Morning Hilda .. thanks for taking a peek for me .. I had another look also .. I think the baptism for Margaret Anne Pemberton, was 1836 with parents Benjamin and Anne ... the earlier one 1781 would have been too early .. Also .. the fact that she was a minor when she was married in 1854 ... the 1836 Baptism makes her 18 when she is married .. think that one fits better .. do you think ? Haven't found any other info as yet .. i'll keep looking .. but the site you sent me is terrific .. thanks so much .. regards Maree Hobart

okey doke .. will do .. thanks Hilda :)

Hilda .. thank you very much for that info .. a little more in the puzzle .. :) I wish I could find more on the Browne ancestors tho ... and the Pembertons for that matter .. thanks so much ... Maree :)

Hi all .. I am new to this list .. would someone be able to help me please ? I am researching our Browne family here in Australia .. and came across their father .. William BROWNE Esq. M.R.I.A. He was a solictor in Rutland Square, Dublin. From my research I think he was born about 1790 and he married a lady named Mary Unsworth., probably in the early 1800s. The Unsworth name has been carried down the line. Their son James Unsworth Browne born about 1823 came to Australia. Before he left he married Margaret Ann Pemberton in about 1854 in Dublin. Any help with William's ancestors or any other info would be greatly appreciated.. thanks for help in advance .. regards Maree Larsen Hobart, Tasmania

FYI. I don't know anything about this list, but it may be worth investigating. PJ ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: [IRL-CLARE] CMC relaunch From: "Christina Finn Hunt" <chrisnina@gmail.com> Date: Sat, December 15, 2012 10:14 am To: irl-clare-L@rootsweb.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have (kind of) inherited the Rootsweb CMC list. This list was originally created to be an adjunct to the CMC project which was an online project for Christening, Marriage and Cemetery records. The project is no longer online and the records there appear to be lost. So the question is - what to do with the list? After thinking about it I felt it might be worth it to try and revitalize this list. We will call it CMC for Church, Memorial and Cemetery. I think Church covers marriages. Memorials can be and often are located in a church (like plaques), and Cemeteries covers well...Cemeteries. That covers the original topics. So, the list will be a place to ask about cemeteries and church records anywhere in Ireland. If you would like to join and ask questions or provide advice, the page with joining information is at: http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/intl/IRL/CMC.html If you need help joining...drop me a line OFF list. chrisnina@gmail.com *If you know someone who might like to join the *new improved* list, please send them the link for joining. Christina =========================== Try http://www.google.ie/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to IRL-CLARE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello, I noticed on the churchrecords.irishgenealogy.ie 1854 COI marriage for James M. Brown and Margaret Pemberton that two witnesses, both males, were listed on the transcription. I looked at the MARRIAGE records for the three marriages I have for children of Gardiner Curtis and Catherine Hawkins. Two witnesses were listed on all three records, one of which was RC (1868) and the other two COI (1877, 1879). For the RC marriage the witnesses were one female and one male; for the COI marriages both were males. In an earlier post I noted that none of the COI BIRTH records in this family listed sponsors, whereas the one RC birth record did list one female and one male sponsor. In this family's case, RC records listed both birth sponsors and marriage witnesses, one female and one male in each case. For their COI records, no birth sponsors were listed, but witnesses, both males, were listed for the two marriage records I have. I wonder if there was a law requiring witnesses to a marriage, but no such law requiring sponsors at a baptism? Would that indicate that the state considered marriage a civil event, which implied the need for witnesses, but considered baptism an ecclesiastical event, and not subject to civil rules? And is it significant that the RC church allowed females to be sponsors and witnesses, whereas the COI church may not have (I have too few records to make a conclusion yet). As an aside: On the Brooklyn, New York, list, we've discussed the difficulty in finding some immigrant RC marriage records in Brooklyn and other areas of NYC, even from the era of civil registration, when priests and preachers were required to notify civil authorities of all marriages. Some listers have noted that many priests considered marriage a sacrament and none of the state's business, so they did not send any notification to the civil authorities. For that reason, finding a marriage record sometimes involves knowing or guessing where a couple lived and finding the probable nearby churches where they might have married, and hoping the churches still exist, and hoping the church records are accessible, and hoping a church official is willing to provide a copy of the record. PJ

PJ, I have COI marriages where there are as many as 3 witnesses. One female and 2 males. The sponsors are godparents and must be RC. They can have a Godfather and Godmother or only one of them. The sponsors are responsible for the spiritual development of the child. Most Protestants don't follow the practice of naming Godparents (sponsors) at a baptism they just have people witness the baptism. Marg >From the Beautiful British Columbia Cariboo Region, Canada ----- Original Message ----- From: <pjsalis@hal-pc.org> To: "Dublin list" <IRL-DUBLIN@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 7:30 AM Subject: [IRL-DUBLIN] COI vs. RC birth & marriage records,sponsors & witnesses Hello, I noticed on the churchrecords.irishgenealogy.ie 1854 COI marriage for James M. Brown and Margaret Pemberton that two witnesses, both males, were listed on the transcription. I looked at the MARRIAGE records for the three marriages I have for children of Gardiner Curtis and Catherine Hawkins. Two witnesses were listed on all three records, one of which was RC (1868) and the other two COI (1877, 1879). For the RC marriage the witnesses were one female and one male; for the COI marriages both were males. In an earlier post I noted that none of the COI BIRTH records in this family listed sponsors, whereas the one RC birth record did list one female and one male sponsor. In this family's case, RC records listed both birth sponsors and marriage witnesses, one female and one male in each case. For their COI records, no birth sponsors were listed, but witnesses, both males, were listed for the two marriage records I have. I wonder if there was a law requiring witnesses to a marriage, but no such law requiring sponsors at a baptism? Would that indicate that the state considered marriage a civil event, which implied the need for witnesses, but considered baptism an ecclesiastical event, and not subject to civil rules? And is it significant that the RC church allowed females to be sponsors and witnesses, whereas the COI church may not have (I have too few records to make a conclusion yet). As an aside: On the Brooklyn, New York, list, we've discussed the difficulty in finding some immigrant RC marriage records in Brooklyn and other areas of NYC, even from the era of civil registration, when priests and preachers were required to notify civil authorities of all marriages. Some listers have noted that many priests considered marriage a sacrament and none of the state's business, so they did not send any notification to the civil authorities. For that reason, finding a marriage record sometimes involves knowing or guessing where a couple lived and finding the probable nearby churches where they might have married, and hoping the churches still exist, and hoping the church records are accessible, and hoping a church official is willing to provide a copy of the record. PJ ****************************** Topic: A mailing list for anyone with a genealogical interest in County Dublin, Ireland and the City of Dublin. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to IRL-DUBLIN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2634/5459 - Release Date: 12/14/12

Maree, I suggest you go to Irishgenealogy.ie & play around with various names in the search engine. Try Pemberton & see what else you can find. Don't put in too much information - just bare surnames. You're not going to get many hits with names like that anyway. Hilda

I had a quick look, & her father was Benjamin, mother Mary Ann. There are several sibling baptisms listed. I think you can probably work out Benjamin's parents too. Good luck! Hilda

Hi Maree, Here is the marriage record for the Brown son to the Pemberton lady. Did not find any Browne/Unsworth records. But hope this helps: http://churchrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/details/53918a0585765 Hilda

I had a google of baptism and it was rather fascinating.   According to Google author baptism is usually only done once, so COI baptism would be accepted by RC, although conversion would have to take place. Apparently only one baptism is acceptable, and a 'second' baptism is only done if there is a possiblity the original baptism wasn't performed correctly (which might cover those blessings by an unsanctified officiate.   All in all an interesting read. I couldn't tell the nationality of the writer/writers and it would be interesting to see if this article is accepted by the forums readers.  Julie --- On Fri, 14/12/12, Margaret Cambridge <talktomarg@shaw.ca> wrote: From: Margaret Cambridge <talktomarg@shaw.ca> Subject: [IRL-DUBLIN] Baptisms To: irl-dublin@rootsweb.com Date: Friday, 14, December, 2012, 3:08 PM You see............a poke and a push with other's thoughts makes me search deeper. Of course 'Mater' and 'Pater' are mother and father.  Can't find anything on Neocon????or Proliate.  But,.......sub conditione can mean that one of the parents was not RC (mixed marriage) and converted as an adult and baptised again as an RC.  In checking the parents again I find the father was a RC and the mother may have been baptised as an adult in September 1870 RC. Haven't confirmed that yet but it is a possiblity.  Maybe she was able to pass herself off as a RC for the baptisms of their first 3 children but unable to confirm this she had to take instruction and was baptised again. Sub conditione is also used in the case of foundlings where the priest cannot be sure that a baptism hasn't already taken place. I find the old brain cells don't work as swiftly as they used to and a push in another direction wakes them up....-)) Marg >From the Beautiful British Columbia Cariboo Region, Canada ----- Original Message ----- From: "Margaret Doyle" <johnmaggie11@yahoo.co.uk> Try putting the Latin words into google translater. Sorry I don't have an actual link but if you google 'Latin translations' or 'Latin to English' you may get something to go on there. Maggie On 13 Dec 2012, at 23:27, "Margaret Cambridge" <talktomarg@shaw.ca> wrote: Maggie, On the baptism record of Joseph Simon and Patrick James there is a comment in the last column for both the boys which is written in Latin and smudged so is almost unreadable but I can see........ Mater Neocon????     and Pater Proliate...Bapt  ....sub condition.. Unfortunately I don't read Latin and the rest is black & unreadable. This, however, probably is some sort of explanation. Marg >From the Beautiful British Columbia Cariboo Region, Canada ****************************** Topic: A mailing list for anyone with a genealogical interest in County Dublin, Ireland and the City of Dublin. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to IRL-DUBLIN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello, List Though this post of mine last summer was about a marriage record, some of the information Cara gave in reply deserves repeating. My translation was mainly Google-aided. I post them again in hopes they'll be useful. *** Subject: Latin on church-register images: translating From: pjsalis@hal-pc.org Date: Thu, July 5, 2012 4:00 am To: irl-dublin@rootsweb.com Hello scholars, I've been working in the http://churchrecords.irishgenealogy.ie database and have just discovered that images of the church register are available for some of the records I've found. At least some of them from St. Mary, Pro Cathedral, in Dublin city are in Latin. It's been many, many moons since I studied Latin, so I want your help translating the page and column headings in the images. One record I'm viewing is at this URL: http://churchrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/reels/st.mary%27s-pro-cath_mf_1881-1904_ma_0043.pdf Using the Google Latin-to-English translator, here's what I've come up with. Please correct me where I'm wrong. Page Heading (I really need help here): INFRASCRIPTI SPONSI ANNO DOMINI 1863, JUXTA RITUM S.R. ECCLESIAE MATRIMONIO CONJUNCTI SUNT AB INFRASCRIPTO PAROCHO VEL VICARIO THE UNDERSIGNED SPOUSE IN THE YEAR 1863, ACCORDING TO THE S.R. CHURCH MARRIAGE WERE MARRIED BY THE PASTOR OR VICAR Column Headings: Nomina Sponsorum: Names of Spouses Cognomina: Surnames Eorum Residentia: Their Residence (or is it Residences, plural?) Nomina Parentum: Names of parents Eorum Residentia: Their Residence (or is it Residences, plural?) Denuntiationes: Publications (What does this mean in a Roman Catholic context?) Impedimentum: Obstacle (What does this mean in a Roman Catholic context?) Die Mensis: Day of the Month Nomen Parochival Vicarii: Parochival Name of Vicar (or is it Vicars, plural?) Testes Adfuerunt: Witnesses Present Eorum Residentia: Their Residence (or is it Residences, plural?) Observanda, si quae sint: e.g., si quis ex sponsis fuerit conversus ad fidem, vel antea matrimonio conjunctus, etc.: Observed, if there are any: e.g., if any of the spouses has been converted to the faith, or previously married, etc. Thanks for any help you can give. PJ, Texas ** Cara's Response 1 Subject: Re: [IRL-DUBLIN] Latin on church-register images: translating IMPEDIMENT From: "Cara" <cara_links@bigpond.com> Date: Fri, July 6, 2012 4:31 am To: irl-dublin@rootsweb.com An impediment is some fact or condition that prevents a person from marrying validly (c. 1073). If a marriage should be contracted without a dispensation from an impediment, it is invalid. Dispensations reserved to the Holy See. When either party has incurred the canonical crime arising from the intentional killing of a spouse (c. 1090.) The canonical crime exists in law now only when a spouse has been killed in order to clear the way for a new marriage Reserved to the local Bishop. In the following cases, requests for dispensations are addressed to the Bishop of Diocese of residence of the Catholic party, or his delegates, even if the wedding is celebrated in another diocese. If both are Catholics the request may be addressed to the bishop of either party. a. Age (When the groom has not completed his 16th year or the bride her 14th) b. Disparity of Cult (a Catholic and a non-baptized person). c. Affinity (when, for example, a man would want to marry anyone related to his deceased wife by blood in the direct line). d. Consanguinity (when, for example, a man wishes to marry a blood relative). This is never given in any degree of the direct line. That is, a dispensation is never given for a man to marry his mother or his daughter. It is never given in cases involving, for example, a man who would want to marry his sister, or aunt or niece. It is rarely and only for the most serious reasons given in cases involving what we usually call "first cousins". It would almost never be given in any case for which the state would not issue a license. Public Propriety: parent or sibling of common law, concubinage or of marriages not recognized by the Catholic Church. It extends to all those related by blood to the "spouse" in the first degree of the direct line. For example, a man could not marry his civil spouse's mother or daughter after he divorced his civil spouse even if the Church never recognized the first marriage; Adoption: parent or sibling by legal adoption (when, for example, a boy is adopted, he cannot later marry his adopted mother or grandmother or any of the natural children of his adopted parents). Canonical Form (When the couple wants to have the wedding take place before the non-Catholic's minister, rabbi, etc.). Sufficient Reasons for Permissions/Dispensations Permission for Mixed Religion can be granted by deacon/priest in the Diocese Request for marriage dispensations can be sought by the priest or deacon preparing the couple. There must always be sufficient reason for granting a dispensation and must include the spiritual welfare of the parties. *** Cara's Response 2 Subject: Re: [IRL-DUBLIN] Latin on church-register images: translating From: "Cara" <cara_links@bigpond.com> Date: Fri, July 6, 2012 4:38 am To: irl-dublin@rootsweb.com Marriage (banns) - banni, proclamationes, denuntiationes Sorry forgot to add this in also Cheers C ***

Try putting the Latin words into google translater. Sorry I don't have an actual link but if you google 'Latin translations' or 'Latin to English' you may get something to go on there. Maggie On 13 Dec 2012, at 23:27, "Margaret Cambridge" <talktomarg@shaw.ca> wrote: Maggie, On the baptism record of Joseph Simon and Patrick James there is a comment in the last column for both the boys which is written in Latin and smudged so is almost unreadable but I can see........ Mater Neocon???? and Pater Proliate...Bapt ....sub condition. Unfortunately I don't read Latin and the rest is black & unreadable. This, however, probably is some sort of explanation. Marg From the Beautiful British Columbia Cariboo Region, Canada ----- Original Message ----- From: "Margaret Doyle" <johnmaggie11@yahoo.co.uk> Hi Margaret, strange allright how they baptised 3 children + left one out. Maybe that's all they could manage to carry? Maybe the Church was overbooked but most likely would be be that he was in hospital when the others were being christened. Maggie ****************************** Topic: A mailing list for anyone with a genealogical interest in County Dublin, Ireland and the City of Dublin. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to IRL-DUBLIN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Margaret, strange allright how they baptised 3 children + left one out. Maybe that's all they could manage to carry? Maybe the Church was overbooked but most likely would be be that he was in hospital when the others were being christened. Maggie

I wonder what the position of the church is on baptisms done by nurses at hospital! Most of the R.C. nurses I know (personally and it isn't that many who do maternity) will do a baptism of sickly babies Eliz On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Margaret Cambridge <talktomarg@shaw.ca> wrote: > Sub conditione is also used in the case of foundlings where the priest > cannot be sure that > a baptism hasn't already taken place.

My Dad was named John Joseph while his only brother was named Joseph John. Does that help? Maggie On 13 Dec 2012, at 20:42, "Margaret Cambridge" <talktomarg@shaw.ca> wrote: I probably misunderstood your reply as you said 'same name' and one died and the other was born but these were both sons who lived. I'm confused with this anyway so a little more confusion doesn't matter. Marg From the Beautiful British Columbia Cariboo Region, Canada ----- Original Message ----- From: <hildanic@aol.com> That's what I'm saying. The birth of one in 1863 & the baptism of the other in 1879. Confused now! :-) Hilda ****************************** Topic: A mailing list for anyone with a genealogical interest in County Dublin, Ireland and the City of Dublin. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to IRL-DUBLIN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

You see............a poke and a push with other's thoughts makes me search deeper. Of course 'Mater' and 'Pater' are mother and father. Can't find anything on Neocon????or Proliate. But,.......sub conditione can mean that one of the parents was not RC (mixed marriage) and converted as an adult and baptised again as an RC. In checking the parents again I find the father was a RC and the mother may have been baptised as an adult in September 1870 RC. Haven't confirmed that yet but it is a possiblity. Maybe she was able to pass herself off as a RC for the baptisms of their first 3 children but unable to confirm this she had to take instruction and was baptised again. Sub conditione is also used in the case of foundlings where the priest cannot be sure that a baptism hasn't already taken place. I find the old brain cells don't work as swiftly as they used to and a push in another direction wakes them up....-)) Marg >From the Beautiful British Columbia Cariboo Region, Canada ----- Original Message ----- From: "Margaret Doyle" <johnmaggie11@yahoo.co.uk> Try putting the Latin words into google translater. Sorry I don't have an actual link but if you google 'Latin translations' or 'Latin to English' you may get something to go on there. Maggie On 13 Dec 2012, at 23:27, "Margaret Cambridge" <talktomarg@shaw.ca> wrote: Maggie, On the baptism record of Joseph Simon and Patrick James there is a comment in the last column for both the boys which is written in Latin and smudged so is almost unreadable but I can see........ Mater Neocon???? and Pater Proliate...Bapt ....sub condition. Unfortunately I don't read Latin and the rest is black & unreadable. This, however, probably is some sort of explanation. Marg >From the Beautiful British Columbia Cariboo Region, Canada

Julie, You asked: "Did the sponsors of RC babies attend the baptism? It must have been difficult having everybody present so quickly after the birth." --- My Kingstown Kelly-White-Plunkett RC church baptismal-registry extracts all name each parent and a male and a female sponsor. None explicitly states that any of these people were actually present at the baptism. My Dublin-city Gardiner Curtis-Catherine Hawkins baptismal records have one RC child and the rest COI. All my info comes from churchrecords.irishgenealogy.ie . Curtis RC record: Both the database transcription and the image of the church-register page list the parents and the sponsors, but again do not state explicitly that any of them were present at the baptism. Here's the database page for this child, John Curtis: http://churchrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/details/b3bf5f0166156 . The link to the image is near the bottom of the page. Curtis COI records: Neither the transcription nor the image lists any sponsors, and neither states explicitly that the parents were present at the baptism. Here's the database page for one of these children, Thomas Curtis: http://churchrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/details/53d5c10142056 . I have GRO birth records for six children born in Kingstown between 1865 and 1888. As far as I know, all were at least nominally RC. Only one was born in a hospital (Lying In), John Carey b 1865. The GRO records don't give baptism information or sponsors' names. They do give the name of the person who registered the birth. In John Carey's case it was a person whose name I don't recognize and who looks to be a hospital staff member. All the other five Kingstown children were born at home. (I have the impression John Carey's family had more money than did my Plunketts and Kellys.) For these five children, the informants were an unknown person, an aunt, and in three cases the mother (one 24 days after the birth, the second 49 days, and the third 99 days). I wonder why the mothers did this, and not a family member or friend. I don't have any information on the effect of hospital deliveries on baptism practices. Maybe someone else does. PJ

Hello List, In two previous posts (Dec. 12, 2012 "COI and RC practices re: when to baptize" and Dec. 13, 2012 "Kelly-White-Plunkett RC birth-baptism intervals Kingstown 1830-1885") I listed birth and baptism dates for seven children baptized in Church of Ireland Dublin St. Mary Church between 1848 and 1860, and eleven children baptized in Roman Catholic Kingstown/Dun Laoghaire Church of St. Michael between 1830 and 1885. Here I summarize the birth-baptism intervals in the two samples. Caveats: These are both very small samples, and each comes from just one church. The COI data come from just one family. The churches were in two different towns. Especially in the RC case, the data come from a long span of time. Doubtless a priest in one RC parish or time might have had baptism practices different from a priest in another RC parish or time, and likewise for COI priests. Nevertheless, here's what I found: Birth-Baptism interval (11 RC children, 7 COI children) 0-1 day: RC 5 children / COI 0 children 2-10 days: RC 5 children / COI 1 child about 1 month: RC 1 child / COI 0 children 30-59 days: RC 0 children / COI 2 children 60-89 days: RC 0 children / COI 3 children 90-120 days: RC 0 children / COI 1 child Conclusion: In these two very particular cases, the RC birth-baptism intervals were all within about a month, and all but one were within 10 days. By contrast, only one COI interval was shorter than 30-120 days. Again, consider the caveats I mentioned above. PJ

Sorry, list -- Cara's gremlins have migrated to my system. You received duplicate mailings titled "Kelly-White-Plunkett RC birth-baptism intervals Kingstown 1830-1885." Please ignore and delete the one with Date: December 13, 2012 1:46 pm. The one with time 3:30 pm is the correct one. My email system went down just as I was sending the 1:46 message, and I thought it hadn't gone through. The later one has a few modifications. PJ