I have various relatives who lived and died in Enfield and Edmonton and surrounds. Other than Lavender Hill Cemetery, are there other cemeteries that they might be buried in, and are there any online records. Regards Jan Sent from Windows Mail

Thanks again, Judy Lester, for setting me straight! However, I have now found on the London, England School Admissions and Discharges record for Roland Geo SEGGER (same person, but name changed to ASSITER and crossed out on Workhouse Admission record of 10 Mar 1903) his admission to Ivydale Road School Southwark on 12 mar 1903! His father George ASSITER was recorded as person responsible, whereas it was his mother Emily SEGGER who was responsible for him two days prior. What was going on - rather a sad tug of war over young Roland I think. Thanks again………Judy. Perth W.Australia > On 21 Apr 2015, at 3:00 pm, [email protected] wrote: > > > > This mailing list works in parallel with the London surname interest list on the web at http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/london.html . Check for matching interests and add your own ! > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Workhouse Information (Judy Lester) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 09:35:16 +0100 > From: "Judy Lester" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [LON] Workhouse Information > To: "'Judith Acaster'" <[email protected]>, "'LONDON Mailing List'" > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Judy, he will have spent the month in Newlands House itself, which served as the receiving-home. Children were allocated from there to the various cottages and 'scattered homes'. Several homes in Friern Road were also used -- see the Workhouses link given earlier (scroll 3/4 down the page to 'Scattered Homes'). > > HTH > > Judy > London, UK > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Judith Acaster via > > Confusing though when he is in the admissions column on 10/3/1903 and discharge column on 9/4/1903 to 6NC. Where did he spend the previous month? > > >> On 19 Apr 2015, at 5:39 pm, Judy Lester <[email protected]> wrote: > >> http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Camberwell/ > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > To contact the LONDON list administrator, send an email to > [email protected] > > To post a message to the LONDON mailing list, send an email to [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 > email with no additional text. > > > End of LONDON Digest, Vol 10, Issue 46 > **************************************

Dear Judy That actually helps a lot! Thank you very much for your very full and detailed reply, which is much appreciated. Having only recently found that letter, it's taken me into unfamiliar areas, which are very fascinating. As you suggest, it hasn't always proved easy to navigate through the poor law records on Ancestry. Thanks again Mike -----Original Message----- From: Judy Lester [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 21 April 2015 22:29 To: 'Mike Corrigan'; 'LONDON Mailing List' Subject: RE: [LON] Workhouse Query - St Luke's Chelsea Mike, Welcome back! One possible scenario is that John Corridon was living in Bristol when he fell upon hard times, or became ill, and was unable to support himself. He may have applied for assistance to the Bristol Corporation of the Poor, and may have undergone a settlement examination to determine his eligibility. As a result, he was found to be chargeable to the parish of St Luke Chelsea, for whatever reason. Up to 1861 he would normally have been removed to his parish of settlement (Chelsea), unless he could prove residence in Bristol for 5 continuous years (this was reduced to 3 years in 1861). The removal order that was issued on 11 September 1860 might have been suspended, if perhaps he was too ill to be removed at that time. Alternatively, Chelsea might have been attempting to appeal against the order. In either of those circumstances Bristol would probably have agreed to care for him temporarily, whilst charging maintenance costs back to Chelsea. These may be the costs that the Clerk was trying to recover. As you suggest, there might be an inwards removal order from Bristol held amongst the Chelsea records, perhaps in CHBG/167/003. This volume is online at Ancestry. The access path is ... London, England, Poor Law and Board of Guardian Records, 1430-1930 > Chelsea > Chelsea > Orders of Removal > Settlement and Relief, 1859-1865 (1137 images). As regards other records at LMA, if John Corridon applied for relief from the Chelsea Guardians at an earlier or a later date, and if his settlement was in doubt, there might be an examination for him at Chelsea. Settlement examinations are in CHBG/164/001-009, covering 1842-1907. There are also some admission/discharge registers for the Britten Street workhouse in the early 1860s. All these records are listed in the LMA online catalogue, but it is quite hard to find things there. The 'London Generations' pdf pages are easier to use and include poor law records. http://bit.ly/1PcO32u (pdf) (scroll down to Chelsea Board of Guardians) Ancestry appears to have some but not all of the Chelsea settlement records. To be honest, it is hard to be sure exactly what they do have because their labelling and source citation are rather poor. I hope this helps a little. Judy London, UK -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Corrigan via This is my first posting to this list for a very long time, so it's good to be back! Amongst the non-indexed records on Ancestry (London, England, Poor Law and Board of Guardian Records, 1430-1930) in the 1861 Settlement and Examinations papers for St Luke's, Chelsea there is a loose letter in which I am very interested. The letter is from the Clerk to the Corporation of the Poor in Bristol, to the workhouse in Chelsea. Dated 30th March 1861 this states that 5 applications to the Churchwardens and Overseers in Chelsea have been sent requesting payment of 7s/10d maintenance of John Corridon under order of removal dated 11 September 1860. As no notice has been taken of three applications, the writer asks for the details of the person whose duty it is to pay these amounts. I have several questions relating to this: In what circumstances would these maintenance payments be made? Also, as Ancestry does not appear to have the appropriate St Luke's orders of removal records online for that period, and virtually all Bristol workhouse records were lost in the blitz, would I be correct in thinking that the order may be recorded at the London Metropolitan Archive at the following location: CHBG/167/003 Orders of removal inwards 1859 - 1865. Are there any other records at the LMA, or elsewhere, which may help me research this further.

Mike, Welcome back! One possible scenario is that John Corridon was living in Bristol when he fell upon hard times, or became ill, and was unable to support himself. He may have applied for assistance to the Bristol Corporation of the Poor, and may have undergone a settlement examination to determine his eligibility. As a result, he was found to be chargeable to the parish of St Luke Chelsea, for whatever reason. Up to 1861 he would normally have been removed to his parish of settlement (Chelsea), unless he could prove residence in Bristol for 5 continuous years (this was reduced to 3 years in 1861). The removal order that was issued on 11 September 1860 might have been suspended, if perhaps he was too ill to be removed at that time. Alternatively, Chelsea might have been attempting to appeal against the order. In either of those circumstances Bristol would probably have agreed to care for him temporarily, whilst charging maintenance costs back to Chelsea. These may be the costs that the Clerk was trying to recover. As you suggest, there might be an inwards removal order from Bristol held amongst the Chelsea records, perhaps in CHBG/167/003. This volume is online at Ancestry. The access path is ... London, England, Poor Law and Board of Guardian Records, 1430-1930 > Chelsea > Chelsea > Orders of Removal > Settlement and Relief, 1859-1865 (1137 images). As regards other records at LMA, if John Corridon applied for relief from the Chelsea Guardians at an earlier or a later date, and if his settlement was in doubt, there might be an examination for him at Chelsea. Settlement examinations are in CHBG/164/001-009, covering 1842-1907. There are also some admission/discharge registers for the Britten Street workhouse in the early 1860s. All these records are listed in the LMA online catalogue, but it is quite hard to find things there. The 'London Generations' pdf pages are easier to use and include poor law records. http://bit.ly/1PcO32u (pdf) (scroll down to Chelsea Board of Guardians) Ancestry appears to have some but not all of the Chelsea settlement records. To be honest, it is hard to be sure exactly what they do have because their labelling and source citation are rather poor. I hope this helps a little. Judy London, UK -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Corrigan via This is my first posting to this list for a very long time, so it's good to be back! Amongst the non-indexed records on Ancestry (London, England, Poor Law and Board of Guardian Records, 1430-1930) in the 1861 Settlement and Examinations papers for St Luke's, Chelsea there is a loose letter in which I am very interested. The letter is from the Clerk to the Corporation of the Poor in Bristol, to the workhouse in Chelsea. Dated 30th March 1861 this states that 5 applications to the Churchwardens and Overseers in Chelsea have been sent requesting payment of 7s/10d maintenance of John Corridon under order of removal dated 11 September 1860. As no notice has been taken of three applications, the writer asks for the details of the person whose duty it is to pay these amounts. I have several questions relating to this: In what circumstances would these maintenance payments be made? Also, as Ancestry does not appear to have the appropriate St Luke's orders of removal records online for that period, and virtually all Bristol workhouse records were lost in the blitz, would I be correct in thinking that the order may be recorded at the London Metropolitan Archive at the following location: CHBG/167/003 Orders of removal inwards 1859 - 1865. Are there any other records at the LMA, or elsewhere, which may help me research this further.

Dear All This is my first posting to this list for a very long time, so it's good to be back! Amongst the non-indexed records on Ancestry (London, England, Poor Law and Board of Guardian Records, 1430-1930) in the 1861 Settlement and Examinations papers for St Luke's, Chelsea there is a loose letter in which I am very interested. The letter is from the Clerk to the Corporation of the Poor in Bristol, to the workhouse in Chelsea. Dated 30th March 1861 this states that 5 applications to the Churchwardens and Overseers in Chelsea have been sent requesting payment of 7s/10d maintenance of John Corridon under order of removal dated 11 September 1860. As no notice has been taken of three applications, the writer asks for the details of the person whose duty it is to pay these amounts. I have several questions relating to this: In what circumstances would these maintenance payments be made? Also, as Ancestry does not appear to have the appropriate St Luke's orders of removal records online for that period, and virtually all Bristol workhouse records were lost in the blitz, would I be correct in thinking that the order may be recorded at the London Metropolitan Archive at the following location: CHBG/167/003 Orders of removal inwards 1859 - 1865. Are there any other records at the LMA, or elsewhere, which may help me research this further. Thanks in anticipation of any help you may be able to give me, please. Regards Mike Corrigan Keynsham Bristol UK Researching CORRIGAN/CORRIDON/CORRIDAN in London 1850s, CORRIGAN/POWELL in Birmingham 1870s, CORRIGAN in Cardiff 1890s, CORRIGAN in NSW Australia 1900s to present. CORRIGAN/CALLAGHAN in Bristol 1850s to present

Thanks Judy Lester. It did cross my mind that it could be ‘6’ but didn’t connect with ‘Newland Cottages’……..obvious!! Confusing though when he is in the admissions column on 10/3/1903 and discharge column on 9/4/1903 to 6NC. Where did he spend the previous month? Poor little chap and poor Mum who was trying to juggle her two children and working in service. My grandmother turned out very well, but never talked about this part of her early life. Roland died aged 21 of Tuberculosis on 25.4.1914 - he lived at the Church Army Home in Balaam St. Plaistow, W. Ham. Grandma said that she had a brother who died in the war. Well, I guess he did! Thanks also for the interesting Workhouse link. Cheers!……….Judy. Perth W.Australia > On 19 Apr 2015, at 5:39 pm, Judy Lester <[email protected]> wrote: > > Judith, > > The discharge column reads 'To 6 NC', showing that he had been allocated to No. 6 Newlands Cottages on entering the receiving-home. > > > For information on Newlands, and on the scattered homes in general, please see the Camberwell Workhouse page. > http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Camberwell/ > > HTH > > Judy > London, UK > ________________________________ > From: Judith Acaster via <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sunday, 19 April 2015, 7:14 > Subject: [LON] Workhouse Information > > Found in the London, England, workhouse Admission and Discharge Records, 1659-1930 > > Roland ASSITER (my grandmother’s brother, recently discovered!) > Birth date: 1893 > Admission Age 10 > Admission Date 10 Mar 1903 > Discharge Date 9 Apri 1903 > Borough Southwark > Parish or Poor Law Union Camberwell. > Place, London England > Title Newlands Cottages Registers, 1903-1923 > > In the column, ‘To whom transferred’……..’To ?CNC’ >

Judy, he will have spent the month in Newlands House itself, which served as the receiving-home. Children were allocated from there to the various cottages and 'scattered homes'. Several homes in Friern Road were also used -- see the Workhouses link given earlier (scroll 3/4 down the page to 'Scattered Homes'). HTH Judy London, UK -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Judith Acaster via Confusing though when he is in the admissions column on 10/3/1903 and discharge column on 9/4/1903 to 6NC. Where did he spend the previous month? > On 19 Apr 2015, at 5:39 pm, Judy Lester <[email protected]> wrote: > http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Camberwell/

Thanks for your patience! Found in the London, England, workhouse Admission and Discharge Records, 1659-1930 Roland ASSITER (my grandmother’s brother, recently discovered!) Birth date: 1893 Admission Age 10 Admission Date 10 Mar 1903 Discharge Date 9 Apri 1903 Borough Southwark Parish or Poor Law Union Camberwell. Place, London England Title Newlands Cottages Registers, 1903-1923 His birth name SEGGER has been crossed out and his birth father’s name substituted. He was born illegitimate in Kersey Suffolk - father not named. My Grandmother, Lillian May ASSITER was given her father’s name but there is no record of a marriage between, George ASSITER and Emily Selina SEGGER. In the column, ‘To whom transferred’……..’To ?CNC’ A further record of Discharge 16.Jan 1904 from Parish of Camberwell, Title, Scattered Homes , Peckham 1902-1907 showed Roland discharged to: 26 Friern Rd. along with nine other children. I note that on the previous record, he was discharged to his mother who is described as a servant at 101 Friern Rd. E. Dulwich. She was there in the 1901 Census. Roland was living with his maternal Aunt in Upper Tulse Hill, London (Now Brixton) and his sister, my grandmother was with her paternal Grandmother, in 29 Stafford St. Camberwell. On 24.08.1903 Lillian May ASSITER was admitted to Woods St. School and left (to another school, not named) 4.11.1904. Her guardian was named George ASSITER. I think my lovely Grandmother would be mortified if she knew I had discovered all this - let alone shared it across the world! Hope all this makes sense……….Judy. Perth W.Australia

Judith, The discharge column reads 'To 6 NC', showing that he was allocated to No. 6 Newlands Cottages on entering the receiving-home. For information on Newlands, and on the scattered homes in general, please see the Workhouses page for Camberwell. http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Camberwell/ HTH Judy London, UK ________________________________ From: Judith Acaster via <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, 19 April 2015, 7:14 Subject: [LON] Workhouse Information Found in the London, England, workhouse Admission and Discharge Records, 1659-1930 Roland ASSITER (my grandmother’s brother, recently discovered!) Birth date: 1893 Admission Age 10 Admission Date 10 Mar 1903 Discharge Date 9 Apri 1903 Borough Southwark Parish or Poor Law Union Camberwell. Place, London England Title Newlands Cottages Registers, 1903-1923 In the column, ‘To whom transferred’……..’To ?CNC’

Judith, The discharge column reads 'To 6 NC', showing that he had been allocated to No. 6 Newlands Cottages on entering the receiving-home. For information on Newlands, and on the scattered homes in general, please see the Camberwell Workhouse page. http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Camberwell/ HTH Judy London, UK ________________________________ From: Judith Acaster via <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, 19 April 2015, 7:14 Subject: [LON] Workhouse Information Found in the London, England, workhouse Admission and Discharge Records, 1659-1930 Roland ASSITER (my grandmother’s brother, recently discovered!) Birth date:  1893 Admission Age 10 Admission Date 10 Mar 1903 Discharge Date   9 Apri 1903 Borough             Southwark Parish or Poor Law Union Camberwell. Place, London England Title Newlands Cottages Registers, 1903-1923 In the column, ‘To whom transferred’……..’To ?CNC’

Judith, The discharge column reads 'To 6 NC', showing that he had been allocated to No. 6 Newlands Cottages on entering the receiving-home. For information on Newlands, and on the scattered homes in general, please see the Camberwell Workhouse page. http://www.workhouses.org.uk/Camberwell/ HTH Judy London, UK ________________________________ From: Judith Acaster via <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, 19 April 2015, 7:14 Subject: [LON] Workhouse Information Found in the London, England, workhouse Admission and Discharge Records, 1659-1930 Roland ASSITER (my grandmother’s brother, recently discovered!) Birth date:  1893 Admission Age 10 Admission Date 10 Mar 1903 Discharge Date   9 Apri 1903 Borough             Southwark Parish or Poor Law Union Camberwell. Place, London England Title Newlands Cottages Registers, 1903-1923 In the column, ‘To whom transferred’……..’To ?CNC’

Thanks everyone, for your responses. Bear with me. I can’t lay my hands on the information and am tied up with family etc. at the moment. Watch this space………..! I really do appreciate your input and knew there would be a positive response. Cheers!……….Judy. Perth W.Australaia

[Patent No: 95 071: Giacinto Bartolomei, Chicago, Ill.--- Composition for Roofing and Paving. - September 21, 1869. Claim - The manufacture or preparation of a compound, herein described, of the ingredients, in the proportions and for the purposes set forth.]. It seems they did get m., I can only suspect the pregnancy had something to do with it. Bart. ===

Hello: LLL's dates are fairly consistent though. The most accurate date must be the 1841C one, [b:07-10-1939], she would in fact be 1yr old at time of census. LLL would be 24yrs old when she m:1864, not needing consent for age as such. [Event Type: Allegation]: This is an application to get married, and probably in a hurry since LLL is 5 months pregnant. It also seems to depend on who fills in the application as to the accuracy of the information. Either way, whether him or her or both or other person, I assume the application was filled in inaccurately, both their ages unsure, and assumed her father would have to give permission for the marriage etc. [The Allegation or application is only an intention to marry and just as a banns book entry may not result in an actual marriage, the license does not imply an actual marriage.]; [Those under the age of 21 had to have parental consent if they married by licence; marriages by banns, by contrast, were valid as long as the parent of the minor did not actually forbid the banns.]. I suspect LLL is uncertain as to her age somewhat. As we can see from the chart below, from her time of departure, she gives her age uniformly incorrectly about 7 years out (Younger), for over 4 decades she is consistent about what she believes her age to be. I suspect she might just be uncertain of age etc. She seemed to have lived away from home, very much alone, so such a detail could easily be unknown. If she were much on her own, the church might have required consent if she were unsure of her own age etc., and the penalty for clergy allowing any under age person to get married was a 14 year penalty. If she did contact her father, he probably would have just told her her correct age ?. I suspect no consent was ever given and possibly no marriage either!. Bart. === A B C C 1841 1840 1 2 1 C 1851 1841 10 12 2 C 1861 1842 19 22 3 M 1864 1839 20 25 5 Consent P 1872 1846 26 33 7 To US C 1880 1847 33 41 8 C 1900 1846 54 61 7 C 1910 1846 64 71 7 B 1839 ===

Hi Judith, A guess: GNC may stand for "Getting Needed Care". John

Hi Marg, Looking at the parish marriage certificate (Ancestry) - married 18th July, 1864 - it says that Louisa's father is George Lee who is a printer. This agrees with the different Census - Lithographer. Giacinto's age as 26, but she is still a minor. Also there is a witness, Eve Lee - according to the Census Louisa /Leah has an older sister called Eve. Also, in the 1871 Census, their son Solomon Bartolomei aged 6yrs is staying with his grandparents, George & Julia. I see the source of some of the name & age dilemma .... the Census records. Looking at the 1861 & 1851 Census, they have used both names Leah & Louisa together as well as singularly & born circa 1841/1842 in Southampton. The 1841 Census is just 'Leah' bc 1840 "No" & they were living in High Holborn, London at that stage. If the birth certificate agrees with the above info about the father & mother, for some unknown reason she has taken 2-3 years off her birth date for the Allegation & marriage certificates . . . OR . . . . Leah / Louisa died & they went back to Southampton & had another child & gave her both or one of same Christian names. The above are the only conclusions that I can come to after looking at other records. BonnieB >According to Leah Louisa LEE's birth certificate she was born 7 Oct 1839. >When she married 18 July 1864 to Giacinto BARTOLOMEI she is said to be a minor and needed her father's consent. On the >Marriage Bonds & Allegations document it states she is 20 yrs old.

Hello All, I have found some one in my family, discharged from a workhouse to GNC. Any idea what this means? Cheers!…….Judy. Perth W.Australia

On 15/04/2015 3:42 AM, Judith Acaster via wrote: > Hello All, > I have found some one in my family, discharged from a workhouse to GNC. Any idea what this means? > Cheers!…….Judy. Perth W.Australia > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Might be he helpful to know the age and sex of inmate, name of the workhouse and date of discharge. Regards John Henley

Judy, Such abbreviations normally refer to another institution (e.g. branch workhouse, school, infirmary) managed by, or regularly used by, the same poor law union -- one that was so familiar that it didn't need spelling out. If you'd like to post the name/place/date, and where you found the reference, it might be easier to help you. HTH Judy London, UK -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Judith Acaster via Sent: 15 April 2015 03:43 To: [email protected] Subject: [LON] Workhouse Information Hello All, I have found some one in my family, discharged from a workhouse to GNC. Any idea what this means? Cheers!…….Judy. Perth W.Australia

GNC is usually General Nursing Council. I'm not quite sure what that would mean in this context though. Ros > Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 10:42:38 +0800 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [LON] Workhouse Information > From: [email protected] > > Hello All, > > I have found some one in my family, discharged from a workhouse to GNC. Any idea what this means? > > Cheers!…….Judy. Perth W.Australia > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Please use PLAIN TEXT only when replying to the list, and trim away any excess. > > Any problems, please contact the List Admin: [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