On 26-12-2014 14:50, Richard Smith wrote: > On 24/12/14 20:18, melanie chesnel wrote: > >> I don't see why Richard van Schaik says such a definite 28 as 20 >> seems just as likely/unlikely to me, particularly as over 21 was >> often written as "of age". > > I can't speak for the specific reasons why Richard van Schaik says it's > far more likely to be a 28 than 20, but he's right. An '8' was often > written much more like a lower-case Greek delta, and in this case the > lower loop, while very small, is very clearly formed. The upper loop is > perhaps atypically large, but not so much as to cast doubt on the > identity of the digit. It would take a lot to convince me that it were > anything but an '8'. And whilst you're right that people over 21 were > often just given as "of age", considerably more often their ages were > given. Let me say it this way, English and Dutch in pure handwriting per letter doesn't differ much if compared in about equal time frames. So as long as local knowledge is not involved I can help a bit sometimes. When local knowledge becomes involved then I look at the contribution of e.g. John below in giving Milton and elaborating. I do think a lot of you could per letter read a lot of old Dutch (though also there were some nasty handwritings) but would have similar problems when local knowledge is involved. Richard -- Richard van Schaik [email protected] http://www.fmavanschaik.nl/ The world is one big madhouse and this is main office.

On 24/12/14 20:18, melanie chesnel wrote: > I don't see why Richard van Schaik says such a definite 28 as 20 > seems just as likely/unlikely to me, particularly as over 21 was > often written as "of age". I can't speak for the specific reasons why Richard van Schaik says it's far more likely to be a 28 than 20, but he's right. An '8' was often written much more like a lower-case Greek delta, and in this case the lower loop, while very small, is very clearly formed. The upper loop is perhaps atypically large, but not so much as to cast doubt on the identity of the digit. It would take a lot to convince me that it were anything but an '8'. And whilst you're right that people over 21 were often just given as "of age", considerably more often their ages were given. Richard

On Fri, 26 Dec 2014 13:50:43 +0000, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >On 24/12/14 20:18, melanie chesnel wrote: > >> I don't see why Richard van Schaik says such a definite 28 as 20 >> seems just as likely/unlikely to me, particularly as over 21 was >> often written as "of age". > >I can't speak for the specific reasons why Richard van Schaik says it's >far more likely to be a 28 than 20, but he's right. An '8' was often >written much more like a lower-case Greek delta, and in this case the >lower loop, while very small, is very clearly formed. The upper loop is >perhaps atypically large, but not so much as to cast doubt on the >identity of the digit. It would take a lot to convince me that it were >anything but an '8'. And whilst you're right that people over 21 were >often just given as "of age", considerably more often their ages were given. I can vouch for the above. A few years ago I was facing the same problem in 17th and early 18th century wills and other documents. This group had a look at my exemplars and drove away my problems, for which I was and am very thankful. -- Don [email protected]

On 26/12/2014 00:32, MB wrote: > On 01/12/2014 15:29, Gordon wrote: >> Hi >> >> The Regiments would not have any details of men who served with them, >> enlistment records were not kept by the Regiments, these are now in the >> National Archives. As you cannot find any service records then they were >> lost in WW2 due to German bombs. They would have received a pension only >> if their length of service entitled them to one, short war service would >> not, or they were invalided out due to wounds. >> >> As it appears they survived the war then the medal cards are mostly >> likely the only information surviving. >> >> Unfortunately another infamous WW1 survivor was responsible for the loss >> of a large amount of soldiers WW1 records in WW2. >> >> Good hunting >> >> Gordon >> >> "Tickettyboo" wrote in message news:[email protected] >> >> I am trying to ascertain if a couple of young men served in WW1. >> Neither of them were in the army prior to WW1 or after from what I can >> see elsewhere. One was unmarried at the outbreak of war, the other was >> married but had returned from Canada when war broke out, so its likely >> he had done that in order to join up. Nothing showing in local >> newspapers so far (sometimes there were lists of men who had joined up >> that week etc). >> Having trawled the service records and pension records available I >> haven't found them. >> Looking at medal cards, I have a selection for the names of each man >> for which there are no surving service/pension records, but they do >> have service numbers and regiments noted. >> >> Nothing showing in local newspapers so far (sometimes there were lists >> of men who had joined up that week etc). >> >> Can anyone tell me if there is an alternative way to find out >> 'anything' further? Would regimental records hold some sort of record >> of men who joined, maybe a birth date (or year) and perhaps other >> identifying info such as town they came from or pevious occupation? >> >> Before I give up on the search I'd like to think I'd tried all avenues. >> >> Thanks > > > > Don't the Guards regiments have their own records? > > There is no harm in asking though, it depends on the particular > regimental museum but it always possible they have some records of their > own. > > I have had very good service (albeit rather expensive) from the Grenadier Guards Archivist, but this was for soldiers of the Victorian era. David

On 01/12/2014 15:29, Gordon wrote: > Hi > > The Regiments would not have any details of men who served with them, > enlistment records were not kept by the Regiments, these are now in the > National Archives. As you cannot find any service records then they were > lost in WW2 due to German bombs. They would have received a pension only > if their length of service entitled them to one, short war service would > not, or they were invalided out due to wounds. > > As it appears they survived the war then the medal cards are mostly > likely the only information surviving. > > Unfortunately another infamous WW1 survivor was responsible for the loss > of a large amount of soldiers WW1 records in WW2. > > Good hunting > > Gordon > > "Tickettyboo" wrote in message news:[email protected] > > I am trying to ascertain if a couple of young men served in WW1. > Neither of them were in the army prior to WW1 or after from what I can > see elsewhere. One was unmarried at the outbreak of war, the other was > married but had returned from Canada when war broke out, so its likely > he had done that in order to join up. Nothing showing in local > newspapers so far (sometimes there were lists of men who had joined up > that week etc). > Having trawled the service records and pension records available I > haven't found them. > Looking at medal cards, I have a selection for the names of each man > for which there are no surving service/pension records, but they do > have service numbers and regiments noted. > > Nothing showing in local newspapers so far (sometimes there were lists > of men who had joined up that week etc). > > Can anyone tell me if there is an alternative way to find out > 'anything' further? Would regimental records hold some sort of record > of men who joined, maybe a birth date (or year) and perhaps other > identifying info such as town they came from or pevious occupation? > > Before I give up on the search I'd like to think I'd tried all avenues. > > Thanks Don't the Guards regiments have their own records? There is no harm in asking though, it depends on the particular regimental museum but it always possible they have some records of their own.

On 25-12-2014 19:38, eve via wrote: > e >>> church at which the marriage was solemnised, and the grooms age. >>> >>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/mmad1tdybeb0a8f/johnlenton_estherlance.jpg?dl=0 >> >> His age is 28 >> ] > > agreed, 28 - the style of the figure is typical opf the period. > EVE Thanks, in Dutch handwriting very common slightly earlier (but not much). Before what I call the "fallen eight" was used frequently and most like ∞ but that one is too neat and fallen a bit far ;-) . Richard -- Richard van Schaik [email protected] http://www.fmavanschaik.nl/ The world is one big madhouse and this is main office.

On Thu, 25 Dec 2014 11:38:13 +0000, MB <[email protected]> wrote: >On 25/12/2014 10:57, Gordon wrote: >> If they are engaged by someone to search for heirs then they will and >> can charge for work done even if they mess up, though I guess a >> solicitor would argue re charging for poor work. Those that use the >> published lists from the Treasury to hunt for heirs only make money if >> they sign up any heirs, that is why they try to work large "estates" >> only. The Treasury stopped publishing the size of the "estates" to stop >> fraudulent claims. > > > >They usually look for people who own their own house rather than >renting, even a quite modest house can mean there is enough in the >estate to allow them to make some profit. > >I presume that if it was heavily mortgaged then the bank (or whoever >issued the mortgage) would have already tried to recover their money by >getting the house sold. > "Getting the house sold" would initially be for the executors not for the bank which by that time would be just one more creditor (but with the advantage of having the house/whatever as security in the event that there is nothing else to discharge the mortgage). >The smaller heir-hunter companies often seem to take on the difficult >cases that larger companies have dropped. > >Always amused by the way they carefully avoid including the size of the >commission in the TV programme, if someone rang me or came to my door it >would be the first question that I asked! > >Also the way they will ring neighbours of the deceased quite early in >the morning, apologising of course! I would never give out information >on a neighbour, especially if the house was empty because they could be >burglars. And I would expect to be paid for the information. >

On Thu, 25 Dec 2014 11:28:59 +0000, MB <[email protected]> wrote: >On 24/12/2014 17:02, Gordon wrote: >> Their commission comes from a percentage of the inheritance you receive >> and which they must, by law tell you, and include in their contract. > > >Slightly ambiguous, the heirs sign for a given percentage but the value >of the estate will often be unknown at that time. I suppose they could >sign for a variable percentage rate depending on value but that might >need the heir requesting it perhaps because of another offer. > ISTR one episode of one of the various programmes where one of the potential heirs negotiated the percentage downward.

e > > church at which the marriage was solemnised, and the grooms age. > > > > https://www.dropbox.com/s/mmad1tdybeb0a8f/johnlenton_estherlance.jpg?dl=0 > > His age is 28 > ] agreed, 28 - the style of the figure is typical opf the period. EVE Author of The McLaughlin Guides for Family Historians Secretary, Bucks Genealogical Society

On 25/12/2014 10:57, Gordon wrote: > If they are engaged by someone to search for heirs then they will and > can charge for work done even if they mess up, though I guess a > solicitor would argue re charging for poor work. Those that use the > published lists from the Treasury to hunt for heirs only make money if > they sign up any heirs, that is why they try to work large "estates" > only. The Treasury stopped publishing the size of the "estates" to stop > fraudulent claims. They usually look for people who own their own house rather than renting, even a quite modest house can mean there is enough in the estate to allow them to make some profit. I presume that if it was heavily mortgaged then the bank (or whoever issued the mortgage) would have already tried to recover their money by getting the house sold. The smaller heir-hunter companies often seem to take on the difficult cases that larger companies have dropped. Always amused by the way they carefully avoid including the size of the commission in the TV programme, if someone rang me or came to my door it would be the first question that I asked! Also the way they will ring neighbours of the deceased quite early in the morning, apologising of course! I would never give out information on a neighbour, especially if the house was empty because they could be burglars. And I would expect to be paid for the information.

On 24/12/2014 17:02, Gordon wrote: > Their commission comes from a percentage of the inheritance you receive > and which they must, by law tell you, and include in their contract. Slightly ambiguous, the heirs sign for a given percentage but the value of the estate will often be unknown at that time. I suppose they could sign for a variable percentage rate depending on value but that might need the heir requesting it perhaps because of another offer.

If they are engaged by someone to search for heirs then they will and can charge for work done even if they mess up, though I guess a solicitor would argue re charging for poor work. Those that use the published lists from the Treasury to hunt for heirs only make money if they sign up any heirs, that is why they try to work large "estates" only. The Treasury stopped publishing the size of the "estates" to stop fraudulent claims. Gordon "Ian Goddard" wrote in message news:[email protected] It's not only done on spec. Some years ago my mother & her siblings were approached by solicitors looking after the estate. I assume that in this case either there was a will or the solicitors had been instructed by the deceased in her lifetime. The solicitors had engaged probate investigators to locate relatives as the deceased lived at the other end of the country. Unfortunately the first lot had made a pigs ear of the investigation & a second firm had had to be engaged. The first lot had still charged for their work, however. -- Ian The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang at austonley org uk

melanie chesnel wrote: > > I don't see why Richard van Schaik says such a definite 28 as 20 seems just as likely/unlikely to me, particularly as over 21 was often written as "of age". > As for the parish, looking through the list of parishes on Genuki for Hampshire I think Portsea is the most likely, specially if one compares it with the word Southsea below. Genuki gives a list of churches in the parish and the church of the Ascension in Stubbington Ave is the only one which could possibly fit the hand writing. > There is an article giving the history of Portsea which I haven't read but may help here http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/hants/vol3/pp192-202#h3-0007 > regards melanie chesnel > His age in the 1871 census was given as 34, so 28 sounds about right. -- Anne Chambers South Australia anne dot chambers at bigpond dot com

brightside S9 <[email protected]_is_not.invalid> wrote: > On Wed, 24 Dec 2014 09:52:13 +0000, John P Gibson > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 20/12/2014 11:39, brightside S9 wrote: >> >> <snip> >> >>> I now have the marriage cert from GRO. I can understand the >>> mistranscription into GRO index. The handwriting is awful. >>> >>> The mariage took place on July 9th 1866. John's father's name is >>> William Lenton. >>> >>> I can scan the cert if anyone wants / needs to try to deciper the >>> rest. >>> >> >> Ooh, yes please! That would be very nice. >> >> I really must try to remember to fire up my newsreader, such as it is, >> more frequently. > > > This link should (I hope it works) bring up the scan. I'll leave it > available for a few days. It would be nice if someone can decpher the > church at which the marriage was solemnised, and the grooms age. > > https://www.dropbox.com/s/mmad1tdybeb0a8f/johnlenton_estherlance.jpg?dl=0 I'd say 28 for his age too but no idea about the church name as I am on holiday with a very intermittent net connection so can't poke around to investigate possibilities. I am very pleased that my long shot turned out helpful though :-)

On 24/12/2014 11:01 AM, brightside S9 via wrote: > On Wed, 24 Dec 2014 09:52:13 +0000, John P Gibson > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 20/12/2014 11:39, brightside S9 wrote: >> <snip> >>> I now have the marriage cert from GRO. I can understand the >>> mistranscription into GRO index. The handwriting is awful. >>> The mariage took place on July 9th 1866. John's father's name is >>> William Lenton. >>> I can scan the cert if anyone wants / needs to try to deciper the >>> rest. >>> >> Ooh, yes please! That would be very nice. >> I really must try to remember to fire up my newsreader, such as it is, >> more frequently. > This link should (I hope it works) bring up the scan. I'll leave it > available for a few days. It would be nice if someone can decpher the > church at which the marriage was solemnised, and the grooms age. > https://www.dropbox.com/s/mmad1tdybeb0a8f/johnlenton_estherlance.jpg?dl=0 To add to last : Crockford for 1868 lists BAYLISS, William Wyke, as curate of St.Mary's, Portsea, from 1863, Perpetual Curate of St.James Milton from 1865. Full entry on Ancestry. John

On 24/12/2014 11:01 AM, brightside S9 via wrote: > On Wed, 24 Dec 2014 09:52:13 +0000, John P Gibson > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 20/12/2014 11:39, brightside S9 wrote: >> <snip> >>> I now have the marriage cert from GRO. I can understand the >>> mistranscription into GRO index. The handwriting is awful. >>> The mariage took place on July 9th 1866. John's father's name is >>> William Lenton. >>> I can scan the cert if anyone wants / needs to try to deciper the >>> rest. >> Ooh, yes please! That would be very nice. >> I really must try to remember to fire up my newsreader, such as it is, >> more frequently. > This link should (I hope it works) bring up the scan. I'll leave it > available for a few days. It would be nice if someone can decpher the > church at which the marriage was solemnised, and the grooms age. > https://www.dropbox.com/s/mmad1tdybeb0a8f/johnlenton_estherlance.jpg?dl=0 I *think* it says "at Milton in the Parish of Portsea" i.e St James, Milton. (Do not confuse with St.Mary Magdalene, New Milton.) see http://www.stjamesmilton.org.uk/history an http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/hants/vol3/pp192-202 Milton Ecclesiastical parish created 1844, out of Portsea ancient parish. It is not unknown for clergy to write the Ecclesiastical Parish in he first space and the Civil Parish in the second. The name of the officiating minister M.M.Baylis[????], may help. Regards, John Henley >

On 24/12/14 15:56, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: > In message <[email protected]>, MB <[email protected]> writes: > [] >> I don't know if anyone has mentioned but there is a TV programme here >> in the UK that follows of the work of companies that do 'heir >> hunting'. They go through the lists of unclaimed estates and try to >> reach the heirs before any of their competitors. >> >> But they can be brought in before that stage. I think sometimes they >> are contacted by neighbours, friends of the deceased person or other >> interested parties. >> >> I understand that the bigger heir hunting companies charge quite high >> commissions for their work but there are also smaller one or two man >> businesses. >> >> > What's always puzzled me is how they _make_ their commission; what > obligation does a potential inheritor, even after the AH has/have > contacted them, to have anything to do with the AH? > It's not only done on spec. Some years ago my mother & her siblings were approached by solicitors looking after the estate. I assume that in this case either there was a will or the solicitors had been instructed by the deceased in her lifetime. The solicitors had engaged probate investigators to locate relatives as the deceased lived at the other end of the country. Unfortunately the first lot had made a pigs ear of the investigation & a second firm had had to be engaged. The first lot had still charged for their work, however. -- Ian The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang at austonley org uk

In the UK when you sign up with them the law gives you a "cooling off" period during which you can change your mind and decide not to go with them. This period is usually a minimum of seven days but could be longer. It will be in the contract you sign with them. You can then make a claim direct to the Treasury Solicitor yourself. Their commission comes from a percentage of the inheritance you receive and which they must, by law tell you, and include in their contract. In the TV programme "Heir Hunters" this occasionally happens to them when heirs decide to claim direct. Good Hunting Gordon "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message news:[email protected] > What's always puzzled me is how they _make_ their commission; what obligation does a potential inheritor, even after the AH has/have contacted them, to have anything to do with the AH? (Also, based on those prog.s, I get the impression they go for the biggest fruit first, as it were - so, OP, the fact that they _have_ contacted you suggests - unless it's a result of neighbour, friend etc. - that you may be in for good news, at least financially.) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)[email protected]+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf The early worm gets the bird.

In message <[email protected]>, MB <[email protected]> writes: [] >I don't know if anyone has mentioned but there is a TV programme here >in the UK that follows of the work of companies that do 'heir hunting'. >They go through the lists of unclaimed estates and try to reach the >heirs before any of their competitors. > >But they can be brought in before that stage. I think sometimes they >are contacted by neighbours, friends of the deceased person or other >interested parties. > >I understand that the bigger heir hunting companies charge quite high >commissions for their work but there are also smaller one or two man >businesses. > > What's always puzzled me is how they _make_ their commission; what obligation does a potential inheritor, even after the AH has/have contacted them, to have anything to do with the AH? (Also, based on those prog.s, I get the impression they go for the biggest fruit first, as it were - so, OP, the fact that they _have_ contacted you suggests - unless it's a result of neighbour, friend etc. - that you may be in for good news, at least financially.) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)[email protected]+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf The early worm gets the bird.

In message <[email protected]>, singhals via <[email protected]> writes: >Jenny M Benson via wrote: > >> I'm not LDS and frankly I think their "one big FamilyTree" is an >> impossible pipe dream, but I do contribute data to FamilyTree and do > >I think ANYONE's "one big FamilyTree" is an impossible pipe-dream -- >LDS', Ancestry's, WorldConnect, the old FTM one. > >Since it is possible for two people to look at the same thing and >interpret it differently there's always going to be conflict. > >Cheryl On the other hand, I think the potential for a lot of reduction of effort - especially in the more recent records and/or where there's little room for different interpretation - definitely exists. It's a pity more rigo(u)r hasn't been applied in many cases, making this less practical than it might have been, but I think the potential is still there. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)[email protected]+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf The early worm gets the bird.