"Di Maloney" wrote in message news:l06dm9$m1h$1@dont-email.me... Hi all, I am looking for King Street Maryport in the 1850's - I have looked at British History OnLine and old.maps.co.uk and can see King Street Maryport but it is not detailed enough. If anyone knows of a map giving good detail of the streets that show those streets or lanes that may have been closed, would you please reply to the newsgroup. Many thanks for any help. Di Hi Di Not sure if this is old enough to help, King Street is near North and Old Harbours. http://www.old-maps.co.uk/maps.html Regards, Kate (Sydney, Australia)

On Wed, 4 Sep 2013 15:59:46 +0100, Charlie <plink.2RoyTubb@spamgourmet.com> wrote: >On Wed, 4 Sep 2013 10:27:37 +0100, Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote: > >> So presumably he knew what he was doing when he signed that will. But >> was he literate? >> >> I wonder what was going on when he signed his will? Had an instruction >> been issued from General HQ? Were the sergeants telling the soldiers >> what to do? Were they sufficiently shell-shocked to do what they were >> told regardless? >> >> Then these words in that will are a classic. I'm sure I've heard of a >> case that went to court because the soldier had merely written >> "Everything to Mother". Who was mother? Was she his biological mother? >> Or was she his wife, who was generally known as Mother? >> The shortest English will was the subject of Thorn v. Dickens ([1906] W.N. 54) (indexed by PRFD as Frederick Charles William THORN in 1905/1906) but the testator wasn't AFAICT a soldier :- "All for mother", Charles William THORNE, Streatham, died 17 May 1905; the will being hurriedly drawn up on the day before his death. reported in The Capricornian, Queensland, AUS on 14 Apr 1906 [http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/71975967] "Mother" was indeed his wife Mary Ann :- [https://portal.barweb.com.au/Upload/FCK/Session%204B%20-%20McKenna%20Paper.pdf] (mentioning the case with reference to ambiguity in contracts). The shortest will ever was in similar vein :- ""Vse zene" means "All to wife" in the Czech was the shortest valid will in the world. It was written and dated 19 January 1967 by Herr Karl Tausch of Langen, Hessen, West Germany" [http://www.lawyerment.com/facts/world_records/Judicial/100002.htm] and various other attributions in past years. >> Was his wife >> pregnant and already thus a mother? > >He was an apprentice printer's compositor finishing his final year when he >joined up. So as literate as you or me. I have examples of his hand >writing. > >I've no reasom to doubt she was his biological mother, and the address he >gave for her agrees with other information I had already, e.g from his >matrriage certificate. > >I wouldn't have thought they had been married long enough to call one >another 'mother' and 'father' anyway especially as their one and only child >lived only a few weeks. > >I have searched birth records from 1915 to 1918 in the hope of finding >another birth, but without success. I would have been over the Moon had I >found one neaning an ouside chance of finding a living cousin. > >Roy

On Wed, 4 Sep 2013 10:27:37 +0100, Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote: > So presumably he knew what he was doing when he signed that will. But > was he literate? > > I wonder what was going on when he signed his will? Had an instruction > been issued from General HQ? Were the sergeants telling the soldiers > what to do? Were they sufficiently shell-shocked to do what they were > told regardless? > > Then these words in that will are a classic. I'm sure I've heard of a > case that went to court because the soldier had merely written > "Everything to Mother". Who was mother? Was she his biological mother? > Or was she his wife, who was generally known as Mother? Was his wife > pregnant and already thus a mother? He was an apprentice printer's compositor finishing his final year when he joined up. So as literate as you or me. I have examples of his hand writing. I've no reasom to doubt she was his biological mother, and the address he gave for her agrees with other information I had already, e.g from his matrriage certificate. I wouldn't have thought they had been married long enough to call one another 'mother' and 'father' anyway especially as their one and only child lived only a few weeks. I have searched birth records from 1915 to 1918 in the hope of finding another birth, but without success. I would have been over the Moon had I found one neaning an ouside chance of finding a living cousin. Roy

Steve Hayes wrote:     > ‘Kindred Britain’ maps 30,000 people in British history > A fantastic new visualisation work has been released today titled ‘Kindred > Britain‘. Created by Nicholas Jenkins and Elijah Meeks of Stanford University > in partnership with Scott Murray (amongst others) the project offers a deep, > exploratory interface into a network of nearly 30,000 key figures in British > culture connected through ‘family relationships of blood, marriage, or > affiliation’. As the designers describe, ‘it is a vision of the nation’s > history as a giant family affair’. > http://www.visualisingdata.com/index.php/2013/08/kindred-britain-maps-30000-people-in-british-history/ > http://kindred.stanford.edu/#     <snip>         Thanks for posting this, Steve. It looks very interesting, if slightly incomprehensible at first glance.       Chris     

Hi all, I am looking for King Street Maryport in the 1850's - I have looked at British History OnLine and old.maps.co.uk and can see King Street Maryport but it is not detailed enough. If anyone knows of a map giving good detail of the streets that show those streets or lanes that may have been closed, would you please reply to the newsgroup. Many thanks for any help. Di

On 1 Sep at 15:58, Charlie <plink.2RoyTubb@spamgourmet.com> wrote: > On Sun, 1 Sep 2013 15:13:10 +0100, Gordon wrote: > > > I too ordered a will which came in a couple of days. My soldier too > > only wrote a couple of lines leaving all to his mother. This does > > not surprise me as most youngsters would not have owned much in > > those days and only married (and/or older) men would have possibly > > made more detailed wills. > > My soldier had married my Aunt Mabel in September 1914. At about the > same time he voluteered for the 13th Battalion of the Essex regiment > (West Ham).. His will was made out and signed on 9th November 1915 and > he left everything to his mother, not his young (19 year old) wjfe. > This strikes me as odd, but I know from other information in the will > that it's the right man, What do others make of that? He would have > had precious little to bequeeth. > > Sadly he died of wounds in the base hospital at Etaples in May 1917. > Just another tragic loss and a family shattered like so many millions > of others....... So presumably he knew what he was doing when he signed that will. But was he literate? I wonder what was going on when he signed his will? Had an instruction been issued from General HQ? Were the sergeants telling the soldiers what to do? Were they sufficiently shell-shocked to do what they were told regardless? Then these words in that will are a classic. I'm sure I've heard of a case that went to court because the soldier had merely written "Everything to Mother". Who was mother? Was she his biological mother? Or was she his wife, who was generally known as Mother? Was his wife pregnant and already thus a mother? -- Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/

In message <1mae45c3xktpp$.1grg0di10wrgf.dlg@40tude.net>, Charlie <plink.2RoyTubb@spamgourmet.com> writes: >On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 15:57:02 +0930, Anne Chambers wrote: > >> Charlie wrote: >> >>> My soldier had married my Aunt Mabel in September 1914. At about the same >>> time he voluteered for the 13th Battalion of the Essex regiment (West >>> Ham).. His will was made out and signed on 9th November 1915 and he left >>> everything to his mother, not his young (19 year old) wjfe. This strikes me >>> as odd, but I know from other information in the will that it's the right >>> man, What do others make of that? He would have had precious little to >>> bequeeth. >>> I did think that maybe it had been a hasty marriage he subsequently regretted (possibly, even, undertaken for carnal reasons by someone expecting to die soon), but ... >> >> Perhaps he thought his mother needed the money more, as his wife >>could go back to her parents if he died. Did ... does seem a kinder explanation. (Also the suggestion of to-mother having been made while single and not subsequently updated seems plausible: even if marriage invalidated the earlier will, it wouldn't surprise me at all if the will remained on file.) >> he have younger siblings still dependent and was his mother a widow ? >>Did war widows get an allowance/some >> other sort of payment in WW1 ? I'd been wondering about when war widows' support came in, I think as regards another thread (or possibly another part of this one). > >He did have younger (and older) siblings. His father was alive when he >married in 1914, but his employment, casual dock labourer, was certainly Did he (the soldier, not the docker father) have much to leave anyway? I was wondering whether it might relate to items of more sentimental than monetary value. (I appreciate that a simple will might not answer this.) >precarious. His wjfe, my aunt, did return to live with her parents for a (That's the second time you've spelt wife as wjfe; unusual!) >while, and their only child died early in 1915. Pretty tragic all round. [] >ago. I could write a book about the small mysteries in that family, Mabel >is just one item! I suspect most of us here could say that about at least one branch! > >Roy (or Charlie?) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf ... so cracking a joke would be like farting in the Sistine Chapel. - Alison Graham, Radio Times 29 January-4 February 2011

‘Kindred Britain’ maps 30,000 people in British history A fantastic new visualisation work has been released today titled ‘Kindred Britain‘. Created by Nicholas Jenkins and Elijah Meeks of Stanford University in partnership with Scott Murray (amongst others) the project offers a deep, exploratory interface into a network of nearly 30,000 key figures in British culture connected through ‘family relationships of blood, marriage, or affiliation’. As the designers describe, ‘it is a vision of the nation’s history as a giant family affair’. http://www.visualisingdata.com/index.php/2013/08/kindred-britain-maps-30000-people-in-british-history/ http://kindred.stanford.edu/# This seems akin to the need I feel for an event-based genealogy, history and biography program, described here: http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com/2011/05/event-based-history-and-genealogy.html -- Steve Hayes Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/ http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

Chris Dickinson wrote: > "Internet survey could replace census. ONS looks at alternative data > instead of once-a-decade questionnaire" They say that so much "private" info is on the Web nowadays that it would be quite possible. Things like http://www.wefeelfine.org/ Doug.

Chris Dickinson wrote: > Tickettyboo wrote: > > >> On 2013-09-02 14:12:55 +0000, Chris Dickinson said: > >>> Objections are that these options may not provide the existing richness >>> of data ('granular data'), government may not be given enough >>> information to formulate policy, and vulnerable groups may be most >>> impacted. > >> Do they do subtitles for those of us who only speak English? >> :-) > > > Sorry. My summary. 'Impacted' was my word (of dubious usage) :-) > > 'Richness of data' was from the article and 'granular data' was from a quote within the article, if I remember right. "Richness of data" = how many questions were asked & WHICH questions were asked "Granular data" = how detailed were the questions asked Cheryl

Tickettyboo wrote:     >On 2013-09-02 14:12:55 +0000, Chris Dickinson said: >> Objections are that these options may not provide the existing richness >> of data ('granular data'),  government may not be given enough >> information to formulate policy, and vulnerable groups may be most >> impacted. > Do they do subtitles for those of us who only speak English? > :-)     Sorry. My summary. 'Impacted' was my word (of dubious usage)   :-)   'Richness of data' was from the article and 'granular data' was from a quote within the article, if I remember right.     Chris

On 03/09/13 07:47, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: > In message <5224c16a$0$1168$5b6aafb4@news.zen.co.uk>, dave > <dave@cyw.uklinux.net> writes: > [] >> From my recollection of the questions in the 2011 census, the document >> would be of very little use to a twenty-second-century genealogist. So >> maybe no great loss. > > I don't remember any of the matters that were in the 1841-1911 censuses > _not_ being asked about; those have been of use to me, so I don't quite > understand what you're saying. (Well, I don't _remember_ any mental > health questions, but they might have been there - but those have never > been of help only interest anyway, in use of old censuses.) Hmmm. My recollection was that the relationships between individuals in the household were not captured, but looking the the form at http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/census/2011/the-2011-census/2011-census-questionnaire-content/2011-census-questionnaire-for-england.pdf it seems they were. What was not asked was the place of birth (ie town, not ethnic origin) which is very useful on the old censuses for linking families. -- Dave

In message <5224c16a$0$1168$5b6aafb4@news.zen.co.uk>, dave <dave@cyw.uklinux.net> writes: [] >From my recollection of the questions in the 2011 census, the document >would be of very little use to a twenty-second-century genealogist. So >maybe no great loss. I don't remember any of the matters that were in the 1841-1911 censuses _not_ being asked about; those have been of use to me, so I don't quite understand what you're saying. (Well, I don't _remember_ any mental health questions, but they might have been there - but those have never been of help only interest anyway, in use of old censuses.) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf "slowly, I caught the virus of uncertainty." (Fadia Faqir [1998], who came to Britain from Jordan, with clear views on what she would find - but has stayed.)

Just catalogued Rhodes' funeral pamphlet complete with photograph on my website. Available here: http://www.modernfirsteditions.com/product/inaffectionater412369398.html Best, Christian On Thursday, 23 October 1997 08:00:00 UTC+1, Bill Irvine wrote: > I would love to hear from anyone knowing any more information of James > Rhodes of Bradford. He was born about 1840 and became a Timber Merchant. > > He had a daughter Martha Elizabeth Rhodes who married Thomas Wilson > Waterhouse and emigrated first to Canada and later to New Zealand. > > I am particularly interested in who James married. I have a painting of this > lady who is my great, great grandmother and I don't know what her name is. > > Bill Irvine

On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 08:15:53 +0100, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote: >On 02/09/2013 06:36, melanie chesnel wrote: >> Thanks very much for all the comments on rank, they have helped me understand what went on. On the subject of a young married man leaving all to his mother I would suggest he was just coping the "standard" will of his squaddie mates without really thinking of what it meant. If they were all unmarried and leaving their meager possessions to their mothers then he did too without thinking that in his case it was more appropriate to leave all to his wife >> >> regards melanie >> > >"What do I do here Sarge? > >Leave it to yer Mum! > The dates need to be looked at as well. (WRT soldiers' documents -) A lot of soldiers would have nominated their mothers as next of kin after joining up unmarried with the records showing a change to a wife married later on. If they were domiciled in England and Wales, made a will in favour of their mother then married but failed to make a new will it would have been invalidated by the marriage if that wasn't a later change in the law.

On 02/09/2013 17:48, dave wrote: > On 02/09/13 15:12, Chris Dickinson wrote: > >> Drat. So, to summarise: >> >> >> The headline is: >> >> "Internet survey could replace census. ONS looks at alternative data >> instead of once-a-decade questionnaire" >> >> A consultation by the ONS is to propose two options to replace the >> census. This, unlike a previous report, won't keep the existing >> arrangement. The two options are to be: an internet survey or a >> collation of alternative sources. >> >> Objections are that these options may not provide the existing >> richness of data ('granular data'), government may not be given >> enough information to formulate policy, and vulnerable groups may be >> most impacted. >> >> >> So there you are. > > > From my recollection of the questions in the 2011 census, the document > would be of very little use to a twenty-second-century genealogist. So > maybe no great loss. About as useful as any of the other censuses. -- Graeme Wall This account not read, substitute trains for rail. Railway Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail>

On 2013-09-02 14:12:55 +0000, Chris Dickinson said: > Objections are that these options may not provide the existing richness > of data ('granular data'),  government may not be given enough > information to formulate policy, and vulnerable groups may be most > impacted. Do they do subtitles for those of us who only speak English? :-) -- Tickettyboo

On 02/09/13 15:12, Chris Dickinson wrote: > Drat. So, to summarise: > > > The headline is: > > "Internet survey could replace census. ONS looks at alternative data > instead of once-a-decade questionnaire" > > A consultation by the ONS is to propose two options to replace the > census. This, unlike a previous report, won't keep the existing > arrangement. The two options are to be: an internet survey or a > collation of alternative sources. > > Objections are that these options may not provide the existing > richness of data ('granular data'), government may not be given > enough information to formulate policy, and vulnerable groups may be > most impacted. > > > So there you are. From my recollection of the questions in the 2011 census, the document would be of very little use to a twenty-second-century genealogist. So maybe no great loss. -- Dave

On 02/09/2013 14:17, Gordon Adshead wrote: > At 21:29 01/09/2013, Chris Dickinson wrote: >> There is an article in the online FT today that may interest some of >> you (see the subject headline). I don't know whether you can access >> this, as I am a subscriber: >> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/380c2bd4-116b-11e3-a14c-00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=uk#axzz2dfsPfWBo > You are right: that FT prefer you to pay or register. > > However if you Google <scrapping the census> > there are several free articles of relevance > > Best regards Gordon +Z > > > [+Z] <http://www.adshead.com/> Gordon Adshead <gordon@adshead.com> > [+Z] Beaumont House, 2 Goodrington Road, Handforth, Cheshire, SK9 3AT, UK > [+Z] Tel:Fax:Msg:+44-1625-549770 Mob:+44-777-6145602 > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENBRIT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > . > Resent as I click the wrong reply button. You do not have to pay to read the article and many more interesting articles linked to it. Simply register choosing the free limited views option. Cheers Guy

In article <522079d1$0$1165$5b6aafb4@news.zen.co.uk>, jerry@nospam.pls says... > > I wonder if anyone can help with the dates of service for this soldier? > > Joseph Pownall > > Loyal North Lancashire Regiment 12835 private > North Staffordshire Regiment 57160 lance corporal > > Every time I try to look up the information I am asked for my credit > card details so I would appreciate any help. > > Regards, Jerry Have you seen this website : http://www.loyalregiment.com/research-services/ The person running it seems prepared to research members of the Regiment for free and appears to have access to some of the Regiment's War Diaries. BobC