I had to chuckle on reading Marg's post about the gentleman whose tree went back 200 generations to Adam and Eve. Now, genetic scientists have determined that there really were a paternal and maternal most recent common ancestor to everyone in the world today. They're known as "Y-DNA Adam" and "mitochondrial DNA Eve". But these people lived many more than 200 generations ago and not at the same time. Y-Adam is estimated to have lived about 338,000 years ago and mt-Eve about 140,000. Assuming an average of 35 years between generations, Y-Adam is nearly 10,000 generations back. (35 may be an over-estimate on this time scale, putting the number of generations at more than 10,000.) If mothers were younger than fathers (say, 30 years per generation) that's 4,500+ generations back to mt-Eve. Descent from Noah, BTW, is part of one Irish origin myth, though usually it's the sons who get the credit. In this 11th-century myth, the Gaels defeated the tribe of the goddess Dannu, who had previously conquered the Fir Bolg and Formorian peoples. Fir Bolg ancestry traced through Agnoman. a king of Scythia, to Noah. (It seems that hijacking ancestors isn't a new phenomenon.) As a further aside, the Dannans seem to resemble fairies, living half in the mundane world and half in the supernatural. The Formorians resemble trolls or Vikings, coming either from the sea or underground. . Has ANYONE made a credible tree going back thousands of generations? -rt_/) ==================================== From: "marg o'leary" <[email protected]> I did have a gentleman send me a family tree back to Adam and eve, before computer email. Beautifully typed, came through the post, it takes the Irish McCauley family back abt 200 generations to Adam and Eve, so if anyone has any McCauleys out there..... (somewhere the daughters of Noah find their way to Ireland and marry Irish chieftains.) Marg ====================================

Hi Lynn, something I see in your mail that I had forgotten to do is a list of the names you are researching. Its a great reminder. Thanks. Mike Morris Toronto Canada From: Lynn Elves via <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2016 5:08 AM Subject: [LAN] Online trees and hijacked info Family Search Org is free and so is putting up a family tree, and they also offer hints from source or family trees of others. LDS believe this is important.  <snipped) Lynn Cheshire Cat in Oz Searching- CARLETON (CARLTON) Ireland, Lancashire and possibly Australia MURRAY - Lancashire HAY - Lanschashire TRANTER - Lancashire and Staffordshire JOHNSON - Lancashire JONES - Lancashire and Buckinghamshire COLLINS - Buckinghamshire, Lancashire, Australia STACKHOUSE - Lancashire, Yorkshire and anywhere..... HALL (Yorkshire) WADE - Lancashire  

Dear Listers, >From the BBC: "An appeal has been launched to trace the families featured in a series of pictures taken in some of England's poorest and most deprived areas. "The images were taken by photographer Nick Hedges in the 1960s and 1970s for housing charity Shelter in some of the country's biggest cities. "He said the conditions some families lived in 'shocked me to the core'. "An exhibition will be held later this year in Sheffield, Birmingham and Manchester to mark Shelter's 50th year." The article and some of the photos can be viewed at http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-35533616 The remaining photos and more information can be viewed at http://england.shelter.org.uk/shelter_50 Moss Side is featured in many of the Manchester photos. Those that participated in the recent discussion about the area might find the photos interesting. Kind regards, Lynne

I agree, you can get clues on even the bad ones but you just have to be very careful and confirm what you find.  Even the worst are often correct on current generations.   Familysearch.org family tree is free, but it lets other records be added so that you end up with things on your tree that you don't want there, and it isn't easy to remove them.  I'm getting frustrated with that.   In any online tree, the key is to be very careful. On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 09:44:07 -0700 (MST), N NASH via wrote: I agree with many comments about erroneous family trees. A "relative" on Genes Reunited had over 12,000 relatives the last time l looked and it went up rapidly each week. Impossible to have done the research that fast. However, having seen the impossible some of these trees have value as a starting point. I have discovered great hints and connections by looking at the trees, considering the probability factor ( much like Adams Douglas's book Hitchhikers Guide to to Galaxy) then doing my own research. Although the trees aren't accurate they sometimes have useful clues and half truths that lead you to a relative. Noreen Victoria, Canada

As everyone else has said - check your own information. A lot of people just copy what others have put on line. Believe it or not I have seen people - on Ancestry - (more than one) purporting to have their family trees back to ADAM & EVE !!!!! They have my Tree included (wrongly) and I have difficulty getting further back than 1600's (the 1900's in some cases)!!! Pamela

I agree with many comments about erroneous family trees. A "relative" on Genes Reunited had over 12,000 relatives the last time l looked and it went up rapidly each week. Impossible to have done the research that fast. However, having seen the impossible some of these trees have value as a starting point. I have discovered great hints and connections by looking at the trees, considering the probability factor ( much like Adams Douglas's book Hitchhikers Guide to to Galaxy) then doing my own research. Although the trees aren't accurate they sometimes have useful clues and half truths that lead you to a relative. Researching Pernie, Wood, Lishman, Perry, Charnley, Wilson, Hunter in Lancashire Smith, Perry of Somerset Wood of Derbyshire Noreen Victoria, Canada

I don't have a problem with Ancestry. Every month, I download my trees to a GEDcom file and put it into an external hard drive on my computer. Each new tree over rides the last one. It works for me. The problem I have is multiple trees on Ancestry ! I have one tree that has 4 other clones, all called the same so I never know when I am working on ! Ancestry says this happen when I change my password! I have started to download my trees, delete the ones on Ancestery and I will put them back with a new name. I am hopeing this works but just this past couple of weeks, I started a file for a friend of mine, left it for a couple of days and then went in to input some information, came out and found that Ancestry has called the tree Holden2. I now have a split tree. They can't explain it. I am up for renewal in April but I don't think I will bother, I will have downloaded all my trees by then. Pauline in Darwen, Lancashire

Good morning all Ah Lynn - You have just reminded me. I belong to genes reunited and I havent had a contact for at least a year! So perhaps Ancestry has taken over from them as a place to have a tree. Also, for a little hints column in out local history group, I am looking for programs where people can add or search actual family trees on line, if anyone has knowledge of trees on line and how good they are. (or how bad!) Marg Port Stephens -----Original Message----- From: Lynn Elves via Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:48 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [LAN] quiet List well I am still reading and watching, though sometimes I read a month work in a sitting as I don't have a lot if time, so others especially Mike will have answered. Not to leave others out.... I have dropped off in terms of me sending in things, but that is a busy life now and little time. I'm still stuck with family, I wait and then a year or two I find something. I know Ancestry and Find my past and Family Search Org have had an impact, but nothing better than having human contact via communication. Lynn Cheshire Cat in Oz

Hello List Yes, I agree with Nivard that many online trees are inaccurate and some are pure fantasy. I looked at one yesterday for an enquirer...it had the illegitimate first child of a woman shown as her younger sister (and showed birthplace as Oakham, Staffordshire...Dudley being the correct place!). The same tree showed the second, illegitimate, child as being legitimate to a husband...though there is no marriage in the period! It was all to make it "nice and tidy - perfectly "normal"". And it was when records abound - a quick check of online registers, GRO and census showed what the true picture was. But the beginner I was helping would have been sucked into believing what she found online was "true and correct - a tree of her family" had I not shown her other records. Some of those offering "free" hosting of trees for their subscribers are then holding and using that material even after the person is no longer a subscriber. Good for promoting sales! There are many who go online, find a tree and make their family fit it - then put their version online too, widening the web of inaccurate or fantasy trees. If you want to put your tree online to entice contact then I would suggest putting basic information only - name, year of birth, year of marriage, year of death - with places. And do respond to enquiries. Having contacted some half-dozen or so online tree owners in the past year...only ONE responded: is that due to apathy, or due to their no longer being a subscriber to the particular "major provider"? One wonders!! I have found trees with women long, long past child bearing years suddenly producing their first child......a century before HRT or IVF existed. User beware! Jacqui ________________________________________ From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Nivard Ovington via <[email protected]> Sent: 13 February 2016 21:41 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LAN] quiet List Hi Marg Not sure you could ever say Ancestry had taken over from Genesreunited as a place to have a tree, surely you have it the other way around? Genesreunited has always been a minnow comparatively As to how good or bad online trees are ? *All* online trees are suspect at best and fairy tales at worst (I have found genesreunited to be the worst of all) Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 13/02/2016 21:33, marg o'leary via wrote: > Good morning all > > Ah Lynn - You have just reminded me. I belong to genes reunited and I havent > had a contact for at least a year! So perhaps Ancestry has taken over from > them as a place to have a tree. > > Also, for a little hints column in out local history group, I am looking for > programs where people can add or search actual family trees on line, if > anyone has knowledge of trees on line and how good they are. (or how bad!) > > > Marg > > Port Stephens --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No fees! The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: ------------------------------- 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 Marg Not sure you could ever say Ancestry had taken over from Genesreunited as a place to have a tree, surely you have it the other way around? Genesreunited has always been a minnow comparatively As to how good or bad online trees are ? *All* online trees are suspect at best and fairy tales at worst (I have found genesreunited to be the worst of all) Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 13/02/2016 21:33, marg o'leary via wrote: > Good morning all > > Ah Lynn - You have just reminded me. I belong to genes reunited and I havent > had a contact for at least a year! So perhaps Ancestry has taken over from > them as a place to have a tree. > > Also, for a little hints column in out local history group, I am looking for > programs where people can add or search actual family trees on line, if > anyone has knowledge of trees on line and how good they are. (or how bad!) > > > Marg > > Port Stephens --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

well I am still reading and watching, though sometimes I read a month work in a sitting as I don't have a lot if time, so others especially Mike will have answered. Not to leave others out.... I have dropped off in terms of me sending in things, but that is a busy life now and little time. I'm still stuck with family, I wait and then a year or two I find something. I know Ancestry and Find my past and Family Search Org have had an impact, but nothing better than having human contact via communication. Lynn Cheshire Cat in Oz

  I have found online trees with parents younger than their children and others adding to trees, people who don't belong in their family.  If a name matches, it doesn't matter if dates or locations don't make sense.  I've had some take people from my tree to add to theirs when their tree has absolutely no connection to mine.  These things would apply to all online trees as they are all owner submitted.  Caution is the word. On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 22:08:51 +0000, w Simkins via wrote: Hello List Yes, I agree with Nivard that many online trees are inaccurate and some are pure fantasy. I looked at one yesterday for an enquirer...it had the illegitimate first child of a woman shown as her younger sister (and showed birthplace as Oakham, Staffordshire...Dudley being the correct place!). The same tree showed the second, illegitimate, child as being legitimate to a husband...though there is no marriage in the period! It was all to make it "nice and tidy - perfectly "normal"". And it was when records abound - a quick check of online registers, GRO and census showed what the true picture was. But the beginner I was helping would have been sucked into believing what she found online was "true and correct - a tree of her family" had I not shown her other records. Some of those offering "free" hosting of trees for their subscribers are then holding and using that material even after the person is no longer a subscriber. Good for promoting sales! There are many who go online, find a tree and make their family fit it - then put their version online too, widening the web of inaccurate or fantasy trees. If you want to put your tree online to entice contact then I would suggest putting basic information only - name, year of birth, year of marriage, year of death - with places. And do respond to enquiries. Having contacted some half-dozen or so online tree owners in the past year...only ONE responded: is that due to apathy, or due to their no longer being a subscriber to the particular "major provider"? One wonders!! I have found trees with women long, long past child bearing years suddenly producing their first child......a century before HRT or IVF existed. User beware! Jacqui

Many places now have trees online.  Ancestry is the largest and best site for trees but contains many errors as it's only as good as the people posting.  Familysearch.org  and My Heritage have trees, as well as several other smaller sites. On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 08:33:13 +1100, marg o'leary via wrote: Good morning all Ah Lynn - You have just reminded me. I belong to genes reunited and I havent had a contact for at least a year! So perhaps Ancestry has taken over from them as a place to have a tree. Also, for a little hints column in out local history group, I am looking for programs where people can add or search actual family trees on line, if anyone has knowledge of trees on line and how good they are. (or how bad!) Marg Port Stephens -----Original Message----- From: Lynn Elves via Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:48 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [LAN] quiet List well I am still reading and watching, though sometimes I read a month work in a sitting as I don't have a lot if time, so others especially Mike will have answered. Not to leave others out.... I have dropped off in terms of me sending in things, but that is a busy life now and little time. I'm still stuck with family, I wait and then a year or two I find something. I know Ancestry and Find my past and Family Search Org have had an impact, but nothing better than having human contact via communication. Lynn Cheshire Cat in Oz :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No fees! The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: ------------------------------- 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

One of the many obstacles that I am attempting to overcome in my research deals with the family of my 3x-gr grandfather Thomas Wood of Ashton in Makerfield. Over a period of many years I have accumulated various pieces of information that leads me to believe his parents were John Wood and Betty Savage who were married at Winwick in 1782: Marriage: 5 Mar 1782 St Oswald, Winwick, Lancashire, England John Wood - (X), this Parish Betty Savage - (X), this Parish Witness: Thomas Cross; John Ascroft Banns Read: 10 Feb 1782, 2nd: 17 Feb 1782, 3rd: 24 Feb 1782 Married by Banns by: B Banner Curate Register: Marriages 1766 - 1812, Page 297, Entry 2718 My objective is to determine definitively that these are my 4x-gr grandparents. What I know is that Thomas was born 16 Apr 1790, the son of John: Baptism: 2 May 1790 St Thomas, Ashton in Makerfield, Lancashire, England Thomas Wood - Son of John Wood Born: 16 Apr 1790 Register: Baptisms 1765-1809, Page 73, Entry 5 Source: FHL British Film 1885657 In addition to Thomas, there were three other sons baptized at St. Thomas to John Wood (no mother’s names were given on christening records of this period) between 1782 and 1802, William in 1784, John in 1798 and James in 1803. I am rather confident that William was Thomas’ brother but I have no other information that would tie Thomas in with either John or James. In this time period there were no females baptized but I believe that there was at least one female that could tie in with William and Thomas. In 1810 Ann Wood was married at Winwick: Marriage: 5 Mar 1810 St Oswald, Winwick, Lancashire, England John Vernon - this Parish Ann Wood - (X), this Parish Witness: William Vernon; Thos. Walker Banns Read: 7 Jan 1810, 2nd: 14 Jan 1810, 3rd: 21 Jan 1810 Married by Banns by: Gs. Chippindall Curate Register: Marriages 1766 - 1812, Page 849, Entry 18 Source: LDS Film 1885708 In 1811 John and Ann Vernon christened a daughter at St. Thomas and the record gives Ann’s parents as John and Betty Wood : Baptism: 24 Feb 1811 Ashton Chapel, Ashton in Makerfield, Lancashire, England Elizabeth Vernon - 1st Child and 1st Daughter of John Vernon & Ann, Daughter of John & Betty Wood Born: 31 Jan 1811 Abode: Ashton Occupation: Hingemaker Baptised by: Rev. E. Sibson Curate Register: Baptisms 1810 - 1812, Page 9, Entry 167 Source: LDS Film 1885657 Based on census and burial data for Ann she would have been born in 1787/88, right between William and Thomas. Prior to John Vernon’s death in 1815, John and Ann had two daughters and a son all christened at St. Thomas. However, Ann later remarried Peter Kay and they had 4 children, two sons and two daughters, but christenings for only the daughters could be found: Baptism: 14 May 1828 Ashton Chapel, Ashton in Makerfield, Lancashire, England Mary Kay - 2nd Child & 1st Daughter of Peter Kay & Anne Born: 29 Feb 1828 Abode: School Lane in Ashton Occupation: Labourer Baptised by: Edmund Sibson Minister of Ashton Register: Baptisms 1828 - 1844, Page 8, Entry 64 Source: LDS Film 1885658 Baptism: 7 Aug 1831 Ashton Chapel, Ashton in Makerfield, Lancashire, England Mary Kay - 4 Child & 2 Daughter of Peter Kay & Anne Born: 7 Jul 1831 Abode: School Lane in Ashton Occupation: Labourer Baptised by: Edmund Sibson Minister of Ashton Register: Baptisms 1828 - 1844, Page 82, Entry 664 Source: LDS Film 1885658 This may be an indication that the sons were christened in a church other than CofE. This was the case with William and his wife Ellen (Ince) Wood. They also had four children with the sons christened at St. Thomas and the daughters christened at Our Lady’s RC Chapel in Bryn, Ashton in Makerfield. This could also be why there were only sons christened at St. Thomas for John Wood and why I have not been able to locate a christening for Ann or any other daughters that may have been born to John and Betty Wood. So, based on this information, would anyone have any idea how this information could be used to locate any daughters or John and Betty Wood and confirm that Ann was the sister of William and Thomas?

Am so grateful to all who responded to my Annie Short request. I have looked at Annie from Toxteth but discarded her. My Annie is very much an enigma right now. She had a dismal life on the whole. She loses her son 14 months after his birth in 1915 and her husband was killed in WW1 (1916) having won a Military Cross doing so. She herself dies aged 33 in 1920. She left behind a daughter born in 1910 who ends up in South Africa. Very sad. On her son’s birth certificate she gives her name as Annie Mary Josephine Short but this is the only time she suggests she has other names. Could it be that she herself is illegitimate and perhaps puts John Short for her father simply to complete the box? She names her only daughter Annie Florence Grace !! Perhaps my Annie hankered after other names for herself also..... the odd thing is that her daughter has never been known by any of these names and re-named herself Judy !!! Thanks to all and I shall keep hunting of course. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

This query has moved on since I posted the message below. (It didn't appear on the Board so I wrote directly to Wendy, the original person with the query). The child Annie Josephine b 1880 - her baptism and her parents marriage is amongst the Liverpool Catholic records on Ancestry - her father was a William Short -- so unfortunately it isn't the correct birth. Wendy will still be looking for an Annie Short, with father John - Annie supposedly born Sutton Lancs about 1885/6.June From: June Dowling via <[email protected]> To: Maree de Hauterive <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Wendy - I am not sure if you will have seen the suggestion from Maree below. She replied to my reply and the message only seems to have come to me and not onto the Lancs Gen Board. (Why does that happen I wonder?) If this is your Annie Josephine, born Liverpool (West Derby District) in 1880- in 1881 she is living with her mother, Annie (father not there) - and her grandparents, Henry Banks 56 and Jane 54. Jane was born Ireland. Family living in Toxteth, Liverpool. Regards June       From: Maree de Hauterive <[email protected]> To: June Dowling <[email protected]> Is this your girl ..... ?? Births Mar 1880   Short Annie Josephine  -  W. Derby 8b252 ________________________________________ F list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected]

Hi Wendy, This is right out of left field and you may know it already, but thought worth mentioning.... JOHN ALBERT SHORTT, Sergeant, 8th Foot Reg., aged 29 yrs., Father John Shortt, (Pensioner) married THIRZA WILLSON, dau. Of late Philip Henry Wilson aka Henry and Mother, Annie, 19 Feb. 1881 St. Philip Salford. (See entries on Ancestry) In 1881 they are at the Military Barracks, Salford. Given ages 29 and 23 resp. She is born Aylesbury Buckinghamshire. (I believe John Albert Shortt was born Chatham Kent). In 1882 In Bradford Yks., Lilian Ethel Shortt is born to this couple. Barracks Bradford. I found an Index stating a JOHN ALBERT SHORTT had died in 1882 in Bradford Yks. I then found an Index which stated a Lilian Ethel Shortt had died in 1883 in Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire. But I do not know whether this is one and the same John Albert Shortt or perhaps a child and I can't find any further links to this small family. Perhaps there is an Irish connection somewhere yet to be found. But I did say, out of left field and wondered whether being in the Military there may be a link someone else may find. Good luck, Robyn --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Wendy - I am not sure if you will have seen the suggestion from Maree below. She replied to my reply and the message only seems to have come to me and not onto the Lancs Gen Board. (Why does that happen I wonder?) If this is your Annie Josephine, born Liverpool (West Derby District) in 1880- in 1881 she is living with her mother, Annie (father not there) - and her grandparents, Henry Banks 56 and Jane 54. Jane was born Ireland. Family living in Toxteth, Liverpool. Regards June From: Maree de Hauterive <[email protected]> To: June Dowling <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, 11 February 2016, 21:51 Subject: Re: Births Mar 1880  - Short Annie Josephine  - W. Derby 8b252 Is this your girl ..... ?? Births Mar 1880   Short Annie Josephine  -  W. Derby 8b252 ________________________________________ From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of June Dowling via <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, 12 February 2016 9:09:27 a.m. To: Wendy Smith; [email protected] Subject: Re: [LAN] SHORT Hi Wendy, If Annie Short was born in Sutton, Lancashire - the Registration District was St Helens - and there isn't an Annie (or variant) Short registered between 1885 - 1889 in that District. Nor does she seem to appear amongst the British Army births (as far as I can see). There are several locations named Sutton throughout England - but I agree that the 1911 census definitely states Lancashire. There was indeed an Army Barracks in St Helens itself at the time of her birth - but then again Army Barracks were fairly plentiful and that may just be a coincidence. There is an Anne Short registered in Belfast in Q/E Dec 1886 - but it would be necessary to obtain a birth certificate to confirm or eliminate that particular birth. Sorry not to be able to help. I hope some super sleuth can come up with something more positive for you. June       From: Wendy Smith via <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, 11 February 2016, 18:27 Subject: [LAN] SHORT I live in Kent and I am helping a good friend to research her ancestors and particularly her grand mother. The grand mother’s name is  Annie SHORT  (possibly Annie Mary Josephine SHORT). We are unsure as to where she was born but it would be somewhere between 1886 - 1888. She marries a George GOODEY in 1909 in Ireland when he is in the army based in NI. However, by 1911 they are living in Pembroke Street, London, and on this entry she gives her birth place as Sutton, Lancashire. At the moment I have been unable to find a birth which seems to fit.  They marry at Willowfield Church, Willowfield, County Down (Belfast) and her father is given as John Short – also a soldier.  I just wonder whether Annie’s family may have been local to Sutton or, of course to Co. Down? Any help would be appreciated. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list.  No fees! The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: ------------------------------- 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 :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list.  No fees! The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: ------------------------------- 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

Hello Lorraine,I cannot help you with a picture but will send you a copy of a section of a map dated 1894 showing the village and the pub... regards. Mike Morris Toronto Canada From: Lorraine Toleikis via <[email protected]> To: Lancsgen <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2016 5:56 PM   I have a family history interest in a house called "Ivy House", in the village of Bardsea, in the parish of Urswick, near Ulverston. In the 1871 census that house was enumerated immediately before the Braddyll's Arms pub.  So I'm assuming it might be next door?  Or certainly nearby… I hope it is still there. <snip>

Hi Wendy, If Annie Short was born in Sutton, Lancashire - the Registration District was St Helens - and there isn't an Annie (or variant) Short registered between 1885 - 1889 in that District. Nor does she seem to appear amongst the British Army births (as far as I can see). There are several locations named Sutton throughout England - but I agree that the 1911 census definitely states Lancashire. There was indeed an Army Barracks in St Helens itself at the time of her birth - but then again Army Barracks were fairly plentiful and that may just be a coincidence. There is an Anne Short registered in Belfast in Q/E Dec 1886 - but it would be necessary to obtain a birth certificate to confirm or eliminate that particular birth. Sorry not to be able to help. I hope some super sleuth can come up with something more positive for you. June From: Wendy Smith via <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, 11 February 2016, 18:27 Subject: [LAN] SHORT I live in Kent and I am helping a good friend to research her ancestors and particularly her grand mother. The grand mother’s name is  Annie SHORT  (possibly Annie Mary Josephine SHORT). We are unsure as to where she was born but it would be somewhere between 1886 - 1888.    She marries a George GOODEY in 1909 in Ireland when he is in the army based in NI. However, by 1911 they are living in Pembroke Street, London, and on this entry she gives her birth place as Sutton, Lancashire. At the moment I have been unable to find a birth which seems to fit.  They marry at Willowfield Church, Willowfield, County Down (Belfast) and her father is given as John Short – also a soldier.  I just wonder whether Annie’s family may have been local to Sutton or, of course to Co. Down? Any help would be appreciated. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list.  No fees!  The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: ------------------------------- 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