Tickettyboo <tickettyboo@mail2oops.com> wrote: > On 2013-07-08 10:57:01 +0000, Geoff Pearson said: > >> "Geoff Pearson" <gspearson1647@hotmail.com> wrote in message > >> news:b3vdubFg2m9U1@mid.individual.net... >>>>> "Tickettyboo" <tickettyboo@mail2oops.com> wrote in message >> >>>>> news:b3u6i6F8d6uU1@mid.individual.net... >>>> I am way out of my usual area here <I have a long line of Ag Labs and >>>> >>> Anchor Smiths and haven't ever needed to venture up the 'posh end'> >>>>>>> Trying to help a friend who is researching the history of a >>>>>>> previous >>> owner of a military sword, one John Duncan Bertie Fulton (1876-1915) >>>> In amongst the masses of paperwork he has collected about this man's >>>> >>> career etc is confirmation from The Central Chancery if the Orders >>>>>>> of >>> Knighthood saying that, in 1914, he was amongst those "To be >>>>>>> Ordinary >>> Members of the Military Division of the Third Class, >>>>>>> or Companions, of >>> the Most Honourable Order of the Bath". >>>>>>>>>>> In the 1911 census he is shown as "single" aged 34. Might there >>>>>>>>>>> be two >> John Fultons? >>> Hope this is all of interest. I'm still puzzled as to when and why he >>> > got the CB - today a very elevated award. >>> ROYAL FLYING CORPS. >> Military Wing, Major John D. B. Fulton, >> C.B., Royal Artillery, Chief Inspector, >> Aeronautical Inspection Department, is appointed >> to the Reserve. Dated 17th December, >> 1913 > > I have just skimmed though the 4 page obit published in The Aeroplane, > Nov 1915 which seems to say he was one of the first aviators (flying > licence no 27). and this part seems to say 'why' he was given the C.B. > <quote> > In May 1912 he was appointed to the newly formed Central Flying School as > an Instructor and was put in charge of the workshops, where he did for > the mechanical side of the R.F.C. much what Major Trenchard […] did for the personnel. > <snip> > In December 1913 he became Chief Inspector of Material R.F.C. and for his > services was given a C.B. > <snip> > In 1914, the Aeronautical Inspection Department was formed and placed > entirely under his control. > </quote> > Extract from Jane's All The World's Aircraft 1913. <quote> In 1912 the Royal Flying Corps was instituted. It consists of two wings, navy and army, with a central flying school at Upavon, Salisbury Plain. The staff is as follows:— Commandant: Paine, Capt. G.M., M.V.O., R.N. Secretary: Lidderdale, Asst. Paymaster J.H., R.N. Medical Officer: Lithgow, Capt. E.G.R., R.A.M.C. Quarter-Master: Kirby, Hon. Lieut. (Qr.-Mr.), V.C. Instructor in Theory and Construction: Cook, Lieut.-Col. H. R., R.A. Instructor in Meteorology: Dobson, G., Esq. Instructors in Flying: Fulton, Capt. J. D. B., R.A. Gerrard, Capt. E. L., R.M. Shepherd, Lieut. P. A., R.N. Trenchard, Mt. Maj. H. M., D.S.O., R. Sc. Fus. Salmond, Capt. J. M., R. Lanc. R. Inspector of Engines: Randall, Eng.-Lieut. C. R. J., R.N. <end quote> <http://freepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~wakefield/history/34815-h/34815-h.htm> -- wtwjgc (Joe) <http://welcometowakefield.org.uk/>

Tickettyboo wrote: > I am way out of my usual area here <I have a long line of Ag Labs and Anchor Smiths and haven't ever needed > to venture up the 'posh end'> > > Trying to help a friend who is researching the history of a previous owner of a military sword, one John > Duncan Bertie Fulton (1876-1915) > In amongst the masses of paperwork he has collected about this man's career etc is confirmation from The > Central Chancery if the Orders of Knighthood saying that, in 1914, he was amongst those "To be Ordinary > Members of the Military Division of the Third Class, or Companions, of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath". > > Okay, so that is confirmed, but would this entitle his wife/widow to style herself as 'Lady Fulton'? > > I can't find a record of this man marrying but various articles on the net indicate that the Fulton Block, in > RAF Cosford was built c 1938 and named in his memory. The funding of £250,000 was said to come from his widow, > Lady Fulton. I haven't yet found a marriage for him and there was no mention of a widow on the CWGC site, nor > in a four page obit about him in 'The Aeroplane' vol IX, no 20, dated 17th November 1915, so its just not > adding up at the moment. > > Supplementary question - His probate record says Administration (with Will limited) to an attorney. Am I > correct in thinking that the 'limited' relates to the Administration (perhaps not all of the estate was clear > to go into probate and they allowed 'some' of his effects to be adminstered) , and not a comment about the > actual will? I am hoping that a will may shed some light on whether or not he married. > Companions of the Order of the Bath do not take the title of 'Sir' (only Knights do) so his widow would not be entitled to call herself Lady Fulton. If she had a title in her own right, she would call herself Lady (forename) Fulton -- Anne Chambers South Australia anne dot chambers at bigpond dot com

Tickettyboo <tickettyboo@mail2oops.com> wrote: > On 2013-07-07 22:44:33 +0000, Charles Ellson said: > >>> I am way out of my usual area here <I have a long line of Ag Labs and >>> Anchor Smiths and haven't ever needed to venture up the 'posh end'> >>>>> Trying to help a friend who is researching the history of a previous >>> owner of a military sword, one John Duncan Bertie Fulton (1876-1915) >>> In amongst the masses of paperwork he has collected about this man's >>> career etc is confirmation from The Central Chancery if the Orders of >>> Knighthood saying that, in 1914, he was amongst those "To be Ordinary >>> Members of the Military Division of the Third Class, or Companions, of >>> the Most Honourable Order of the Bath". >>>>> Okay, so that is confirmed, but would this entitle his wife/widow to >>> style herself as 'Lady Fulton'? >>>> IMU there isn't actually any prohibition on a woman styling herself as >> "Lady XYZ" as long as there is no fraudulent intent or actual/implied >> false claim to anything titular other than the simple use of "Lady" >> before a normal variation of her name. If I've read various sources >> correctly then a mere Companion (distinct from a Knight Companion) is >> not a Knight so while she might have been free to be a "Lady" her >> husband wasn't a "Sir". > > Thanks. She seems to be billed as Lady Fulton in the various things I > have read about the building of the Fulton Block, but there again, she > was forking out £250,000 in the 1930s so I suppose the recipients would > have called her anything she liked :-) A bit more background info you most probably have already found:- Captain John Duncan Bertie Fulton RFA Date: 15 November 1910. Used a Farman Biplane at Salisbury Plain. He was awarded the third R.Ae.C. Special certificate on 6 December 1911. Later a Lieutenant Colonel and Chief Inspector of the Aeronautical Inspection Department of the Royal Flying Corps when he died 11 November 1915. This from <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pilots_awarded_an_Aviator's_Certificate_by_the_Royal_Aero_Club_in_1910> According to 'Flight' magazine he left £6,191 when he died. <http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CDQQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.flightglobal.com%2Fpdfarchive%2Fview%2F1916%2F1916%2520-%25200181.html&ei=umjaUd-AMYLa0QW63YDAAQ&usg=AFQjCNGKQYUUUE7_3AspY6oh-djj-y4K7Q&sig2=Iwn9c-C2gEBWE8cVujG1cA&bvm=bv.48705608,d.d2k> -- wtwjgc (Joe) <http://welcometowakefield.org.uk/>

On 2013-07-07 22:44:33 +0000, Charles Ellson said: >> I am way out of my usual area here <I have a long line of Ag Labs and >> Anchor Smiths and haven't ever needed to venture up the 'posh end'> >> >> Trying to help a friend who is researching the history of a previous >> owner of a military sword, one John Duncan Bertie Fulton (1876-1915) >> In amongst the masses of paperwork he has collected about this man's >> career etc is confirmation from The Central Chancery if the Orders of >> Knighthood saying that, in 1914, he was amongst those "To be Ordinary >> Members of the Military Division of the Third Class, or Companions, of >> the Most Honourable Order of the Bath". >> >> Okay, so that is confirmed, but would this entitle his wife/widow to >> style herself as 'Lady Fulton'? >> > IMU there isn't actually any prohibition on a woman styling herself as > "Lady XYZ" as long as there is no fraudulent intent or actual/implied > false claim to anything titular other than the simple use of "Lady" > before a normal variation of her name. If I've read various sources > correctly then a mere Companion (distinct from a Knight Companion) is > not a Knight so while she might have been free to be a "Lady" her > husband wasn't a "Sir". Thanks. She seems to be billed as Lady Fulton in the various things I have read about the building of the Fulton Block, but there again, she was forking out £250,000 in the 1930s so I suppose the recipients would have called her anything she liked :-) -- Tickettyboo

On 2013-07-07 22:55:11 +0000, Anne Chambers said: > Tickettyboo wrote: >> I am way out of my usual area here <I have a long line of Ag Labs and >> Anchor Smiths and haven't ever needed >> to venture up the 'posh end'> >> >> Trying to help a friend who is researching the history of a previous >> owner of a military sword, one John >> Duncan Bertie Fulton (1876-1915) >> In amongst the masses of paperwork he has collected about this man's >> career etc is confirmation from The >> Central Chancery if the Orders of Knighthood saying that, in 1914, he >> was amongst those "To be Ordinary >> Members of the Military Division of the Third Class, or Companions, of >> the Most Honourable Order of the Bath". >> >> Okay, so that is confirmed, but would this entitle his wife/widow to >> style herself as 'Lady Fulton'? >> >> > Companions of the Order of the Bath do not take the title of 'Sir' > (only Knights do) so his widow would not be entitled to call herself > Lady Fulton. If she had a title in her own right, she would call > herself Lady (forename) Fulton Thanks, that is what I thought from what I read on the net. -- Tickettyboo

On 2013-07-01 15:51:28 +0000, Ann Watson said: > On 30/06/2013 5:04 PM, ecunningham wrote: > >> Matt: Hate to jump into the middle of this but need a >> clarification. Do you KNOW he was drafted. The card you are >> referring to is a REGISTRATION CARD. It does not mean he was >> drafted. If he was, get his military records (if they didn't burn >> in St. Louis). However, you needed this card to work during the >> ww1 years and could be stopped on the street by patriotic bullies >> and made to show the card. Many men never registered but did serve. >> ecunningham@att.net >> > I find this interesting because the last trace I've found of one of my > grandfather's half uncles (who had been born in Guelph, Canada and had > been living on the west coast of the US since at least 1905) is a US > draft registration card dated September 12, 1918. He's down as a > "non-declarant alien, citizen or subject of Great Britain". I often > wonder what the chances were that he actually served in WW I. > > AW Ancestry have a database (with images) of US Headstones Applications for Military Veterans 1925 -1963. I found records for Charles Henry in there which gave details of his service, so there 'may' be records for the person you are looking for. I am happy to look , if you don't have access to those records. -- Tickettyboo

On 2013-06-30 22:21:45 +0000, mllt1@le.ac.uk said: > On Sunday, June 30, 2013 10:04:14 PM UTC+1, ecunningham wrote: > >> Matt: Hate to jump into the middle of this but need a clarification. >> Do> you KNOW he was drafted. The card you are referring to is a >> REGISTRATION> CARD. It does not mean he was drafted. If he was, get his >> military> records (if they didn't burn in St. Louis). However, you >> needed this> card to work during the ww1 years and could be stopped on >> the street by> patriotic bullies and made to show the card. Many men >> never registered> but did serve. >> ecunningh***.net > > A good question - all we know is that Tickettyboo's original post said > 'a month later he was enlisted'. It's one of the circumstances one > would like to know more about - was he conscripted unwillingly, or did > he accept the draft more or less willingly, or did he simply volunteer > (the last seems unlikely - his statements in the draft card do not > point to much desire for service.) If Tickettyboo knows anything more > it would be interesting to hear it. > > Matt Tompkins Sorry I didn't back back to this sooner, the here and now has been demanding my attention so the long dead have taken a back seat. Charles Victor HENRY is a twiglet on my tree, he was the son of one of my Granda's cousins. Until I started researching my family history I had no idea of their existence so have no personal knowledge of them. His grandparents and assorted children (including Charles' father) emigrated from Shetland to Canada c1873. Charles' parents married in New Brunswick in 1891, they had 2 children (that I know of) Hazel born 1892 and Charles born 1896. Charles' father died in 1899 and his widow re-married in 1904. One of Charles' uncles had left Canada and settled in Maine with his family. According to the 1920 US census, Charles was living with them and the form says he had been in the US since 1912. The same 1920 census has him, still classified as an alien, by 1930 the entry in the citizenship column of the census say Pa (which I believe means he had submitted the papers for citizenship, but I could be wrong). I don't have an actual service record for Charles (if anyone can point me to where I may find one, I'll go look), I do have a record from the Maine-WW1-Soldiers index which says he entered service 25 July 1918 and was honourably discharged 24 Jul 1919. When he died in 1956, his widow (who, just to complicate matters, was also his cousin) applied for a headstone to be paid for by the Govt and that form confirms his service dates and gives his service number as 3160782 and says he served in the Army - 83 Co. Transportation Corps. He was buried in Village Cemetery, Gray, Maine. So, yes, I am sure he served in the US Army, but I have no idea if he did that voluntarily or was conscripted. Is there anyway to tell? -- Tickettyboo

On Sun, 7 Jul 2013 22:57:26 +0100, Tickettyboo <tickettyboo@mail2oops.com> wrote: >I am way out of my usual area here <I have a long line of Ag Labs and >Anchor Smiths and haven't ever needed to venture up the 'posh end'> > >Trying to help a friend who is researching the history of a previous >owner of a military sword, one John Duncan Bertie Fulton (1876-1915) >In amongst the masses of paperwork he has collected about this man's >career etc is confirmation from The Central Chancery if the Orders of >Knighthood saying that, in 1914, he was amongst those "To be Ordinary >Members of the Military Division of the Third Class, or Companions, of >the Most Honourable Order of the Bath". > >Okay, so that is confirmed, but would this entitle his wife/widow to >style herself as 'Lady Fulton'? > IMU there isn't actually any prohibition on a woman styling herself as "Lady XYZ" as long as there is no fraudulent intent or actual/implied false claim to anything titular other than the simple use of "Lady" before a normal variation of her name. If I've read various sources correctly then a mere Companion (distinct from a Knight Companion) is not a Knight so while she might have been free to be a "Lady" her husband wasn't a "Sir". >I can't find a record of this man marrying but various articles on the >net indicate that the Fulton Block, in RAF Cosford was built c 1938 and > named in his memory. The funding of £250,000 was said to come from his >widow, Lady Fulton. I haven't yet found a marriage for him and there >was no mention of a widow on the CWGC site, nor in a four page obit >about him in 'The Aeroplane' vol IX, no 20, dated 17th November 1915, >so its just not adding up at the moment. > >Supplementary question - His probate record says Administration (with >Will limited) to an attorney. Am I correct in thinking that the >'limited' relates to the Administration (perhaps not all of the estate >was clear to go into probate and they allowed 'some' of his effects to >be adminstered) , and not a comment about the actual will? I am hoping >that a will may shed some light on whether or not he married.

I am way out of my usual area here <I have a long line of Ag Labs and Anchor Smiths and haven't ever needed to venture up the 'posh end'> Trying to help a friend who is researching the history of a previous owner of a military sword, one John Duncan Bertie Fulton (1876-1915) In amongst the masses of paperwork he has collected about this man's career etc is confirmation from The Central Chancery if the Orders of Knighthood saying that, in 1914, he was amongst those "To be Ordinary Members of the Military Division of the Third Class, or Companions, of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath". Okay, so that is confirmed, but would this entitle his wife/widow to style herself as 'Lady Fulton'? I can't find a record of this man marrying but various articles on the net indicate that the Fulton Block, in RAF Cosford was built c 1938 and named in his memory. The funding of £250,000 was said to come from his widow, Lady Fulton. I haven't yet found a marriage for him and there was no mention of a widow on the CWGC site, nor in a four page obit about him in 'The Aeroplane' vol IX, no 20, dated 17th November 1915, so its just not adding up at the moment. Supplementary question - His probate record says Administration (with Will limited) to an attorney. Am I correct in thinking that the 'limited' relates to the Administration (perhaps not all of the estate was clear to go into probate and they allowed 'some' of his effects to be adminstered) , and not a comment about the actual will? I am hoping that a will may shed some light on whether or not he married. -- Tickettyboo

A few years ago I wrote to the HR dept of Trinity Mirror asking if they still had a file on my grandfather who was a press photographer with the Daily Mirror in the first decade of the 20th century. The buggers didn't even bother to acknowledge my letter which was particularly annoying given that my father worked for them for 51 years. It contrasts with Cadburys who will (or did) supply a copy of the record card of workers from the 19th century. Brian Austin <chrisj.doran%proemail.co.uk@gtempaccount.com> wrote in message news:65cb62df-36dc-4108-ab77-6a5c0d4acae9@googlegroups.com... > On Friday, 5 July 2013 12:57:18 UTC+1, MB wrote: >> >> Has anyone posted that the Daily Mail archive is now on Gale and is >> >> available on free trial until later this month. >> >> >> >> http://www.galeuk.com/trials/dailymail-opentrial/ > > They say it's only available to institutions, not individuals, so you need > to see if your library (for example) is taking up the offer. It runs until > 20th July. > > Chris

chrisj.doran%proemail.co.uk@gtempaccount.com wrote: > On Friday, 5 July 2013 12:57:18 UTC+1, MB wrote: >> >> Has anyone posted that the Daily Mail archive is now on Gale and is >> >> available on free trial until later this month. >> >> >> >> http://www.galeuk.com/trials/dailymail-opentrial/ > > They say it's only available to institutions, not individuals, so you need to see if your library (for example) is taking up the offer. It runs until 20th July. > > Chris > I registered as Institution 'Home' position 'CEO' with no trouble ;) -- Anne Chambers South Australia anne dot chambers at bigpond dot com

On 06/07/2013 22:14, Anne Chambers wrote: > chrisj.doran%proemail.co.uk@gtempaccount.com wrote: >> On Friday, 5 July 2013 12:57:18 UTC+1, MB wrote: >>> >>> Has anyone posted that the Daily Mail archive is now on Gale and is >>> >>> available on free trial until later this month. >>> >>> >>> >>> http://www.galeuk.com/trials/dailymail-opentrial/ >> >> They say it's only available to institutions, not individuals, so you >> need to see if your library (for example) is taking up the offer. It >> runs until 20th July. >> >> Chris >> > I registered as Institution 'Home' position 'CEO' with no trouble ;) > I just put my name and EMail address with dashes in the other two fields.

> > I've watched quite a few of the WDYTYA programs and I've been suspicious > of a few. For the most part I've felt they were genuine. Many have said > they found the experience more moving than they expected and I can > believe that. > > I > > As for getting angry, I'm afraid I can't see that unless those > responsible are still alive. It just concerns me that so few actors and show biz people seem ever to have learnt any history. Common sense would show that people generally didn't go into the workhouse unless their home conditions were really desperate, and generaqlly they were better fed, better housed, better cared for medically, and probably less exposed to physical and moral dangers than they would have been, or actually had been, outside. True, they lacked television, mod cons, designer clothes, and the liberty to misbehave, start a boy band and (save the mark) be a Selebritty - but most would have lacked these opportunites outside the workhouse too. No one NOW would want to be sent to the workhouse, but thibnga were different then - and adults at least had to apply for admission when they had exhausted all other possibilities. For these luvvies to emote all over the screen as if their own ancestors had been singled out for harsh treatment, rather than being rescued from worse lives, is not really acceptable. EVE Author of The McLaughlin Guides for Family Historians Secretary, Bucks Genealogical Society

On Friday, 5 July 2013 12:57:18 UTC+1, MB wrote: > > Has anyone posted that the Daily Mail archive is now on Gale and is > > available on free trial until later this month. > > > > http://www.galeuk.com/trials/dailymail-opentrial/ They say it's only available to institutions, not individuals, so you need to see if your library (for example) is taking up the offer. It runs until 20th July. Chris

Anne Chambers wrote: > Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote: >> We (another interested party and myself) have been unable to find any >> record of Juliana Haywood's death in 1897/8. > > > National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations) 1898 > Haywood Juliana of 50 rue-Joinville Boulogne-sur-Mer France Widow died 13th December 1897 Probate London 1 > March to Celia Mary Helen Dashwood Widow Effects £86 172 7d > should be £86 17s 7d -- Anne Chambers South Australia anne dot chambers at bigpond dot com

Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote: > We (another interested party and myself) have been unable to find any > record of Juliana Haywood's death in 1897/8. National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations) 1898 Haywood Juliana of 50 rue-Joinville Boulogne-sur-Mer France Widow died 13th December 1897 Probate London 1 March to Celia Mary Helen Dashwood Widow Effects £86 172 7d -- Anne Chambers South Australia anne dot chambers at bigpond dot com

On 5 Jul at 22:42, "Steven Gibbs" <stevenng4@sgibbs1.freeserve.co.uk> wrote: > "Tim Powys-Lybbe" <tim@powys.org> wrote in message > news:mpro.mphfao0evzyrb007r.tim@powys.org... > > We (another interested party and myself) have been unable to find > > any record of Juliana Haywood's death in 1897/8. > > > > Burial Date: 16 Dec 1897 Burial Place: Charlton Near Dover, Kent, > > England Indexing Project (Batch) Number: I01383-9 > > > > Any views on where else I might find any record of her death? > > I would have thought the Charlton burial register might contain a > clue. The batch number looks like genuine extractions. Yes, occasionally there are useful notes in margins. Thanks and I'll follow that up as it might given another snippet to her life. -- Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/

On 5 Jul at 22:41, Charles Ellson <ce11son@yahoo.ca> wrote: > On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 22:20:48 +0100, Tim Powys-Lybbe <tim@powys.org> > wrote: > > > We (another interested party and myself) have been unable to find > > any record of Juliana Haywood's death in 1897/8. > > > > She, her maiden name was Gibbons was born c.1821 from the censuses > > and married, as his second wife, James Haywood on May 1866 (Burke > > corroborated by FreeBMD). James died in 1866, she appeared in the > > 1871 census in Folkestone and then vanishes from all save > > FamilySearch which has her burial as: > > > > Name: Juliana Haywood Gender: Female Burial Date: 16 Dec 1897 > > Burial Place: Charlton Near Dover, Kent, England Indexing Project > > (Batch) Number: I01383-9 System Origin: England-EASy GS Film > > number: 1786211 > > > > Burke, that unreferenced source, has her as dying on 13 Dec 1898. > > > > None of these GRO based databases show her death at all: FreeBMD, > > TheGenealogist and FindMyPast. Nothing found on Scotland's People > > either. > > > > The Kent Registration Services at > > <http://www.kent.gov.uk/KCC.ROIS.Web.Sites.Public/Pages/DeathSearch.aspx> > > does not show her death either. > > > > I have not tried Ancestry though it does show her will for 1897; I > > might go to the local library tomorrow. > > > If it saves you the journey; from the PRFD index :- "HAYWOOD, Juliana > of 50 rue Joinville Boulogne sur Mer France widow died 13 December > 1897 Probate London 1 March to Cecilia Mary Helen Dashwood widow > Effects £86 17s 7d" Many thanks and just the job and it makes sense. One of Juliana's step daughters died in Boulogne in 1879, this step-daughter was the first, but childless, wife of my gt-grandfather. Cecilia Mary Helen has to have been another of the step-daughters, having been born a Haywood in 1849. -- Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/

"Tim Powys-Lybbe" <tim@powys.org> wrote in message news:mpro.mphfao0evzyrb007r.tim@powys.org... > We (another interested party and myself) have been unable to find any > record of Juliana Haywood's death in 1897/8. > > Burial Date: 16 Dec 1897 > Burial Place: Charlton Near Dover, Kent, England > Indexing Project (Batch) Number: I01383-9 > > Any views on where else I might find any record of her death? I would have thought the Charlton burial register might contain a clue. The batch number looks like genuine extractions.

On Fri, 5 Jul 2013 22:20:48 +0100, Tim Powys-Lybbe <tim@powys.org> wrote: >We (another interested party and myself) have been unable to find any >record of Juliana Haywood's death in 1897/8. > >She, her maiden name was Gibbons was born c.1821 from the censuses and >married, as his second wife, James Haywood on May 1866 (Burke >corroborated by FreeBMD). James died in 1866, she appeared in the 1871 >census in Folkestone and then vanishes from all save FamilySearch which >has her burial as: > >Name: Juliana Haywood >Gender: Female >Burial Date: 16 Dec 1897 >Burial Place: Charlton Near Dover, Kent, England >Indexing Project (Batch) Number: I01383-9 >System Origin: England-EASy >GS Film number: 1786211 > >Burke, that unreferenced source, has her as dying on 13 Dec 1898. > >None of these GRO based databases show her death at all: FreeBMD, >TheGenealogist and FindMyPast. Nothing found on Scotland's People >either. > >The Kent Registration Services at ><http://www.kent.gov.uk/KCC.ROIS.Web.Sites.Public/Pages/DeathSearch.aspx> >does not show her death either. > >I have not tried Ancestry though it does show her will for 1897; I might >go to the local library tomorrow. > If it saves you the journey; from the PRFD index :- "HAYWOOD, Juliana of 50 rue Joinville Boulogne sur Mer France widow died 13 December 1897 Probate London 1 March to Cecilia Mary Helen Dashwood widow Effects £86 17s 7d" >She may have died abroad. > >Any views on where else I might find any record of her death?