Hi, Thanks to those that have had a bit of a look into this one for me. As John rightly says something must of happened to John McKinley GRIMASON the question is what? , when and where?. As outlined I suspect he may have been put up for adoption. John McKinley GRIMASON was not with his parents in 1910 or 1916 or even 1921. I was well aware of the Jones surname usage for Samuel J GRIMASON AKA JONES. Samuel J GRIMASON was still a married man and Lily McKinley was still a married woman and neither of their respective spouses had died prior to 1908 no divorce issued in England either. Samuel John GRIMASON was not legally entitled to remarry until 1942 as that is the year that his wife in England died. In 1910 John McKinley GRIMASON would have been aged 2, by 1916 he would have been 8 and by 1921 he would have been 13 if he was known as a McKinley he ought to have still shown up in the Census he does not. As for the Wikitree, unfortunately it is incorrect based on the research I have done, it is a mix of two different families and secondly it does not show the only known legal Marriage for Samuel either. I have sent a message to the Tree owner and hopefully they will correct the tree. On 30/12/2014 12:19 p.m., John Carey wrote: > David > > The birth registration says that the child's parents are Samuel Grimason and > Lily McKinley and gives Samuel's occupation as a grocer but have you checked > the second page of the border crossing manifest? He is identified as a > 'Procurer' and she as a 'Prostitute'!. That and the border crossing card > give his alias as Jones and hers as Johnson. Maybe they just abandoned the > child or the child was taken into care if she was arrested. > > In any case, there was a Samuel and Lily Grimason living in Regina, > Saskatchewan at the time of the 1916 census and in Winnipeg in the 1921 > census - both instances with no children so something must have happened to > him. > > John Carey (GOONS 6565) > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: goons-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:goons-bounces@rootsweb.com] On > Behalf Of Sherlock Holmes via > Sent: December-29-14 10:37 AM > To: goons@rootsweb.com > Subject: [G] Possible Adoption > > > Hi, > I have a person in my database that I suspect may have been adopted out in > Canada. > The reason that I suspect that the individual may have been adopted out is > that his parents tried crossing the border at Buffalo Creek, New York, USA > in November 1910 and were turned back, there is no mention of their child > yet that child ought to have been two years old at that time, the couple > were not married and in a relationship that would have been deemed not legal > in England as the father was still married and his proper wife was still > alive in England. > What is known is the birth full name of the individual and the birth date as > follows; John McKinley GRIMASON > Born: 30 August 1908 > Place of Birth: York, Yorkville, Canada. > > I have not been able to find any death for this individual either hence the > reason I suspect that he may have been adopted out. > Question I have is, is there away of finding out if this individual was > adopted out and what their Name became as i would like to be able to trace > this one forward if possible. > Please help if you can, thanks in advance. > > regards, > David J Grimshaw (or is it Grimason?) > Genealogical Researcher of the "Grimason" surname and variations of the > "Grimason" surname World Wide. > A One Name study registered with the Guild of One Name Studies (GOONS): 6138 > formally 2962 The "Sherlock Holmes" of this family according to some > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message > > > -- David J Grimshaw (or is it Grimason?) Genealogical Researcher of the "Grimason" surname and variations of the "Grimason" surname World Wide. A One Name study registered with the Guild of One Name Studies (GOONS): 6138 formally 2962 The "Sherlock Holmes" of this family according to some

David If John Mckinley Grimason was 'adopted' in Ontario in the early twentieth century, I seriously doubt that records exist that would help resolve what happened to him or, if they exist and identified him, a researcher could easily get access to them. Adoption was not recognized in Ontario as a legislated legal process until 1921. Prior to that, it was a private matter and there were many agencies that could have facilitated it. They were subject to government inspection of a sort but whatever records they kept were their own and, as far as I know, they remain so. While the most likely agency in Toronto would likely have been the local Children's Aid Society and you might want to contact them , there were many others. Many of these pre-dated the CAS and were involved in the placement of tens of thousands of orphans and other children who were sent from Britain to Canada in the later decades of the 19th century. In fact, some of the procedures employed by the Ontario CAS were modeled on Dr. Barnardo's scheme for the placement of British children in Canadian homes. Adoption information in Ontario was placed in closed files from 1927 on and to this day is available only to the birth parents and the adoptee and only with the consent of both. John Carey (GOONS 6565) -----Original Message----- From: goons-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:goons-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Sherlock Holmes via Sent: December-30-14 1:35 AM To: goons@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [G] Possible Adoption Hi, Thanks to those that have had a bit of a look into this one for me. As John rightly says something must of happened to John McKinley GRIMASON the question is what? , when and where?. As outlined I suspect he may have been put up for adoption. John McKinley GRIMASON was not with his parents in 1910 or 1916 or even 1921. I was well aware of the Jones surname usage for Samuel J GRIMASON AKA JONES. Samuel J GRIMASON was still a married man and Lily McKinley was still a married woman and neither of their respective spouses had died prior to 1908 no divorce issued in England either. Samuel John GRIMASON was not legally entitled to remarry until 1942 as that is the year that his wife in England died. In 1910 John McKinley GRIMASON would have been aged 2, by 1916 he would have been 8 and by 1921 he would have been 13 if he was known as a McKinley he ought to have still shown up in the Census he does not. As for the Wikitree, unfortunately it is incorrect based on the research I have done, it is a mix of two different families and secondly it does not show the only known legal Marriage for Samuel either. I have sent a message to the Tree owner and hopefully they will correct the tree.