The following have been added to the index: Lincoln Registration District (Rural parishes) All 1871-1911 unless otherwise stated: Metheringham, Navenby, Nettleham, Nocton, Normanby by Spital, North Carlton, North Hykeham, Owmby by Spital, Potterhanworth, Rand, Reepham, Riseholme, Saxby cum Owmby, Saxilby to Sep 1911 - next register missing, Scampton, Scothern and Skellingthorpe. 9,141 marriages now in this spreadsheet. Horncastle Registration District - all 1851-1911 unless otherwise stated: Asgarby, Ashby Puerorum (1837-1911), Asterby, Bag Enderby (1837-1911), Baumber (register closed in 1910). Gainsborough Registration District marriage spreadsheet updated. "Northolm" had been typed into the parish column instead of "Northorpe". Anne Anne Cole, President, Lincolnshire Family History Society Duncalf(e)/Duncuff/Duncuft One-name Study GOONS member 513 http://www.one-name.org/profiles/duncalf.html http://duncalfonenamestudy.tribalpages.com/ Lincolnshire Post 1837 Marriage Index http://mi.lincolnshiremarriages.org.uk/ Lincolnshire Family History Society http://www.lincolnshirefhs.org.uk

Charles the second son of James & Elizabeth Philo was born on 29 August 1773 and baptized on 12 September 1773 at St Nicholas, East Dereham Charles was apprenticed to Edward Bracebridge a Watch Finisher of St James, Clerkenwell for 7 years on 22 May 1786 for the consideration of £8. Banns for a marriage between Charles Philo and Mary Bishop were published on 9th, 16th & 23rd February 1794 at St. Martins in the Fields, Westminster, but the marriage did not take place at St. Martins in the Fields as the Banns Register has a note that the marriage was "Forbidden by James Philo the father of Chas. Philo of East Dereham in Norfolk, He being a Minor". James Philo was the Parish Clerk of East Dereham at the time. However Charles Philo swore an Allegation dated 24th February 1793 (date should probably be 1794!) that he "was of the Parish of Saint Andrew Holborn in the County of Middlesex aBachelor of the age of Twenty two Years and upwards and intended to intermarry with Mary Bishop of the same Parish Spinster also of twenty two years & upwards" Charles Philo of the parish of Saint Andrew, Holborn in the County of Middlesex, Bachelor and Mary Bishop of the same parish a Spinster, were married in this church (St Andrew) by Licence on the twenty fourth day of February in the year One thousand seven Hundred and Ninety Four. Charles must have been reconciled with his father as he had equal shares with his siblings in his father's will. Tony Harris #5904 Philo One Name Study -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of June Willing via Sent: 21 May 2016 10:28 To: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [G] Illegal marriage ? Hi Ann A marriage where the ages were falsified was still legal. It seems that she did not tell her parents and later ‘married’ someone else. In the absence of other evidence the second marriage was bigamous. However, it is possible that William Ginger was not free to marry Mary, in which case she would have been free to marry James. Have you checked for a prior marriage for William? June Willing KFHS member no 2588 Guild of One-Name Studies member no 2117 Willing/Willings One-Name Study http://one-name.org/name_profile/Willing/ Willing/Willings DNA Project https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/willing Dominicus One-Name Study http://one-name.org/name_profile/dominicus/ > On 21 May 2016, at 09:23, Robert Fowler via <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi > > Large numbers of wedding combattants gave their age as 21 although they were obviously younger. It appears the churchs were happy to proceed so long as they were "told" that figure. > > Robert Fowler > > > ________________________________ > From: ann wadge via <[email protected]> > To: goons <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, 21 May 2016, 9:12 > Subject: [G] Illegal marriage ? > > > On 4 March 1850 a marriage took place between Mary Louisa Virtue Wadge & William Ginger at St Martin in the Fields, both parties said to be of full age although I know that the bride was only 18. > The 1851 census shows her in her parents' household, unmarried & in 1853 she married James George Waight. > Would this first marriage have been illegal because of her age, if she had no parental consent & could the parents have had it anulled ? Would there have been any record of this ? > Thanks for any help or guidance > Ann > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message _____________________________________________ RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

For my one name study it looks feasible, half in Northumberland and Durham Chris Chris U > On 21 May 2016, at 12:19, June Willing via <[email protected]> wrote: > > I checked my name, Willing, and found the places and numbers in the UK where people of that name live to be reasonably accurate, at least for adults, with one exception. It says that there are 14 people called Willing in Glasgow, where I live, which is about ten too many. I would love to know who these other people called Willing in Glasgow are. > > But there are certainly a few centres of population which have been omitted. > > June Willing > Guild of One-Name Studies member no 2117 > Willing/Willings One-Name Study > http://one-name.org/name_profile/Willing/ > Willing/Willings DNA Project > https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/willing > Dominicus One-Name Study > http://one-name.org/name_profile/dominicus/ > > >> On 21 May 2016, at 10:31, Peter Amsden via <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> The information that LocateMyName contains is certainly very suspect. We have no idea how they gather such information, and I would suspect that much of it is based on out of date data. >> >> For example, I have lived in Scotland since 1979 and have made no secret of it. But try to find an Amsden who lives there according to LocateMyName. Maybe they just drop information about individuals, but if they do then their data is certainly not to be relied upon. >> >> >> Peter Amsden >> >> >> >> _____________________________________________ >> >> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: >> http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Merryl, As to what you could do to warn others - if you have a tree online add an explanation there. If you have a blog or static website add a post or page, make the name Henry Christopher Bawtree a heading or sub-heading and / or put it in the title so it may well come up high in results for anyone googling for him, and / or you can put the alternative onto Ancestry so anyone looking on that site should find him high up in the results (though I think he will show with the surname Baurn and they may wonder why but ignore him as having the wrong surname). Teresa On 19/05/2016 06:58, Merryl Wells via wrote: > I've recently sent three emails to the List that have not seemed to arrive > so am resending this one with fingers crossed > From > Merryl Wells of Luton, Beds. > E-Mail: [email protected] > GOONS Mem. No. 1757 Reg. ONS: Bawtree; Gullick/ock, Moist/Moyst. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Merryl Wells" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 8:37 PM > Subject: Error in GRO Index? > > >> I came across Henry Christopher Bawtree's birth on 3 Nov 1863 Camberwell >> not having an entry on FreeBMD which I thought was odd, so went hunting. >> Searching for any Henry C. B* born 1861 to 1865 I found Henry Christopher >> Baurn Dec. 1863 Camberwell R.D. which must be him, but surname unclear, so >> checked the original scan. >> >> Initially I thought there were no Baurn entries but on looking around, >> before BAX I found five Baurn entries with the previous entry being one >> Bowler, and before that Bawden which was in the right sequence. There are >> also no Bawtree entries in that quarter on that page. >> >> I thought of leaving a PostEm note but no one searching for Bawtree would >> think to look at it. Also it is therefore possible that the other entries >> are not just in the wrong place but have the wrong surname? I looked in >> my Bawtree birth indexes for the previous entry of Lilian Louisa Baurn but >> couldn't find any Lilian Louisa Bawtree births at all. >> >> Can't think of anything I can do to get it corrected or to warn other >> researchers as guess I would have to buy the Baurn certificate to prove >> it's really Bawtree. >> >> From >> Merryl Wells of Luton, Beds. >> E-Mail: [email protected] >> GOONS Mem. No. 1757 Reg. ONS: Bawtree; Gullick/ock, Moist/Moyst. > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I checked my name, Willing, and found the places and numbers in the UK where people of that name live to be reasonably accurate, at least for adults, with one exception. It says that there are 14 people called Willing in Glasgow, where I live, which is about ten too many. I would love to know who these other people called Willing in Glasgow are. But there are certainly a few centres of population which have been omitted. June Willing Guild of One-Name Studies member no 2117 Willing/Willings One-Name Study http://one-name.org/name_profile/Willing/ Willing/Willings DNA Project https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/willing Dominicus One-Name Study http://one-name.org/name_profile/dominicus/ > On 21 May 2016, at 10:31, Peter Amsden via <[email protected]> wrote: > > The information that LocateMyName contains is certainly very suspect. We have no idea how they gather such information, and I would suspect that much of it is based on out of date data. > > For example, I have lived in Scotland since 1979 and have made no secret of it. But try to find an Amsden who lives there according to LocateMyName. Maybe they just drop information about individuals, but if they do then their data is certainly not to be relied upon. > > > Peter Amsden > > > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

At 10:56 AM 5/21/2016, Debbie wrote: >I had an e-mail from Locatemyname offering to pay me to review their site >which I thought was odd. I declined the offer but asked them if they might >be able to provide details of the sources they are using for their maps as, >without this information, the maps have little value. I was told that they >would "consider making a list". > >Best wishes >Debbie Kennett I note that the contact address is in Ukraine which says a lot about why the results are vaguely interesting but very much hit and miss. For example:- the well known GORDON surname Many summarised in the US and UK But not one in Scotland ! Best Gordon +Z [+Z] <http://www.adshead.com/> Gordon Adshead <[email protected]> [+Z] Beaumont House, 2 Goodrington Road, Handforth, Cheshire, SK9 3AT, UK [+Z] Tel:+44-1625-549770 Mob:+44-7776-145602

I had an e-mail from Locatemyname offering to pay me to review their site which I thought was odd. I declined the offer but asked them if they might be able to provide details of the sources they are using for their maps as, without this information, the maps have little value. I was told that they would "consider making a list". Best wishes Debbie Kennett

The information that LocateMyName contains is certainly very suspect. We have no idea how they gather such information, and I would suspect that much of it is based on out of date data. For example, I have lived in Scotland since 1979 and have made no secret of it. But try to find an Amsden who lives there according to LocateMyName. Maybe they just drop information about individuals, but if they do then their data is certainly not to be relied upon. Peter Amsden

Hi Ann A marriage where the ages were falsified was still legal. It seems that she did not tell her parents and later ‘married’ someone else. In the absence of other evidence the second marriage was bigamous. However, it is possible that William Ginger was not free to marry Mary, in which case she would have been free to marry James. Have you checked for a prior marriage for William? June Willing KFHS member no 2588 Guild of One-Name Studies member no 2117 Willing/Willings One-Name Study http://one-name.org/name_profile/Willing/ Willing/Willings DNA Project https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/willing Dominicus One-Name Study http://one-name.org/name_profile/dominicus/ > On 21 May 2016, at 09:23, Robert Fowler via <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi > > Large numbers of wedding combattants gave their age as 21 although they were obviously younger. It appears the churchs were happy to proceed so long as they were "told" that figure. > > Robert Fowler > > > ________________________________ > From: ann wadge via <[email protected]> > To: goons <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, 21 May 2016, 9:12 > Subject: [G] Illegal marriage ? > > > On 4 March 1850 a marriage took place between Mary Louisa Virtue Wadge & William Ginger at St Martin in the Fields, both parties said to be of full age although I know that the bride was only 18. > The 1851 census shows her in her parents' household, unmarried & in 1853 she married James George Waight. > Would this first marriage have been illegal because of her age, if she had no parental consent & could the parents have had it anulled ? Would there have been any record of this ? > Thanks for any help or guidance > Ann > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On 4 March 1850 a marriage took place between Mary Louisa Virtue Wadge & William Ginger at St Martin in the Fields, both parties said to be of full age although I know that the bride was only 18. The 1851 census shows her in her parents' household, unmarried & in 1853 she married James George Waight. Would this first marriage have been illegal because of her age, if she had no parental consent & could the parents have had it anulled ?  Would there have been any record of this ? Thanks for any help or guidance Ann

The big thing when looking at any site like locatemyname is to check their methodology and/or sourcing (in much the same way you would check your sourcing and referencing for any other online genealogical information). Its quite clear that the methodology of this site is seriously flawed, which really discredits it totally. I'm quite surprised that it even featured in the Eastman genealogy newsletter, as I thought they were a bit more clued up about the differences between good data and questionable data. Corinne Curtis #5579

Hi Large numbers of wedding combattants gave their age as 21 although they were obviously younger. It appears the churchs were happy to proceed so long as they were "told" that figure. Robert Fowler ________________________________ From: ann wadge via <[email protected]> To: goons <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, 21 May 2016, 9:12 Subject: [G] Illegal marriage ? On 4 March 1850 a marriage took place between Mary Louisa Virtue Wadge & William Ginger at St Martin in the Fields, both parties said to be of full age although I know that the bride was only 18. The 1851 census shows her in her parents' household, unmarried & in 1853 she married James George Waight. Would this first marriage have been illegal because of her age, if she had no parental consent & could the parents have had it anulled ? Would there have been any record of this ? Thanks for any help or guidance Ann _____________________________________________ RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi I just checked Liddiard, 1358 people in the UK, gross under estimation. That means with about 200 turning up at the Liddiard Gathering in August we would have 15% of the population of Liddiard's - I wish Karen -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Adrian Hanwell via Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 9:48 AM To: 'Goons' Subject: [G] LocateMyName.co./uk Dear All, I have just checked locateMyName.com for my own name - HANWELL. I live in North Yorkshire and have relatives in Hull, East Yorkshire and in Beverley, East Yorkshire. None of these are shown. My one-name study name is HANWELL and, from the electoral rolls and the White Pages telephone directory, I know that there are at least twelve Hanwells in Australia. These are not shown either, but from my studies, I would guess that the proportions (and also perhaps the numbers) which ARE given for English towns (shown below) are about right. http://www.locatemyname.com/uk/Hanwell Local (UK) Sheffield = 68 London = 45 Northampton = 30 Stoke-on-Trent = 18 Plymouth = 17 Leeds = 11 Leicester = 10 Hartlepool = 9 Coventry = 6 Newcastle = 6 Global (World) Country Records Estimation UK 243 1089 USA 131 163 Canada 25 71 France 2 6 Norway 2 3 I hope that this helps. Regards, Adrian. h the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Dear All, I have just checked locateMyName.com for my own name - HANWELL. I live in North Yorkshire and have relatives in Hull, East Yorkshire and in Beverley, East Yorkshire. None of these are shown. My one-name study name is HANWELL and, from the electoral rolls and the White Pages telephone directory, I know that there are at least twelve Hanwells in Australia. These are not shown either, but from my studies, I would guess that the proportions (and also perhaps the numbers) which ARE given for English towns (shown below) are about right. http://www.locatemyname.com/uk/Hanwell Local (UK) Sheffield = 68 London = 45 Northampton = 30 Stoke-on-Trent = 18 Plymouth = 17 Leeds = 11 Leicester = 10 Hartlepool = 9 Coventry = 6 Newcastle = 6 Global (World) Country Records Estimation UK 243 1089 USA 131 163 Canada 25 71 France 2 6 Norway 2 3 I hope that this helps. Regards, Adrian. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: 19 May 2016 06:56 To: [email protected] Subject: GOONS Digest, Vol 11, Issue 222 Message: 1 Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 08:38:10 +0100 From: <[email protected]> Subject: LocateMyName? To: "Goons" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Eastman's Online Genealogy Newsletter has reported on the LocateMyName website that gives the count of a name in their records and then estimates what this means for the actual numbers. On looking at it, I am concerned with what it seems to be telling me. For example, it shows the following for their top five countries for the name GRAY - the columns being country, he count in their records and the estimate: Country Records Estimate USA 307,166 382,841 Canada 8,729 24,995 UK 1,758 7,884 Australia 895 11,055 New Zealand 413 4,812 It also indicates that GRAY is ranked as number 222 in the UK. While I have no problems with the numbers of people they have in their databases, the estimate as to how many there are would seem to be wildly inaccurate. Does anyone know anything about this site? Regards Chris ------------------------------ GOONS Digest, Vol 11, Issue 222 **************************************

Hello everyone, I’m looking for volunteers to try a Marriage Challenge later this year. If you live near a County Record Office or some other repository that holds copies of church marriage registers, I’d like to tempt you to do a Challenge. The Challenge is searching and finding the details of marriages for fellow Guild members. You would select a Registration District covered by your CRO and then a date range for the Challenge. You advertise your Challenge (I will do this for you on the Guild website and Journal) and ask for basic marriage details from the GRO listing to be sent you as a basis for your search. Even if your CRO has allowed Ancestry or FindmyPast to copy and index many of the church records, there is still a possibility for a Challenge. It is just a matter of selecting a suitable District and date range. Many FMP records end in 1880 or 1901, so a Challenge period after these dates would be suitable. Many Ancestry marriage records end in 1921. A Challenge can be tailored, by limiting the date range for the Challenge, to suit the amount of time you could spare to visit the Record Office. Just let me know whether you could be interested and hopefully, between us we can sort out a suitable Challenge. Peter Copsey Marriage Challenge Coordinator

Being an inhabitant of ’the colonies’ I’m not in a position to offer to do Marriage Challenges in English parishes. But I felt obliged to make a quick report and offer a heartfelt Thank You for so many past Marriage Challenges executed by such wonderful volunteers. I’ve submitted a number of my Shenton people to Marriage Challenges over the years (back as far as 2010), and have to date received 111 (that’s One Hundred Eleven !) faux marriage certificates or the data needed to generate same. This includes four I received just this morning from Nick Miskin on his Sheppey RD Challenge. While I haven’t (so far) nailed down every couple for all 111 marriages, the majority of them have been an absolute treasure to help my study, and I’m sure I’ll figure out the remaining ones eventually. Thank you again, Nick and all the other Challengers, and thank you Peter for organizing and managing and promoting this fantastic project ! Scott Shenton (GOONS 5292) Indialantic, Florida, USA Shenton one name study http://shenton.tribalpages.com > On May 19, 2016, at 11:58 AM, Peter Copsey via <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > I’m looking for volunteers to try a Marriage Challenge later this year. If you live near a County Record Office or some other repository that holds copies of church marriage registers, I’d like to tempt you to do a Challenge. The Challenge is searching and finding the details of marriages for fellow Guild members. > > You would select a Registration District covered by your CRO and then a date range for the Challenge. You advertise your Challenge (I will do this for you on the Guild website and Journal) and ask for basic marriage details from the GRO listing to be sent you as a basis for your search. > > Even if your CRO has allowed Ancestry or FindmyPast to copy and index many of the church records, there is still a possibility for a Challenge. It is just a matter of selecting a suitable District and date range. Many FMP records end in 1880 or 1901, so a Challenge period after these dates would be suitable. Many Ancestry marriage records end in 1921. A Challenge can be tailored, by limiting the date range for the Challenge, to suit the amount of time you could spare to visit the Record Office. > > Just let me know whether you could be interested and hopefully, between us we can sort out a suitable Challenge. > > Peter Copsey > Marriage Challenge Coordinator > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Corinne/Meryl, >I'm not at all surprised the index appears wrong. I keep remembering back to Michael Foster's research on the marriage indexes and his assessment of the rather big proportion of wrongly (or not) indexed marriages (A Comedy of Errors or The Marriage Records of England and Wales 1837-1899 by Michael Whitfield Foster). If anyone hasn't read this, it is well worth a look - if only as a reminder to not totally trust GRO indexes.< Michael Foster published a further volume in 2002: "A Comedy of Errors, Act 2". In it, I think, he estimated that about 10% of the marriage records 1837-1899 had errors. I am just finishing a study of the Cardinal Points for Newcastle upon Tyne Registration District 1837 to 1911 and I would suggest that 10% is about right. There are undoubtedly errors in the actual church registers, such as inconsistencies between the spellings of name, but these are compounded by errors in the compiling of the indexes. I have found missing spouses, wrong spouses and missed marriages! Regards, Phil Thirkell

Hi Sarah I did not quote the full details in my e-mail as Corinne did so in hers. "I keep remembering back to Michael Foster's research on the marriage indexes and his assessment of the rather big proportion of wrongly (or not) indexed marriages (A Comedy of Errors or The Marriage Records of England and Wales 1837-1899 by Michael Whitfield Foster). If anyone hasn't read this, it is well worth a look - if only as a reminder to not totally trust GRO indexes." June Willing > On 19 May 2016, at 10:06, sarah hughes via <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi > Is it possible to tell me the name of the book by Michael Foster as it > looks like it could be very helpful. > Thank you > > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 9:54 AM, John Hanson via <[email protected]> wrote: >> The other book that I would recommend to get a full understanding of Civil Registration in England and Wales and how it relates with the GRO is >> >> Birth, Marriage and Death Records (a guide for the family historian) by David Annal and Audrey Collins and published by Pen and Sword >> >> I contains a lot of the background information and also explains exactly how the indexes were created and the issues involved. >> >> One other course of action would be to contact the actual Register Office - the trouble seems to be that some of the London ones point you are the GRO! >> >> Regards >> John Hanson >> Researcher, The Halsted Trust >> Website - www.halstedresearch.org.uk >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of June Willing via >> Sent: 19 May 2016 09:04 >> To: Merryl Wells; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [G] Error in GRO Index? >> >> Hi Merryl >> >> This looks like an error which was made when the original index was converted from the handwritten version to the typewritten version. Looking at the page, the clues are in the entries which are out of alphabetical order. These are the ones which have been wrongly copied. >> >> So BOWLER is obviously out of sequence, and should probably be BAWLER, I would think. This is a simple typo. >> >> Then there are several Baurn entries, Clara, Ellen Emily, Henry, Lilian Louisa, Henry Christopher. >> >> Henry Christopher is out of sequence, so it looks like the typist accidentally omitted another surname. Bawtree comes between Baurn and Bax, so fits exactly. >> >> I found a similar example a few years ago in the births for WILLINGS in 1864 September quarter, where there were seven entries. This is very high for Willings, so I was suspicious, then I noticed there were two sequences of forenames. I wrote to Southport querying this and they replied to confirm that the second sequence of names should have been WILLINGTON. They corrected their indexes but naturally all the online indexes are incorrect. >> >> So, I think that only one of the Baurn entries should be Bawtree. You could query it directly with the GRO but whether it would help anyone else would be doubtful, or you could try Corinne’s suggestion. I agree with the suggestion of reading Michael Foster’s book. It explains a lot. >> >> June Willing >> Guild of One-Name Studies member no 2117 Willing/Willings One-Name Study http://one-name.org/name_profile/Willing/ >> Willing/Willings DNA Project >> https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/willing >> Dominicus One-Name Study >> http://one-name.org/name_profile/dominicus/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On 19 May 2016, at 06:58, Merryl Wells via <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I've recently sent three emails to the List that have not seemed to >>> arrive so am resending this one with fingers crossed From Merryl Wells >>> of Luton, Beds. >>> E-Mail: [email protected] >>> GOONS Mem. No. 1757 Reg. ONS: Bawtree; Gullick/ock, Moist/Moyst. >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Merryl Wells" <[email protected]> >>> To: <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 8:37 PM >>> Subject: Error in GRO Index? >>> >>> >>>> I came across Henry Christopher Bawtree's birth on 3 Nov 1863 >>>> Camberwell not having an entry on FreeBMD which I thought was odd, so went hunting. >>>> Searching for any Henry C. B* born 1861 to 1865 I found Henry >>>> Christopher Baurn Dec. 1863 Camberwell R.D. which must be him, but >>>> surname unclear, so checked the original scan. >>>> >>>> Initially I thought there were no Baurn entries but on looking >>>> around, before BAX I found five Baurn entries with the previous entry >>>> being one Bowler, and before that Bawden which was in the right >>>> sequence. There are also no Bawtree entries in that quarter on that page. >>>> >>>> I thought of leaving a PostEm note but no one searching for Bawtree >>>> would think to look at it. Also it is therefore possible that the >>>> other entries are not just in the wrong place but have the wrong >>>> surname? I looked in my Bawtree birth indexes for the previous entry >>>> of Lilian Louisa Baurn but couldn't find any Lilian Louisa Bawtree births at all. >>>> >>>> Can't think of anything I can do to get it corrected or to warn other >>>> researchers as guess I would have to buy the Baurn certificate to >>>> prove it's really Bawtree. >>>> >>>> From >>>> Merryl Wells of Luton, Beds. >>>> E-Mail: [email protected] >>>> GOONS Mem. No. 1757 Reg. ONS: Bawtree; Gullick/ock, Moist/Moyst. >>> >>> _____________________________________________ >>> >>> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: >>> http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> _____________________________________________ >> >> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: >> http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> _____________________________________________ >> >> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: >> http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > -- > sarah > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Is it possible to tell me the name of the book by Michael Foster as it looks like it could be very helpful. Thank you On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 9:54 AM, John Hanson via <[email protected]> wrote: > The other book that I would recommend to get a full understanding of Civil Registration in England and Wales and how it relates with the GRO is > > Birth, Marriage and Death Records (a guide for the family historian) by David Annal and Audrey Collins and published by Pen and Sword > > I contains a lot of the background information and also explains exactly how the indexes were created and the issues involved. > > One other course of action would be to contact the actual Register Office - the trouble seems to be that some of the London ones point you are the GRO! > > Regards > John Hanson > Researcher, The Halsted Trust > Website - www.halstedresearch.org.uk > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of June Willing via > Sent: 19 May 2016 09:04 > To: Merryl Wells; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [G] Error in GRO Index? > > Hi Merryl > > This looks like an error which was made when the original index was converted from the handwritten version to the typewritten version. Looking at the page, the clues are in the entries which are out of alphabetical order. These are the ones which have been wrongly copied. > > So BOWLER is obviously out of sequence, and should probably be BAWLER, I would think. This is a simple typo. > > Then there are several Baurn entries, Clara, Ellen Emily, Henry, Lilian Louisa, Henry Christopher. > > Henry Christopher is out of sequence, so it looks like the typist accidentally omitted another surname. Bawtree comes between Baurn and Bax, so fits exactly. > > I found a similar example a few years ago in the births for WILLINGS in 1864 September quarter, where there were seven entries. This is very high for Willings, so I was suspicious, then I noticed there were two sequences of forenames. I wrote to Southport querying this and they replied to confirm that the second sequence of names should have been WILLINGTON. They corrected their indexes but naturally all the online indexes are incorrect. > > So, I think that only one of the Baurn entries should be Bawtree. You could query it directly with the GRO but whether it would help anyone else would be doubtful, or you could try Corinne’s suggestion. I agree with the suggestion of reading Michael Foster’s book. It explains a lot. > > June Willing > Guild of One-Name Studies member no 2117 Willing/Willings One-Name Study http://one-name.org/name_profile/Willing/ > Willing/Willings DNA Project > https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/willing > Dominicus One-Name Study > http://one-name.org/name_profile/dominicus/ > > > > > > >> On 19 May 2016, at 06:58, Merryl Wells via <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I've recently sent three emails to the List that have not seemed to >> arrive so am resending this one with fingers crossed From Merryl Wells >> of Luton, Beds. >> E-Mail: [email protected] >> GOONS Mem. No. 1757 Reg. ONS: Bawtree; Gullick/ock, Moist/Moyst. >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Merryl Wells" <[email protected]> >> To: <[email protected]> >> Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 8:37 PM >> Subject: Error in GRO Index? >> >> >>> I came across Henry Christopher Bawtree's birth on 3 Nov 1863 >>> Camberwell not having an entry on FreeBMD which I thought was odd, so went hunting. >>> Searching for any Henry C. B* born 1861 to 1865 I found Henry >>> Christopher Baurn Dec. 1863 Camberwell R.D. which must be him, but >>> surname unclear, so checked the original scan. >>> >>> Initially I thought there were no Baurn entries but on looking >>> around, before BAX I found five Baurn entries with the previous entry >>> being one Bowler, and before that Bawden which was in the right >>> sequence. There are also no Bawtree entries in that quarter on that page. >>> >>> I thought of leaving a PostEm note but no one searching for Bawtree >>> would think to look at it. Also it is therefore possible that the >>> other entries are not just in the wrong place but have the wrong >>> surname? I looked in my Bawtree birth indexes for the previous entry >>> of Lilian Louisa Baurn but couldn't find any Lilian Louisa Bawtree births at all. >>> >>> Can't think of anything I can do to get it corrected or to warn other >>> researchers as guess I would have to buy the Baurn certificate to >>> prove it's really Bawtree. >>> >>> From >>> Merryl Wells of Luton, Beds. >>> E-Mail: [email protected] >>> GOONS Mem. No. 1757 Reg. ONS: Bawtree; Gullick/ock, Moist/Moyst. >> >> _____________________________________________ >> >> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: >> http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-req[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- sarah

The other book that I would recommend to get a full understanding of Civil Registration in England and Wales and how it relates with the GRO is Birth, Marriage and Death Records (a guide for the family historian) by David Annal and Audrey Collins and published by Pen and Sword I contains a lot of the background information and also explains exactly how the indexes were created and the issues involved. One other course of action would be to contact the actual Register Office - the trouble seems to be that some of the London ones point you are the GRO! Regards John Hanson Researcher, The Halsted Trust Website - www.halstedresearch.org.uk -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of June Willing via Sent: 19 May 2016 09:04 To: Merryl Wells; [email protected] Subject: Re: [G] Error in GRO Index? Hi Merryl This looks like an error which was made when the original index was converted from the handwritten version to the typewritten version. Looking at the page, the clues are in the entries which are out of alphabetical order. These are the ones which have been wrongly copied. So BOWLER is obviously out of sequence, and should probably be BAWLER, I would think. This is a simple typo. Then there are several Baurn entries, Clara, Ellen Emily, Henry, Lilian Louisa, Henry Christopher. Henry Christopher is out of sequence, so it looks like the typist accidentally omitted another surname. Bawtree comes between Baurn and Bax, so fits exactly. I found a similar example a few years ago in the births for WILLINGS in 1864 September quarter, where there were seven entries. This is very high for Willings, so I was suspicious, then I noticed there were two sequences of forenames. I wrote to Southport querying this and they replied to confirm that the second sequence of names should have been WILLINGTON. They corrected their indexes but naturally all the online indexes are incorrect. So, I think that only one of the Baurn entries should be Bawtree. You could query it directly with the GRO but whether it would help anyone else would be doubtful, or you could try Corinne’s suggestion. I agree with the suggestion of reading Michael Foster’s book. It explains a lot. June Willing Guild of One-Name Studies member no 2117 Willing/Willings One-Name Study http://one-name.org/name_profile/Willing/ Willing/Willings DNA Project https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/willing Dominicus One-Name Study http://one-name.org/name_profile/dominicus/ > On 19 May 2016, at 06:58, Merryl Wells via <[email protected]> wrote: > > I've recently sent three emails to the List that have not seemed to > arrive so am resending this one with fingers crossed From Merryl Wells > of Luton, Beds. > E-Mail: [email protected] > GOONS Mem. No. 1757 Reg. ONS: Bawtree; Gullick/ock, Moist/Moyst. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Merryl Wells" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 8:37 PM > Subject: Error in GRO Index? > > >> I came across Henry Christopher Bawtree's birth on 3 Nov 1863 >> Camberwell not having an entry on FreeBMD which I thought was odd, so went hunting. >> Searching for any Henry C. B* born 1861 to 1865 I found Henry >> Christopher Baurn Dec. 1863 Camberwell R.D. which must be him, but >> surname unclear, so checked the original scan. >> >> Initially I thought there were no Baurn entries but on looking >> around, before BAX I found five Baurn entries with the previous entry >> being one Bowler, and before that Bawden which was in the right >> sequence. There are also no Bawtree entries in that quarter on that page. >> >> I thought of leaving a PostEm note but no one searching for Bawtree >> would think to look at it. Also it is therefore possible that the >> other entries are not just in the wrong place but have the wrong >> surname? I looked in my Bawtree birth indexes for the previous entry >> of Lilian Louisa Baurn but couldn't find any Lilian Louisa Bawtree births at all. >> >> Can't think of anything I can do to get it corrected or to warn other >> researchers as guess I would have to buy the Baurn certificate to >> prove it's really Bawtree. >> >> From >> Merryl Wells of Luton, Beds. >> E-Mail: [email protected] >> GOONS Mem. No. 1757 Reg. ONS: Bawtree; Gullick/ock, Moist/Moyst. > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message _____________________________________________ RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc: http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message