we find errors. FMP > in my > experience are very good and fast at accepting corrections and acting on > the data you > send them. > > -- > Roy Stockdill > Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer > Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: > www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html > > "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, > and that is not being talked about." > OSCAR WILDE > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ENG-WORCESTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3053 - Release Date: 08/05/10 > 19:23:00 >

On 5 Aug 2010 at 16:02, Ann wrote: > Emily I agree as you say its just a bit of time as I have an annual > sub to Ancestry. The 1911 census is on Find My Past at a price. if > all the entries are as bad as the person I wanted then they ought to > be paying us. ! The person I wanted was EDMUND SMERDON JORDAN. It came > out as JORDAN. EDMUD SINERDON. !! < In my experience, which is extensive, the general level of transcriptions at Findmypast is much superior to that of Ancestry. Moreover, FMP is a British company who employ people with a real concern for genealogy, not an American outfit that seems to regard genealogy and family history as little more than a saleable commodity like soap powder and baked beans. I have submitted a considerable number of transcription corrections to FMP and have never had one refused yet. Moreover, they usually implement them within a few days, whereas others have told me you are lucky to get a response from Ancestry at all. Talking of errors, let us all remember that, for reasons of speed and cost, the censuses are transcribed and indexed by teams mostly in the Third World whose first language may well not even be English. Given this, on the whole they seem to do a pretty fair job! How many of us would care to transcribe and index a census of India or Sri Lanka? I well recall that when the 1881 census was transcribed, indexed and published, first on CD-ROM, that work was undertaken by teams of volunteers organised on a county basis who might be expected to be familiar with localised place names and surnames. It took YEARS to complete and was still riddled with errors !!! We must accept that if you want something done quickly and readily available online - and, let's face it, we all do - then the project will have to be farmed out to people unfamiliar with the names and areas they are working on. It's inevitable, so let's stop complaining and make sure we submit corrections when we find errors. FMP in my experience are very good and fast at accepting corrections and acting on the data you send them. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

Emily I agree as you say its just a bit of time as I have an annual sub to Ancestry. The 1911 census is on Find My Past at a price. if all the entries are as bad as the person I wanted then they ought to be paying us. ! The person I wanted was EDMUND SMERDON JORDAN. It came out as JORDAN. EDMUD SINERDON. !! **** Ann **** ----- Original Message ----- From: "Emily Kearns" <emily.kearns@st-hildas.ox.ac.uk> To: "Katie de Haan" <gallorosso@home.nl> Cc: <eng-worcester@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 2:48 PM Subject: Re: [WOR] 1911 Census >I don't see how they can forbid look-ups as such - that would logically > mean you were infringing terms just by passing any information from the > site on even to a close family member. Surely what they forbid is > charging a fee to do look-ups. If I have a spare moment, which doesn't > happen all that often but did happen this morning, I am perfectly happy > to do a favour to someone by passing on (free) a snippet of information > which I happen to have easy access to anyway - I have paid the same > subscription whether I do the extra look-up or not. And I am sure there > are many people who feel the same way. I don't have time to do the > detailed extras that Roy has so kindly given, but that is his choice, > and I am sure that the questioner must appreciate his valuable help. > > I may be under a misapprehension, but I did think that genealogy lists > were about co-operation... > > Emily > > Katie de Haan wrote: >> List, >> >> I may be under a misapprehension - though I think not - but I understood >> 1911 lookups were expressly forbidden by the company anyway. >> Surely by now that must be well-known by anyone tracing their family history >> online. >> >> Enjoy the trail, >> Katie >> The Netherlands >> >> >> >> --Original Message--From: eng-worcester-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:eng-worcester-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Peter Booth Sent: >> dinsdag 3 augustus 2010 14:38 To: eng-worcester@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: [WOR] 1911 Census Roy, >> Well done. I hope your efforts are appreciated and not simply dismissed as >> the wrong person. I must admit I'm very reluctant to help people who >> expect a "free" lookup when they are not prepared to spend a few dollars to >> look for themselves. Don't they realise that it's not free. We have to >> pay to have access to the data. Peter in Sydney >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-WORCESTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-WORCESTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Roy, Well done. I hope your efforts are appreciated and not simply dismissed as the wrong person. I must admit I'm very reluctant to help people who expect a "free" lookup when they are not prepared to spend a few dollars to look for themselves. Don't they realise that it's not free. We have to pay to have access to the data. Peter in Sydney

On 3 Aug 2010 at 19:11, Syd Hockey wrote: > > Thank you for all your kind help in assisting me in my search for > ADA CAMPION (nee HUGHES) I am sorry for any confusion that I may > have caused. > Regards, > Syd > Thank you, kindly, Syd, but could you put us out of our misery and tell us whether I found the right one, please? -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

Thank you for all your kind help in assisting me in my search for ADA CAMPION (nee HUGHES) I am sorry for any confusion that I may have caused. Regards, Syd

Dennis, I think you have missed the point here - people like Roy go out of their way to help others with very little thanks or acknowledgement. Before the advent of online census sites I used to spend hours searching cds I had purchased for different censuses, parish records and the like to answer peoples queries on various forums. At a rough guess I'd say about half of those whose queries I answered couldn't be bothered to thank me for the time and effort put in. Eventually I stopped bothering to look things up for them. These days there are too many people who expect others to do their research for them, giving not just time but also the money it costs to access the records. This is not a cheap hobby for any of us, so why should others who have been told how to access the information still expect to be subsidised by those who have spent money on subscriptions? I have a whole library of cds, subscriptions to most of the mjor sites etc but have reached the stage where I think "Let them spend their own money not that of a pensioner". So much is available on the internet if they are prepared to make an effort. Thank you Roy for all the help you give others. Nuala ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis Corbett Tel" <denniscorbett@denniscorbett.e.telefonica.net> To: "Worcester" <eng-worcester@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 6:49 PM Subject: Re: [WOR] 1911 Census > Many of us who do not have the luxury of living near to a family history > centre or CRO, and in my case no longer live in the UK, are extremely > grateful to those kind individuals who willingly go out of their way to > help > us with our research. Often our requirements will be simple for somebody > living in the right place, but our remoteness turns a simple job into a > nightmare. > > I have therefore been quite upset to see the recent postings on the above > subject. To those willing to help, please don't be discouraged by the > adverse comments of others. In some cases there is clearly an agenda > there. > I have received considerable help recently by a couple of people who have > gone out of their way to help me and I shall always be in their debt. > > Dennis > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > ENG-WORCESTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Many of us who do not have the luxury of living near to a family history centre or CRO, and in my case no longer live in the UK, are extremely grateful to those kind individuals who willingly go out of their way to help us with our research. Often our requirements will be simple for somebody living in the right place, but our remoteness turns a simple job into a nightmare. I have therefore been quite upset to see the recent postings on the above subject. To those willing to help, please don't be discouraged by the adverse comments of others. In some cases there is clearly an agenda there. I have received considerable help recently by a couple of people who have gone out of their way to help me and I shall always be in their debt. Dennis

On 3 Aug 2010 at 15:55, Polly Rubery wrote: > Hi Roy > > >>I don't see your difficulty at all, I'm afraid because she is easily > >> traced in the records.<< > > Surely his difficulty is that he is trying to find an Ada HUGHES who > was born in Cirencester? Kind regards Polly > Well, possibly, but how do we know he's right? In fact, a simple check at FreeBMD shows not a single entry for any Ada Hughes born, married or died in the Cirencester registration district. Check for yourself! I gave the enquirer the results of my research based on what I found about the information he posted, which was for an Ada Campion married to William Campion in the 1911 census and I am quite certain I was correct. However, if this wasn't the Ada Hughes he sought I suggest he tells us so so because I won't waste my time again. There is an Ada Hughes who says she was born at Cirencester in 1872 in the 1891 census, living with her parents John and Susan Hughes at Chipping Camden. Maybe this is the one he seeks. The birth is not found at Cirencester with FreeBMD, though. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE