On 8/24/2013 7:58 AM, brightside S9 wrote: > I'll ask the question here first, and then try uk.legal > > I have a friend who's birth was registered as forename 1 (let's say > XXX) forname 2 (let's say YYY) and surname. (I know that it can > happen, my wife registred the birth of my first son in hospital as the > registrar came round the maternity ward and named him without my > presence). > > My friend *thinks / guesses* that some family disagrrements over > these registerd fornames led to him always being called with a > forename ZZZ. > > His his baptismal certificate, driving licence, passport, employment > records, bank account, credit and debit cards, NI records, and > marriage certificate are all shown with forename ZZZ. > > He has known that his birth certificate doesn't show the ZZZ forename > for some time but this has not raised any concerns for him until now. > > He has applied for a job which requires considerable security > checking. Needless to say this forname discrepancy on the birth > certificate aginst all the other documents listed above has resulted > in him failing the security check *unless* he can prove that > XXX-YYY-surname is the same person as ZZZ-surname. His parents are > long deceased and no living family member has any idea why his birth > registration forenames were unacceptable to either his mother, father > or other family member and who chose to call him by the ZZZ forename. > > ISTR that it is permissable to call oneself any name one chooses > provided it is not for nefarious purposes. But how could a neme change > be made 'official', after 55 years of being known as ZZZ surname'? > > Has any of the contributors to this newsgroup come across such a > situation as this before, and any ideas what he should do to prove > that XXX-YYY-surname is the same person as ZZZ-surname. > > Thanks. > I am not in Britain so I can not help with the legal side, but the situation you describe is common. As for my own name. for the first 15 years of my life I went by a name that is not on my baptism certificate, or on my birth certificate. I also know of another person who went through part of his life using what turned out to be his first name and the rest life his middle name. After working through that one, I found every bible I had and copied the information, so I had some documentation on all of my ancestors middle names if some one asked me a similar question.

Hello - I am researching Violet Josephine Hambleton (nee Delcourt. Her father and mother were Pierre Delcourt and Catherine Grisenthwaite. >From their marraige certificate (1916) Catherine was 31 therefore born c1885 and Pierre was 41 born c1875. Catherine father is listed as Henry Grisenthwaite (deceased) and listed as a farmer. The only other record I can find is the death of a Catherine Delcourt in Wales and again her birth is c 1885. Free BMD only shows two Catherines, one born 1881 and the other 1889. I can't find them on the census documents. Is any of this linked to your tree. I would appreciate any information. I have a copy of the marraige certificate if you would like it. Regards John Burney

On Fri, 23 Aug 2013 19:37:58 -0700 (PDT), joshcarroll21@gmail.com wrote: > >On Wednesday, February 16, 2000 2:00:00 AM UTC-6, allyson wrote: >> Hello everyone, >> When I was young I remember my Grandma telling me that my ggrandfather >> Henry Francis Corley was a "......... boy" at the turn of the century, >> he travelled round the country with a gang of men laying what I thought >> she said was electricity cables, fore runner of the National Grid? >> Just a snatched conversation from childhood, another shot in the dark. >> >> BTW I am going to Durham county Records Office on 1/3/2000, any one want >> a look up by a newbie, I am a fast learner and will faithfully >> transcribe anything I find. >> >> regards >> >> Ally P. >> All the best signatures are stolen from someone else...but I'm no thief. >> >> Researching the Family, RAMSHAW and YOUNG in Houghton-Le-Spring, HEAD(S) in >> Newcastle upon Tyne, CORLEY/TURNER anywhere and Lancashire, PROUDFOOT and >> SURTEES Washington, Tyne and Wear. >Allyson, > >I realize this post is about 13 years old, but I'm hoping you see this. I'm curious if perhaps your "Henry Francis Corley" died in 1913. If so, then we are related - HFC was my 2nd great grandfather. If this is the case I'd really like to compare notes with you - I've never been able to find out who his parents were. > This one ? :- [1861 census] Name: Henry Corley Age: 9 Estimated Birth Year: abt 1852 Relation: Son Father's Name: Henry Corley Mother's Name: Eliza Corley Gender: Male Where born: Kent Road, Surrey, England Civil Parish: Lambeth Ecclesiastical parish: St Matthew County/Island: Surrey Country: England Registration District: Lambeth Sub-registration District: Brixton ED, institution, or vessel: 8 Neighbors: View others on page Household Schedule Number: 128 Piece: 363 Folio: 151 Page Number: 25 Household Members: Name Age Henry Corley 37 Eliza Corley 34 Mary Corley 11 Henry Corley 9 William Corley 6 Sarah Corley 4 Walter Corley 2 Robert Corley 8 Months [1911 census] Name: Henry Corley Age in 1911: 59 Estimated Birth Year: abt 1852 Relation to Head: Husband Gender: Male Birth Place: Old, Kent, England Civil Parish: Wandsworth County/Island: London Country: England Street Address: 3 Youngs Rents, Old Town, Clapham Years Married: 9 Estimated Marriage Year: 1902 Occupation: PEDLAR Registration District: Wandsworth Registration District Number: 26 Sub-registration District: Clapham ED, institution, or vessel: 1 Piece: 2251 Household Members: Name Age Henry Corley 59 Susie Corley 57 Lily Corley 13 The birth place seems to be a consistently mucked up "Old Kent Road" and he is the best match for a death in Wandsworth registration district in 1913. There is another Henry north of the river, c.2 years younger, born in Suffolk and married to Charlotte who probably matches a death registration in West Ham registration district in 1932.

On 23/08/2013 23:11, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: > In message <b7om4sFemncU1@mid.individual.net>, Anne Chambers > <anne@privacy.net> writes: >> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: >> >>> >>> Interesting that, as well as the third month which is the >>> standard way and the first which I have seen, someone in this >>> thread (for what seems like a very sensible reason) uses the >>> middle month - so all three are in use. >> >> The original post (which I am starting to wish I hadn't made) was a >> cut > > I just used it as an example: that's why I deliberately didn't credit > you, as you were just quoting the original reference in the approved > manner. > >> & paste from a FreeBMD result and contained all the information >> needed to obtain the relevant certificate from the GRO (or whatever >> they call themselves now) certificate ordering website. There are >> plenty of > > Indeed it did - see above. And any newcomer to the hobby should learn > fairly soon that something like "Jun 1888 2a 123" is such a > reference. My point (in quoting it) was that if, say, the "2a 123" > gets separated, what is left is "Jun 1888",, which could easily > mislead. Not if you know what you are doing and learn the discipline of genealogy and adapt your database or sheet of paper to allow that a reference such as this refers to an event registered in a quarter and not the precise month of an event. Best to leave it as the year only, without mentioning quarter references. (And don't let's start on events in December not registered till the following March.) It's on a par with the date of baptism, which is not the same as a date of birth. There could be twenty years between the two.

In message <mailman.0.1377271338.14451.genbrit@rootsweb.com>, singhals <singhals@erols.com> writes: [] >I am fairly neutral on the merits of the idea that further clarity is >required for "4th Quarter 1876", mostly because by the time civil reg I'd have no problem with "4th Quarter 1876". "Dec 1876", however, could mislead, especially if - as could easily happen! - it got separated from the "2a 123" or whatever that most of us recognise as a BMD index format. That was all! >begins in England, I have no one in England to be affected. (-: [I take it that wherever you _do_ have people, doesn't use the "Dec 1876" way of referring to quarters.] > >My point was, there are enough disparities in manners-of-recording that >have to be considered while reading a date that it seems downright >malicious to deliberately elect to create yet another. The "Q2" format is already quite widely used, not least by those here, so it isn't "yet another". > >Standardization works IF AND ONLY IF it can be enforced by something >other than peer pressure. Some folks don't acknowledge the existence of >peers. (g) Indeed! All I was suggesting was that we don't _propagate_ something that is already ambiguous. > >Cheryl -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Radio 4 is one of the reasons being British is good. It's not a subset of Britain - it's almost as if Britain is a subset of Radio 4. - Stephen Fry, in Radio Times, 7-13 June, 2003.

In message <b7om4sFemncU1@mid.individual.net>, Anne Chambers <anne@privacy.net> writes: >J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: > >> >> Interesting that, as well as the third month which is the standard >>way and the first which I have seen, >> someone in this thread (for what seems like a very sensible reason) >>uses the middle month - so all three are >> in use. > >The original post (which I am starting to wish I hadn't made) was a cut I just used it as an example: that's why I deliberately didn't credit you, as you were just quoting the original reference in the approved manner. >& paste from a FreeBMD result and contained all the information needed >to obtain the relevant certificate from the GRO (or whatever they call >themselves now) certificate ordering website. There are plenty of Indeed it did - see above. And any newcomer to the hobby should learn fairly soon that something like "Jun 1888 2a 123" is such a reference. My point (in quoting it) was that if, say, the "2a 123" gets separated, what is left is "Jun 1888",, which could easily mislead. >'newbies guides' available if anyone isn't aware of the FreeBMD >recording convention - and how one records a GRO reference on one's own >personal family tree program is surely optional and subjective. If the >event's not important enough to get the certificate with the exact >date, then anything else is hairsplitting. > >Enough already ! > -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Radio 4 is one of the reasons being British is good. It's not a subset of Britain - it's almost as if Britain is a subset of Radio 4. - Stephen Fry, in Radio Times, 7-13 June, 2003.

Allyson, I realize this post is about 13 years old, but I'm hoping you see this. I'm curious if perhaps your "Henry Francis Corley" died in 1913. If so, then we are related - HFC was my 2nd great grandfather. If this is the case I'd really like to compare notes with you - I've never been able to find out who his parents were. Thanks, Joshua josh carroll 21 @ gmail . com (remove spaces) On Wednesday, February 16, 2000 2:00:00 AM UTC-6, allyson wrote: > Hello everyone, > When I was young I remember my Grandma telling me that my ggrandfather > Henry Francis Corley was a "......... boy" at the turn of the century, > he travelled round the country with a gang of men laying what I thought > she said was electricity cables, fore runner of the National Grid? > Just a snatched conversation from childhood, another shot in the dark. > > BTW I am going to Durham county Records Office on 1/3/2000, any one want > a look up by a newbie, I am a fast learner and will faithfully > transcribe anything I find. > > regards > > Ally P. > All the best signatures are stolen from someone else...but I'm no thief. > > Researching the Family, RAMSHAW and YOUNG in Houghton-Le-Spring, HEAD(S) in > Newcastle upon Tyne, CORLEY/TURNER anywhere and Lancashire, PROUDFOOT and > SURTEES Washington, Tyne and Wear.

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: > > Interesting that, as well as the third month which is the standard way and the first which I have seen, > someone in this thread (for what seems like a very sensible reason) uses the middle month - so all three are > in use. The original post (which I am starting to wish I hadn't made) was a cut & paste from a FreeBMD result and contained all the information needed to obtain the relevant certificate from the GRO (or whatever they call themselves now) certificate ordering website. There are plenty of 'newbies guides' available if anyone isn't aware of the FreeBMD recording convention - and how one records a GRO reference on one's own personal family tree program is surely optional and subjective. If the event's not important enough to get the certificate with the exact date, then anything else is hairsplitting. Enough already ! -- Anne Chambers South Australia anne dot chambers at bigpond dot com

Found a 75 yr-old Mary Hanson in Shoreditch Workhouse in 1841 census: HO107 piece 707 folio 9/14 page 13 If it helps... "Norma Clay" <startrekgrannie@gmail.com> wrote in message news:f4a59990-c83a-467b-a03c-60cbe0c1916d@googlegroups.com... > On Monday, August 5, 2013 10:40:10 AM UTC-5, Jill Dyke wrote: >> I have just received the death certificate for John HANSON a 76 year old >> >> shoemaker, who died 11th December 1844 but have been unable to find this >> man >> >> in the 1841 census. >> >> >> >> The death was registered in the Whitechapel district, sub-district Mile >> End >> >> New Town, Middlesex. >> >> Place of death Workhouse, Charles Street, Mile End New Town >> >> Informant Mary Hayes Nurse present at the death Christchurch Workhouse >> her >> >> Mark X >> >> >> >> I am hoping this is my 5*great grandfather John HANSON who married Mary >> >> JOSLIN at St Mary Whitechapel, Middlesex the 30th November 1790 and >> baptised >> >> 3 children at St Mary Whitechapel. Mary (my 4*great grandmother who >> married >> >> James SWIGG) bapt. 23 Nov 1791, John bapt. 27 January 1793 and James >> bapt. >> >> 12 July 1795 & buried 1 Nov 1796. >> >> >> >> Hoping someone can find John in 1841 >> >> >> >> Jill > > rently 1650 is too far back for those websites. Alas I have waited too > long to make the trip to Fishguard as my health is poor. Hoping I have > instilled my love of ancestry in my children who will make the trip some > day.

On 23 Aug at 15:57, Norma Clay <startrekgrannie@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sunday, July 28, 2013 10:25:28 AM UTC-5, Norma Clay wrote: > > I ask before, I ask again. Is anyone here from Fish Guard, Wales ? > > My 5x great Grandfather left there in 1650. Fishguard is in Pembrokeshire. Rootsweb provides two mailing lists for Pembrokeshire. I suggest you also try both of: WLS-PEMBROKESHIRE-L at <http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/intl/WLS/WLS-PEMBROKESHIRE.html> and DYFED-L at <http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/intl/WLS/DYFED.html>. -- Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: > In message<mailman.2.1377033174.2882.genbrit@rootsweb.com>, singhals > <singhals@erols.com> writes: >> >> >> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: > [] >>>>> Can we as a hobby/profession start to abandon using only a month to >>>>> refer to a quarter, when further precision isn't known? I'd suggest any of >>>>> >>>>> Apr-Jun 1891 >>>>> 1891, Apr-Jun >>>>> Q2 1891 >>>>> 1891Q2 > [] >> Aren't there enough things the newbie (and the oldie) need to remember >> about boundary changes and calendar changes and how Regnal dates and >> the Quaker dating system(s) differ from the Gregorian/Julian and why >> Uncle James' baptism is down as Jacobus ... without tossing in an >> unnecessary difference? Even if /this/ change seems like a good idea at >> the time. >> >> Cheryl >> >> > I wasn't sure whether you are agreeing with me or disagreeing. I'm only > suggesting we use something like Q2 rather than Jun, which should _help_ > not only newcomers but anyone; all I'm suggesting is that if we say Q2, > it is less _likely_ that, further down the line, it'll lose the > "quarter" information, whereas if we continue to say Jun, it can easily > become corrupted into meaning the month. > > Interesting that, as well as the third month which is the standard way > and the first which I have seen, someone in this thread (for what seems > like a very sensible reason) uses the middle month - so all three are in > use. I am fairly neutral on the merits of the idea that further clarity is required for "4th Quarter 1876", mostly because by the time civil reg begins in England, I have no one in England to be affected. My point was, there are enough disparities in manners-of-recording that have to be considered while reading a date that it seems downright malicious to deliberately elect to create yet another. Standardization works IF AND ONLY IF it can be enforced by something other than peer pressure. Some folks don't acknowledge the existence of peers. (g) Cheryl

On 23 Aug at 7:46, "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote: > I wasn't sure whether you are agreeing with me or disagreeing. I'm > only suggesting we use something like Q2 rather than Jun, which should > _help_ not only newcomers but anyone; all I'm suggesting is that if we > say Q2, it is less _likely_ that, further down the line, it'll lose > the "quarter" information, whereas if we continue to say Jun, it can > easily become corrupted into meaning the month. > > Interesting that, as well as the third month which is the standard way > and the first which I have seen, someone in this thread (for what > seems like a very sensible reason) uses the middle month - so all > three are in use. My problem is that my genealogy program, on which I store all my data, does not allow the use of Qn for a date. So I definitely use the middle month but prefixed by circa, which the program does accept. -- Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/

On Monday, August 5, 2013 10:40:10 AM UTC-5, Jill Dyke wrote: > I have just received the death certificate for John HANSON a 76 year old > > shoemaker, who died 11th December 1844 but have been unable to find this man > > in the 1841 census. > > > > The death was registered in the Whitechapel district, sub-district Mile End > > New Town, Middlesex. > > Place of death Workhouse, Charles Street, Mile End New Town > > Informant Mary Hayes Nurse present at the death Christchurch Workhouse her > > Mark X > > > > I am hoping this is my 5*great grandfather John HANSON who married Mary > > JOSLIN at St Mary Whitechapel, Middlesex the 30th November 1790 and baptised > > 3 children at St Mary Whitechapel. Mary (my 4*great grandmother who married > > James SWIGG) bapt. 23 Nov 1791, John bapt. 27 January 1793 and James bapt. > > 12 July 1795 & buried 1 Nov 1796. > > > > Hoping someone can find John in 1841 > > > > Jill rently 1650 is too far back for those websites. Alas I have waited too long to make the trip to Fishguard as my health is poor. Hoping I have instilled my love of ancestry in my children who will make the trip some day.

On Sunday, July 28, 2013 10:25:28 AM UTC-5, Norma Clay wrote: > I ask before, I ask again. Is anyone here from Fish Guard, Wales ? My 5x great Grandfather left there in 1650.

In message <mailman.2.1377033174.2882.genbrit@rootsweb.com>, singhals <singhals@erols.com> writes: > > >J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: [] >>>> Can we as a hobby/profession start to abandon using only a month to >>>> refer to a quarter, when further precision isn't known? I'd suggest any of >>>> >>>> Apr-Jun 1891 >>>> 1891, Apr-Jun >>>> Q2 1891 >>>> 1891Q2 [] >Aren't there enough things the newbie (and the oldie) need to remember >about boundary changes and calendar changes and how Regnal dates and >the Quaker dating system(s) differ from the Gregorian/Julian and why >Uncle James' baptism is down as Jacobus ... without tossing in an >unnecessary difference? Even if /this/ change seems like a good idea at >the time. > >Cheryl > > I wasn't sure whether you are agreeing with me or disagreeing. I'm only suggesting we use something like Q2 rather than Jun, which should _help_ not only newcomers but anyone; all I'm suggesting is that if we say Q2, it is less _likely_ that, further down the line, it'll lose the "quarter" information, whereas if we continue to say Jun, it can easily become corrupted into meaning the month. Interesting that, as well as the third month which is the standard way and the first which I have seen, someone in this thread (for what seems like a very sensible reason) uses the middle month - so all three are in use. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf It is dangerous to be sincere, unless you are also stupid. - George Bernard Shaw

On Saturday, August 25, 2001 2:47:58 PM UTC+1, Nina Harkey wrote: > Am interested to know if anyone has researched, or has information on > either of these families. > > Andrew Jasper Perkins left for USA approximately 1875 or so and > settled in New Jersey. > > Letford Edward Goring Walker m. Sarah Ann Morris also went to the > states/ New Jersey a bit before.....around 1870 or so. > > The son of Andrew Perkins FREDERICK (b. November 09, 1870) and the > daughter of Let Walker CECELIA (b. November 07, 1873) married, > possibly in new Jersey, USA. > > Both the Walker and the Perkins family lived in Smethwick. They > attended St Paul's church, some are burried there. Some of them > worked at Chance Brothers Glass works. > > Does anyone have connection to these people? > > Thanks in advance for any replies. hi please join smethwick heritage page on facebook and send a message to Mandy Mix-up Southall

The Chief wrote: > Two possibilities to explain your mysterious "Lady" that don't seem to have been mentioned before: > > 1) A simple misunderstanding Both then and even today, the wife or daughter of any gentleman can rightfully > claim to be, or be said to be, a "lady". Indeed, it is common to see the wife of gentlemen so described on > census returns, etc. It is easy to confuse such a lady with a "Lady", as in titled lady. So, I can easily > imagine a miscommunication where the generous donor for the RAF building was described as a "lady", and > this was misunderstood as being a claim to hold a title. > And, of course, formal birth notices - "the lady of John Doe, Esq, of a son (or daughter)" -- Anne Chambers South Australia anne dot chambers at bigpond dot com

On 22/08/2013 03:07, Charles Ellson wrote: > On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 00:48:50 +0100, Renia <renia@otenet.gr> wrote: > > Giving the false impression that your credit is good was far from a > modern invention in the 19th century. Of course it wasn't. But that's what the Burke's books and directories were for and why aristocrats knew their genealogies. It wasn't for snob value, but as a means of reference for lawyers and others to uncover such fraudsters. Local shopkeepers usually knew their local aristocrats, who often shopped on tick, the bill only being paid out of their estate. If the local shopkeeper didn't know a person who claimed to be titled, more fool them if they gave them their goods on tick. >>> As for "The style or title of Lady is part of one's name", that >>> is only correct with titles or names but not with styles, >> >> If a woman has the style of Lady Smith, this tells us the style is >> by right of her husband, that she is the wife of a titled person or >> a knight. If she is styled Lady Mary Smith, then the style is her >> own, something she has inherited as the daughter of a peer, or >> something she has been granted by the monarch. >> > No, if she is female and has the surname Smith then that is enough. > It might not be acceptable to people in some social circles but it > isn't forbidden. Nope, if the title was her husband's then she was known as Lady Husbands-Surname. If the title was her own, then she was known as Lady Mary Husbands-Surname, at least, on written documents. In social occasions, she would be referred to as Lady Husbands-Surname, or Lady Mary, depending on the origin of he title. There were plenty of etquette books around which made this quite clear. Even in my own lifetime, I, myself, have been referred to as Mrs Peter Simmonds which is actually the correct form.

I have Francis PASCOE born 1819 in Constantine, Cornwall, England Married Belinda MINERS born 7 Feb 1819 in Ladock, Cornwall, England their first Child Belinda PASCOE was born 1841 in Falmouth, Cornwall, England I can't find a marriage for Francis and Belinda, any ideas, I do have the rest of their children, just no marriage -- Cheers Jenny I DON'T do Mornings!!!!! Photos http://www.flickr.com/photos/jen_in_brisbane/ Family Tree http://minerstree.tribalpages.com/

On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 11:56:48 -0700 (PDT), The Chief <the.chieftain@ymail.com> wrote: >[...] In this instance, I am suggesting [...] she, > or someone else, may have - entirely > correctly - described her as a "lady". > In this sense meaning the wife/widow/daughter > of a gentleman. This is often the case on > census documents, and is entirely proper. > However, it can be misunderstood > by the unwary as being a claim to > be "Lady xyz", and so the unwary can go > on to refer to "Lady XYZ", when > XYZ never said or claimed such a thing. Rather like the partner of my half-ggg-uncle being listed with his surname rather than her own when she registered his death in 1843. She may have told the registrar that it was her surname, or the conversation might have been along the lines of: She: "My man is dead" Reg: "His name?" She: "Xxxxx Yyyyy" Reg: "And your name?" She: "Nnnnn" Registrar notes "Nnnnn Yyyyy" as informant She makes her mark, not aware of the error. The deceased's will refers to her with her own name, as does the Death Duties paperwork. When she marries, she does not mention having been known as Yyyyy.