RootsWeb.com Mailing Lists
Previous Page      Next Page
Total: 1980/10000
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. dennis bramble
    3. Hello Caroline, My apologies Caroline and Connie.. I have just replied on this subject and addressed it to Connie. It should have been to you, Caroline. Sorry folks especially those taking part in this discussion. Dennis Bramble. (Kent FHS)

    08/14/2013 02:35:40
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. dennis bramble
    3. Hello Connie, Clearly a misunderstanding has come about in your search for burial/funerals. The law requires that the Anglican Church (C of E) must keep registers of b.m.d's. That law only applies to the Established Church which is the Anglican Church. It came about because Henry VIII insisted that all his subjects would be C of E., like it or not and he wanted to keep tabs on all his subjects! At that time b.m.d records in the parish churches was the easy way to achieve that end. In recent years the law stepped in to preserve the registers which were completed and over 100 years old. These must be kept in a safe place and environment. A very few parish churches are able, by complying with that specification to store their own registers. Otherwise the normal place of storage is the in the County Record Offices. Registers over 100 years old which are still in use are not under that order. With ref; burial of non Anglican people. It is also a legal right of all people to be buried in their own parish churchyard even if their faith is not Anglican. If the churchyard is closed due to being full up, then the local civil cemetery will normally be the burial place. As previously stated, the burial register is for burials, not funeral services. A funeral service could be held in the parish where the dead person lived and the body buried miles away in an ancestral grave. I hope this helps. Dennis Bramble. (Kent FHS)

    08/14/2013 02:30:09
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] LDS website
    2. Phyllis, If you put Dusty Docs into Google you would have come up with this. http://dustydocs.com/ Jennifer

    08/14/2013 01:15:59
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. Anne Peat
    3. Church Registers should be handed over once they are full. Some churches which don't have many burials, christenings or weddings may take a long time to fill up registers, so retain them for many years. They also only have to hand them over if they don't have suitable facilities for storing them themselves, which is the case with most churches which cannot afford the fireproof and temperature/humidity controlled environments that are needed. As well as registers for the occasional offices, churches also have service registers, where funeral services which may take place before burial or cremation at non-church facilities will be recorded. Most churches will put the name of the person whose funeral it is in the margin of the register, so there might be a record here, but it would be very hard to search. Similarly, many churchyards which are closed for burials still are open for the burial of ashes, and will have some sort of register of these occasions. But again, hard to search. HTH Anne On 13 Aug 2013, at 17:12, Brad Rogers wrote: > On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 15:38:51 +0100 > Connie <connie.sparrer@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello Connie, > >> I was told all completed registers and those over 100 years are >> required to be deposited in the Diocesan Record Office which is >> usually, but not always, the county record office. The archivist who >> told me that wasn't telling the truth then? > > Not the whole truth. What you were told is what *should* happen. Many > registers have simply not been surrendered for archival. There's > little, if anything, the relevant Record Office can do to force the > surrender of the required registers.

    08/13/2013 11:30:30
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. Brad Rogers
    3. On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 15:38:51 +0100 Connie <connie.sparrer@gmail.com> wrote: Hello Connie, >I was told all completed registers and those over 100 years are >required to be deposited in the Diocesan Record Office which is >usually, but not always, the county record office. The archivist who >told me that wasn't telling the truth then? Not the whole truth. What you were told is what *should* happen. Many registers have simply not been surrendered for archival. There's little, if anything, the relevant Record Office can do to force the surrender of the required registers. -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)rad never immediately apparent" Going round on the Circle Line trying to find a way out Titanic (My Over) Reaction - 999

    08/13/2013 11:12:08
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. Caroline Bradford
    3. Hi Connie > Are you saying that I dreamed seeing a parish church burial register with > burials up to and including 1992 and it was a register not a day book? Does a > burial not follow a funeral service? Are not burials preceded by a funeral > service? Did I dream seeing a cemetery burial book with conformist and non > conformist burials at a date after the closure of churchyards? No, of course not. Many parishes (though it is almost exclusively rural ones) still have functioning churchyards and therefore continue to maintain burial registers. But burials are registered where they take place. If in a churchyard, they are registered in the burial register of the church, if in a cemetery then they are registered in the cemetery burial register. What religious services may or may not take place prior to the interment are not relevant to the registration of the burial, nor is the denomination of any such service. All burials within a cemetery are registered there, regardless of the religious affiliations of the deceased. > I was told all completed registers and those over 100 years are required to be > deposited in the Diocesan Record Office which is usually, but not always, the > county record office. The archivist who told me that wasn't telling the truth > then? The archivist was, of course, correct, but the fact remains that a large majority of churchyards have been closed at some point in the last 160 years so the parishes concerned no longer maintain burial registers which, as I said before, are registers of burials, not funeral services. Perhaps this extract from the Medway Archives guide explains it better than I can: "Burials may be missing from a particular parish collection altogether or, where they do exist, are discontinued after a certain date because many 19th Century urban churches were built without their own burial grounds, burials taking place in the newly established municipal burial grounds instead. Where burial registers exist for a parish but are discontinued after a certain date, it should be assumed burials had transferred to a municipal cemetery or more recently that a cremation may have taken place...Medway Ancestors includes a few parish funeral registers which are non-statutory and informal parish records containing records of cremations, burials of ashes or burials in municipal cemeteries and some service registers many of which record funerals in the parent church or a crematorium chapel and which in the former case are subject to deposit or survival and in the later case are outwith the present project" Best wishes Caroline

    08/13/2013 10:40:30
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. Connie
    3. On 13/08/2013 14:54, Caroline Bradford wrote: > Sorry, Connie, but this is just not the case. Parish burial registers record > *burials* not funeral services. A vicar who conducted the latter (and who > may well have officiated at the graveside in the former) will probably have > recorded the event in some format (usually a day-book), and these records > may have found their way to the county archives but they are different from > the actual registers and there is no statutory duty for them to be kept, let > alone deposited. Are you saying that I dreamed seeing a parish church burial register with burials up to and including 1992 and it was a register not a day book? Does a burial not follow a funeral service? Are not burials preceded by a funeral service? Did I dream seeing a cemetery burial book with conformist and non conformist burials at a date after the closure of churchyards? I was told all completed registers and those over 100 years are required to be deposited in the Diocesan Record Office which is usually, but not always, the county record office. The archivist who told me that wasn't telling the truth then? -- Connie http://oursalmons.wordpress.com/

    08/13/2013 09:38:51
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. Caroline Bradford
    3. -----Original Message----- From: kent-eng-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:kent-eng-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Connie Sent: 13 August 2013 14:44 To: kent-eng@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903 "However, if there was a church service ahead of the burial the entry will be in the parish church burial registers. If the child was not CoE, then they will be in the burial registers for that denomination." Sorry, Connie, but this is just not the case. Parish burial registers record *burials* not funeral services. A vicar who conducted the latter (and who may well have officiated at the graveside in the former) will probably have recorded the event in some format (usually a day-book), and these records may have found their way to the county archives but they are different from the actual registers and there is no statutory duty for them to be kept, let alone deposited. Caroline

    08/13/2013 08:54:34
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. Connie
    3. On 13/08/2013 12:50, Lozzie55@aol.com wrote: > Not sure if I am missing them, but I can only find Parish Church Burials > here and not > the Municipal Cemeteries that I was meaning Connie. > Have I just not spotted them? The cemetery burial books are often held either by the cemetery supervisor or the local council, often the Parks and Leisure department. However, if there was a church service ahead of the burial the entry will be in the parish church burial registers. If the child was not CoE, then they will be in the burial registers for that denomination. In my experience there are two different registers. The CityArk burial registers go well past the closure date of the churchyards. I've found family burials in the 1900s on CityArk. They weren't buried in the churchyard, nor were they cremated which is the only other way there might be an interment in a churchyard. I've also searched a parish church burial register where the last entry was in 1992, and I do mean 1992, not 1892. I've also been through a cemetery burial book with the supervisor and unexpectedly found a non conformist burial for a family member which was obviously not in the parish church burial register. -- Connie http://oursalmons.wordpress.com/

    08/13/2013 08:43:34
    1. [KENT-ENG] LDS website
    2. Brian Butler
    3. Dear Phylis, If you are having trouble with the site, try www.Dusty Docs. Its the same LDS site but set mainly for UK parish records. It is also available under another name beginning with the letter M but can not recall it at the moment. Hope this helps. Brian Butler mem no 7979

    08/13/2013 07:48:57
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. Jacquie Knott
    3. By 1903, all churchyards in Rochester and the Medway towns were closed for burials. The child would have been buried in one of the municipal cemeteries, either the St Nicholas cemetery or St Margarets Cemetery (despite their names, these are not churchyards) in Rochester, or in one of the Strood, Chatham or Gillingham cemeteries. The burials in the cemeteries are NOT on cityark. But they do have all the cemetery burial books on film at Medway Records Office. I know, as I have found the burials of a dozen or more of my ancestors in them. Happy hunting! Simon On 13/08/2013 05:06, JIM HILL wrote: > Hello all, does any one happen to know what graveyard a child of two months would be laid to rest in Rochester Kent in the year of 1903?? > Thanks > Jim, Alberta canada > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to KENT-ENG-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: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3211/6572 - Release Date: 08/12/13 > >

    08/13/2013 07:35:45
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. Connie
    3. On 13/08/2013 12:05, Lozzie55@aol.com wrote: > Records of burials are on film at Medway Archives so hopefully a kindly > soul may volunteer to do a look up there. They are all here: http://cityark.medway.gov.uk/query/results/?Mode=Search&PathList=%2FZ4a_Medway_Ancestors%2F%0A&SearchWords=&DateList= or http://preview.tinyurl.com/cumtk It's free of charge. -- Connie http://oursalmons.wordpress.com/

    08/13/2013 06:38:37
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. Connie
    3. On 13/08/2013 05:06, JIM HILL wrote: > Hello all, does any one happen to know what graveyard a child of two months would be laid to rest in Rochester Kent in the year of 1903?? Hallo The Medway CityArk may give an indicatiion. There are a number of churches in Rochester and several cemeteries in the Medway area. CityArk is a free resource. If you could give the name of the church where the burial took place it would help. -- Connie http://oursalmons.wordpress.com/

    08/13/2013 04:57:56
    1. [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. Neil Turner
    3. Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 22:06:10 -0600 (MDT) From: JIM HILL <jfhill@shaw.ca> Subject: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903 To: kent-eng@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <1663693003.15403535.1376366770697.JavaMail.root@cds038> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Hello all, does any one happen to know what graveyard a child of two months would be laid to rest in Rochester Kent in the year of 1903?? Thanks Jim, Alberta canada ------------------------------ Hi Jim, If you go to the cityark website http://cityark.medway.gov.uk/ you should be able to trawl through the parish records. There are several churches in Rochester I'd start with the nearest from the 1901 census. Regards, Neil

    08/13/2013 04:28:48
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. In a message dated 13/08/2013 12:35:17 GMT Daylight Time, connie.sparrer@gmail.com writes: They are all here: http://cityark.medway.gov.uk/query/results/?Mode=Search&PathList=%2FZ4a_Medw ay_Ancestors%2F%0A&SearchWords=&DateList= or http://preview.tinyurl.com/cumtk Not sure if I am missing them, but I can only find Parish Church Burials here and not the Municipal Cemeteries that I was meaning Connie. Have I just not spotted them? Lozzie T

    08/13/2013 01:50:25
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. In a message dated 13/08/2013 05:10:09 GMT Daylight Time, jfhill@shaw.ca writes: Hello all, does any one happen to know what graveyard a child of two months would be laid to rest in Rochester Kent in the year of 1903?? Thanks Jim, Alberta canada Hi Jim - hope you are well! It is very possible the child was not buried in a 'churchyard' at all as by 1903 these were pretty full. Perhaps give us the name and date of burial to see if anyone can help? If not in a churchyard: Rochester, St. Margaret's Cemetery Maidstone Road Rochester Kent Also known as: St. Margaret's Cemetery, Rochester was opened on 1860 - (not to be confused with Chatham Cemetery, Maidstone Rd Chatham!) Records of burials are on film at Medway Archives so hopefully a kindly soul may volunteer to do a look up there. Burials; St. Margarets Cemetery, Rochester. 1865 – 1942. There are other burial registers on film there too: St. Margarets Cemetery, Rochester. Burials in Unconsecrated ground 1896 - 1957. 
 St. Peters Cemetery, Rochester. 1871 - 1941. Borstal Cemetery, 1901 - 1960. St. Nicholas Cemetery Rochester 1873 - 1991 Fort Pitt Cemetery, Rochester. 1869 - 1997. The last time I contacted Medway Council for details of a burial it was rather expensive for the details but the form should be her; https://www.medway.gov.uk/forms/serveform.asp?formName=Cremations-Funerals-E nquiry_app.xft&preference=AHTML Best regards Lozzie T

    08/13/2013 01:05:03
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. JIM HILL
    3. Thanks Simon, how are the books listed? By date perhaps as I have the date of death for her and her brother. Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jacquie Knott" <jacquieknott@ntlworld.com> To: kent-eng@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 6:35:45 AM Subject: Re: [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903 By 1903, all churchyards in Rochester and the Medway towns were closed for burials. The child would have been buried in one of the municipal cemeteries, either the St Nicholas cemetery or St Margarets Cemetery (despite their names, these are not churchyards) in Rochester, or in one of the Strood, Chatham or Gillingham cemeteries. The burials in the cemeteries are NOT on cityark. But they do have all the cemetery burial books on film at Medway Records Office. I know, as I have found the burials of a dozen or more of my ancestors in them. Happy hunting! Simon On 13/08/2013 05:06, JIM HILL wrote: > Hello all, does any one happen to know what graveyard a child of two months would be laid to rest in Rochester Kent in the year of 1903?? > Thanks > Jim, Alberta canada > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to KENT-ENG-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: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3211/6572 - Release Date: 08/12/13 > > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to KENT-ENG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

    08/13/2013 12:46:34
    1. [KENT-ENG] Graves Rochester 1903
    2. JIM HILL
    3. Hello all, does any one happen to know what graveyard a child of two months would be laid to rest in Rochester Kent in the year of 1903?? Thanks Jim, Alberta canada

    08/12/2013 04:06:10
    1. [KENT-ENG] Life changing trips our Ancestors took!
    2. Frances Lee
    3. Dear Listers Here's some life changing tips for you! My 2 x great grandfather Edmund Bogg was in the royal Artillery and in 1834 he was sent to the island of Guernsey in the Channel Islands. Now I have found that in the 18th century the Channel Islands were used as places of convalescence for soldiers recovering from injury or illness so I wonder if that is why he was sent there? Anyway whilst he was there he got friendly with a young lady called Ann Glanville born in Mevagissy, Cornwall who was the eldest daughter of Thomas Glanville a ropemaker and Mary Warren. A young bombadier in a bright red uniform would turn a girls head wouldn't it? So that year they got married at The Town Church, St. Peter Port, Guernsey. After that they were sent to Canada for two years and Ceylon for six years! All very exciting! Unfortunately after they seem to have lived in Plumstead, Woolwich for the rest of their lives with Edmund working at Woolwich Arsenal. Poor Ann then found that all of her brothers and sisters and their parents were emigrating to New Zealand whilst she was stuck in the smoky area of Plumstead which is now part of London! She did get to see her siblings and parents once as they came to England to catch the ships to New Zealand but after that a lifetime of letters only! I've always felt so sorry for Ann after living is such beautiful places to be stuck in Plumstead whilst the rest of her family were in beautiful New Zealand! Best wishes Frances Lee

    08/12/2013 04:11:03
    1. Re: [KENT-ENG] Kent List - Life changing Visits, Holidays or excursions our ancestors took
    2. Nancy Seger
    3. Hello Stuart, By now I am sure you know that Meerut was famous as the seat of the Sepoy Rebellion against the East India Company in 1857. I visited there briefly but do not know much since I lived mostly in Pakistan and Sri Lanka. I know more of southern India since my children attended a boarding school in Tamil Nadu. The Raj era is fascinating and I hope that as you dig into that rich history that you find a helpful overview and maybe clues about Sgt. Punchard. Were regiments stationed at Shornclife Camp rotating in and out of India at the time? I realize that he is not a direct ancestor but I think most of us get off on these side roads which help fill out the life of our main interest. I cannot begin to count my tangents and they are all worthwhile for many reasons. I don't know much about records of the British Regular and Colonial Armies in India, but at one time I did find confirmation of my father's cousin in India. (Colonial army or civil servant in Lahore in the 1920's) I do not think it is anything more then stumbling on an odd reference rather than an official source. As a probably irrelevant note, my gg grandfather was the librarian for the East India Company in the 1840's and 50's (Offices in London) which got me wondering what kind of records were kept as the British fortunes in India shifted through the years until the1920's and where are these records kept. I suspect you might find all this on Cindi's Lists. :-) Good luck. Nancy Daryl Rickards wrote: > Hi Stuart, > > If you Google - Shorncliffe Camp - there is much information which may be > able to help > > Daryl from Oz > > -----Original Message----- > From: kent-eng-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:kent-eng-bounces@rootsweb.com] > On Behalf Of Stuart Hammond > Sent: Friday, 9 August 2013 6:36 PM > To: kent-eng-l@rootsweb.com > Subject: [KENT-ENG] Kent List - Life changing Visits, Holidays or excursions > our ancestors took > > Hi All, > > I note that it has been strangely quiet on the Kent List, so to promote a > few postings, I am going to suggest that you might post about a visit, > holiday or excursion which an ancestor made, which in some way changed the > course of the family history. > > To start this off : My grandmother, Elizabeth HODGES (born 9th March 1894 > Sellindge, Hythe, Kent), went into domestic service in Surrey in 1911 and at > sometime around 1918/19 met a young soldier Edward James PUNCHARD (born > about 1889 from Norfolk), who at that time was a Corporal in the Machine Gun > Corps based at Shorncliffe. They married on 13th January 1920 at Elham > Registry Office and when he was posted to India, Elizabeth went with him, > along with their son James born on 17th November 1920. > > Initially things went well and Edward was promoted to become a Farrier > Sergeant stationed in Meerut, India but unfortunately whilst there, the > relationship between Elizabeth and Edward broke down, perhaps through his > drinking, and she left him. Shortly afterwards in 1922, he died possibly at > his own hand. Elizabeth stayed on in India for a short time, returning to > England, where she met and married at the Wesleyan Methodist Church on 5th > April 1926, my granddad, Henry Sisley BIRCH (born 29th April 1897) who at > that time lived at Gibbons Brook, Sellindge. > > Many years later my grandmother wrote a moving account of her time in India, > though never discussed the death of her first husband. > > Had she not gone to India, I would never have been born, since my mother > Kathleen Ruth BIRCH was born from the second marriage on 12th January 1927 > at Grange Cottage, Sellindge, Kent. > > So my questions that arise out of this are : > > Can anyone tell me anything about Shorncliffe Camp? > What was it like to be in India in the 1920s? > In the 1911 census my grandmother was working as a general servant in a > girls school Drumgowan, Alexandra School, Surrey. This seems quite a > distance from the family who were based in 2 Oak Cottage, Sellindge, Kent. > Can anyone suggest why? > > > All the best > > D. Stuart Hammond > Kent List Administrator > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KENT-ENG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to KENT-ENG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >

    08/11/2013 12:52:27