Hello all, One of those recorded on the GOV.UK 'Find a Will' website is Clifford Ernest Lovelock who died on 19 Sep 2017. I am trying to establish whether he was the Clifford Ernest born in Jul-Sep 1968 to Ernest Lovelock and Marion Bouette, who had married in Jan-Mar 1961. Marion may have died in Dec 1996, having been born on 4 Mar 1925. Was Ernest the man born in Apr-Jun 1932, with his mother's maiden name being Smith, and if so do we know who his parents were? Any help greatly appreciated. Regards, Graham

Hello Kate, Yes they are related: George was Hannah Maria's Great Uncle, although as she was born about 18 months after George and family arrived in Australia they obviously never met. When Hannah married in 1861 she signed the Register so presumably could read and write. Tempting to think she might have corresponded with some of her Australian relations ..... but I seriously doubt it! Regards, Graham ________________________________ From: Kate Fitzpatrick <katepaul@iinet.net.au> Sent: 22 May 2018 11:20 To: lovelock@rootsweb.com Subject: [LOVELOCK] Re: LOVELOCK Digest, Vol 13, Issue 17 (LOVELOCK) Who's at fault? Hi All, It was with interest that I perused the words “Hannah Maria Lovelock from the Lieflock line…”, and it made me wonder if she is related to George Lovelock who came out to Australia in 1839 on the Prince Regent, and took up land at Aldinga, South Australia in 1841. As far as I know George hailed from Wiltshire. Cheers from Down Under, Kate > On 22 May 2018, at 5:34 pm, lovelock-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > > Send LOVELOCK mailing list submissions to > lovelock@rootsweb.com > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via email, send a message with subject or > body 'help' to > lovelock-request@rootsweb.com > > You can reach the person managing the list at > lovelock-owner@rootsweb.com > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of LOVELOCK digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Who's at fault? (Graham Lovelock) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 13:14:23 +0000 > From: Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> > Subject: [LOVELOCK] Who's at fault? > To: "lovelock@rootsweb.com" <lovelock@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <AM5P190MB043467F988A3D6FF35EE9EA5C4950@AM5P190MB0434.EURP > 190.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hello all, > > > Hannah Maria Lovelock from the Lieflock Line married William Swatton on 30 November 1861. > > > The 1891 Census records them in East Grafton, Wiltshire with son Walter and daughter Kate. > > > What's wrong with that? Only that William's death is recorded in the GRO Index in Jan-Mar 1891, the quarter in which the death occurred according to GRO practice, but the Census was taken on the night of 5 April 1891. > > > So had the Enumerator been preparing paperwork naughtily in advance, was William's death prematurely reported, or is there some other odd circumstance to explain the anomaly? > > > Regards, > > > Graham > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > To contact the %(real_name)s list administrator, send an email to > %(real_name)s-admin@rootsweb.com. > > To post a message to the LOVELOCK mailing list -- lovelock@rootsweb.com, send an email to %(real_name)s@rootsweb.com. > > __________________________________________________________ > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to %(real_name)s-request@%(host_name)s > with the word "unsubscribe" without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > email with no additional text. > > > ------------------------------ > > End of LOVELOCK Digest, Vol 13, Issue 17 > **************************************** _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Archives: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/hyperkitty/list/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Hi All, It was with interest that I perused the words “Hannah Maria Lovelock from the Lieflock line…”, and it made me wonder if she is related to George Lovelock who came out to Australia in 1839 on the Prince Regent, and took up land at Aldinga, South Australia in 1841. As far as I know George hailed from Wiltshire. Cheers from Down Under, Kate > On 22 May 2018, at 5:34 pm, lovelock-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > > Send LOVELOCK mailing list submissions to > lovelock@rootsweb.com > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via email, send a message with subject or > body 'help' to > lovelock-request@rootsweb.com > > You can reach the person managing the list at > lovelock-owner@rootsweb.com > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of LOVELOCK digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Who's at fault? (Graham Lovelock) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 13:14:23 +0000 > From: Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> > Subject: [LOVELOCK] Who's at fault? > To: "lovelock@rootsweb.com" <lovelock@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <AM5P190MB043467F988A3D6FF35EE9EA5C4950@AM5P190MB0434.EURP > 190.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hello all, > > > Hannah Maria Lovelock from the Lieflock Line married William Swatton on 30 November 1861. > > > The 1891 Census records them in East Grafton, Wiltshire with son Walter and daughter Kate. > > > What's wrong with that? Only that William's death is recorded in the GRO Index in Jan-Mar 1891, the quarter in which the death occurred according to GRO practice, but the Census was taken on the night of 5 April 1891. > > > So had the Enumerator been preparing paperwork naughtily in advance, was William's death prematurely reported, or is there some other odd circumstance to explain the anomaly? > > > Regards, > > > Graham > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > To contact the %(real_name)s list administrator, send an email to > %(real_name)s-admin@rootsweb.com. > > To post a message to the LOVELOCK mailing list -- lovelock@rootsweb.com, send an email to %(real_name)s@rootsweb.com. > > __________________________________________________________ > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to %(real_name)s-request@%(host_name)s > with the word "unsubscribe" without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > email with no additional text. > > > ------------------------------ > > End of LOVELOCK Digest, Vol 13, Issue 17 > ****************************************

Hello all, Hannah Maria Lovelock from the Lieflock Line married William Swatton on 30 November 1861. The 1891 Census records them in East Grafton, Wiltshire with son Walter and daughter Kate. What's wrong with that? Only that William's death is recorded in the GRO Index in Jan-Mar 1891, the quarter in which the death occurred according to GRO practice, but the Census was taken on the night of 5 April 1891. So had the Enumerator been preparing paperwork naughtily in advance, was William's death prematurely reported, or is there some other odd circumstance to explain the anomaly? Regards, Graham

I have worked at the Hemophilia Center of Central PA for the past 30 years. You are right about it being carried on the X chromosome. However the females that have hemophilia are low-level carriers. This can happen sometimes but it has nothing to do with both parents having hemophilia. Females have two copies of the X chromosome, so if the factor VIII or IX gene on one chromosome does not work, the gene on the other chromosome can sometimes do the job of making factor. One case where a female might have a genetic deficiency is called "lionization" or X-inactivation, where some or all of the copies of the X chromosome are inactivated. One X can shut down or not express itself. This can cause a female carrier to have low levels of the factor. Because males only have one X if he inherits the deficiency from his mother he has a 50/50 chance of inheriting it. Fathers who have hemophilia cannot pass it on to their sons because they get a normal X from their mothers. All daughters of a father with hemophilia must be obligate carriers because they get the defective gene from their fathers. They have a 50/50 chance of having daughters who are carriers or sons with hemophilia. I make up family trees for all our patients so this is what I have learned through the years. Also hemophilia originates in a patient by a genetic change in the germ cells (ovary or sperm) of an individual and then is inherited from that point on. About 1/3 of our patients come to us with no family history of bleeding but becomes inherited from that point on. There is another type of hemophilia called acquired hemophilia that is not inherited. It is caused by illness or medications that affect the liver. Hope this helps! From: Graham Lovelock [mailto:lovelockgraham@hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2018 2:58 PM To: Lovelock family history <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Cc: tns750@aol.com Subject: [LOVELOCK] Re: URGENT REQUEST It's true, Steve, that all males get their X-chromosome from their mothers and so if they are haemophiliacs the mother must be a carrier. However, females can be haemophiliacs too, but to be so they must have inherited two deficient X-chromosomes - one from each parent, meaning of course that the father must also be a haemophiliac. So a son can not be a haemophiliac just because his father is. A bit tortuous. The situation that my correspondent has alluded to is that a Mr Lovelock who died well over 60 years ago had a daughter who was a carrier. She had a haemophiliac son, who in turn had a daughter who was also a carrier, who in her turn had a son who is a living haemophiliac. Since females have two X-chromosomes, if the mother is healthy only one of her X-chromosomes can be affected, and so a son has a 50% chance of receiving the affected one. Equally of course as a daughter gets her X-chromosomes one from each parent she might or might not be a carrier. And finally if both parents are haemophiliacs I believe their children must also be. So one of the questions is was the Mr Lovelock who died over 60 years ago a haemophiliac or not? If he was, but his wife was healthy, then that would explain why his daughter was a carrier. But if he was not then his wife must have been a carrier or a haemophiliac. Thus it's not so much a matter of trying to follow the disease through the Lovelock line as to find out how it got into the family in the first place. Hope that hasn't confused the issue? Regards, Graham ________________________________ From: tns750--- via LOVELOCK <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: 05 May 2018 17:41 To: lovelock@rootsweb.com Cc: tns750@aol.com Subject: [LOVELOCK] Re: URGENT REQUEST Graham If your correspondent is interested in transmission through the Lieflock surname, s/he is going down the wrong path. Haemophilia I think is transmitted down the female line. Steve Tanner -----Original Message----- From: Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> To: lovelock <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sat, 5 May 2018 10:18 Subject: [LOVELOCK] URGENT REQUEST Hello all, I have been contacted by someone with a connection to an Australian part of the Lieflock Line asking if we have any information concerning incidences of haemophilia in the Line's early generations. I can't recall this condition ever being the subject of a discussion with respect to Lovelocks, but obviously would like to help if we can. If you do have some information but would prefer to contact me off-List please do so. Regards, Graham _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Lovelock Family History<http://lovelock.free.fr/> lovelock.free.fr Purpose The purpose of this Web Site is to collect together family history information concerning families with the Lovelock name, and related versions of it. Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Archives: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/hyperkitty/list/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Archives: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/hyperkitty/list/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Archives: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/hyperkitty/list/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

It's true, Steve, that all males get their X-chromosome from their mothers and so if they are haemophiliacs the mother must be a carrier. However, females can be haemophiliacs too, but to be so they must have inherited two deficient X-chromosomes - one from each parent, meaning of course that the father must also be a haemophiliac. So a son can not be a haemophiliac just because his father is. A bit tortuous. The situation that my correspondent has alluded to is that a Mr Lovelock who died well over 60 years ago had a daughter who was a carrier. She had a haemophiliac son, who in turn had a daughter who was also a carrier, who in her turn had a son who is a living haemophiliac. Since females have two X-chromosomes, if the mother is healthy only one of her X-chromosomes can be affected, and so a son has a 50% chance of receiving the affected one. Equally of course as a daughter gets her X-chromosomes one from each parent she might or might not be a carrier. And finally if both parents are haemophiliacs I believe their children must also be. So one of the questions is was the Mr Lovelock who died over 60 years ago a haemophiliac or not? If he was, but his wife was healthy, then that would explain why his daughter was a carrier. But if he was not then his wife must have been a carrier or a haemophiliac. Thus it's not so much a matter of trying to follow the disease through the Lovelock line as to find out how it got into the family in the first place. Hope that hasn't confused the issue? Regards, Graham ________________________________ From: tns750--- via LOVELOCK <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: 05 May 2018 17:41 To: lovelock@rootsweb.com Cc: tns750@aol.com Subject: [LOVELOCK] Re: URGENT REQUEST Graham If your correspondent is interested in transmission through the Lieflock surname, s/he is going down the wrong path. Haemophilia I think is transmitted down the female line. Steve Tanner -----Original Message----- From: Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> To: lovelock <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sat, 5 May 2018 10:18 Subject: [LOVELOCK] URGENT REQUEST Hello all, I have been contacted by someone with a connection to an Australian part of the Lieflock Line asking if we have any information concerning incidences of haemophilia in the Line's early generations. I can't recall this condition ever being the subject of a discussion with respect to Lovelocks, but obviously would like to help if we can. If you do have some information but would prefer to contact me off-List please do so. Regards, Graham _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Lovelock Family History<http://lovelock.free.fr/> lovelock.free.fr Purpose The purpose of this Web Site is to collect together family history information concerning families with the Lovelock name, and related versions of it. Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Archives: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/hyperkitty/list/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Archives: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/hyperkitty/list/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Graham If your correspondent is interested in transmission through the Lieflock surname, s/he is going down the wrong path. Haemophilia I think is transmitted down the female line. Steve Tanner -----Original Message----- From: Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> To: lovelock <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sat, 5 May 2018 10:18 Subject: [LOVELOCK] URGENT REQUEST Hello all, I have been contacted by someone with a connection to an Australian part of the Lieflock Line asking if we have any information concerning incidences of haemophilia in the Line's early generations. I can't recall this condition ever being the subject of a discussion with respect to Lovelocks, but obviously would like to help if we can. If you do have some information but would prefer to contact me off-List please do so. Regards, Graham _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Archives: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/hyperkitty/list/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Hello all, I have been contacted by someone with a connection to an Australian part of the Lieflock Line asking if we have any information concerning incidences of haemophilia in the Line's early generations. I can't recall this condition ever being the subject of a discussion with respect to Lovelocks, but obviously would like to help if we can. If you do have some information but would prefer to contact me off-List please do so. Regards, Graham

Hello all, Let me start this one at the end, as it were, at least chronologically. If you go to our page of 'Wills from 1996 onwards' you will find a reference to Minnie Lovelock who died on 5 Jun 2006: http://lovelock.free.fr/documents/Wills%20from%201996%20onwards.html The corresponding GRO entry reveals that her date of birth was 23 Mar 1912, and she died in the Warrington Registration District (RD). There is no record of the birth of a Minnie Lovelock that fits, but the GRO records do include the marriage of Douglas H G Lovelock and Minnie Short in the Warrington RD in Cheshire in Oct-Dec 1958. Turning to our collections of 1939 Register data you will find in the Hampshire set Douglas H Lovelock, born 25 Sep 1916, at 2 Temple Gardens in Southampton. With Douglas is Violet D Lovelock, both of them being married, although, since the 1939 Register gives no family relationships, not necessarily to each other. However, the GRO records quickly confirm that Douglas had married Violet D Hurst in the Southampton RD in Jan-Mar 1937. The entry for Violet indicates that she later married someone named Denyer, and the GRO records furnish details of the marriage in the Southampton RD in Jan-Mar 1959. The next port of call is the 1939 Leicestershire set of data which records Minnie Short at 3 Hobart Street in Leicester. The entry indicates that Miss Short did later marry a Lovelock, although for the purposes of the 1939 record she took 2 years off her age. It would be nice to know how Douglas in Southampton and Minnie in Leicester got together in Warrington, but I suspect that's too much to hope for. Turning back to Douglas, the GRO data does have the record of his birth in the Oct-Dec quarter of 1916 in the Frome RD in Somerset. Not so helpfully his mother's maiden name is recorded as Steeds, but there seems to be no record of a Lovelock/Steeds marriage. Fortunately Douglas had an older sister, Margaret K M, who was also born in the Frome RD in Jan-Mar 1914. For once fortune smiles upon us, for amongst our collection of 'Lovelocks in Somerset' we have the baptism in St John the Baptist, Frome on 12 Apr 1914 of 'Margaret Kathleen May daughter of William James and Ellen Lovelock of New Buildings'. Between 1895 and 1914 Free BMD has only one marriage of a William James, and one other of a William J. The latter married Rhoda Smith in Apr-Jun 1912 in Cornwall so can be discounted. The former married Isabel Norrie in the Romford RD in Essex in Apr-Jun 1903, they are members of the Farnham Tree, and their last two children, twins Evelyn and Grace, were born in the West Ham RD in 1915, so they can be ruled out as well. (True, the twins' mother's maiden name is recorded by Free BMD as Norris, but there is no Lovelock/Norris marriage on record that could be the parents, and whilst the GRO Online Index of Births records Grace's mother's maiden name as Horrie, it does have Norrie for Evelyn.) But where to turn next if the marriage of William James and Ellen has escaped the bureaucrats? Back to Margaret Kathleen May Lovelock. She married Arthur Y Sansome in Jul-Sep 1934 in the Winchester RD, and can easily be found in the 1939 Register at 8 Mead Villas, Mead Road in Eastleigh, Hampshire, date of birth 12 Feb 1914. That prompted me to look again at the 1939 Hampshire data and at 'Keynsham', St Helens Road in Winchester are William J and Ellen Lovelock. Frustratingly there are two closed records in the entry which would normally be assumed to be their children, but Free BMD has no record of other Lovelock children with mother's maiden name being Steeds. Another possibility comes to mind: Douglas and Violet had a daughter in 1937 and a son in Oct-Dec 1939 but their 1939 entry includes a closed record that is presumably the daughter, and the son might not have been born when the Register was compiled. Margaret and husband had 3 children by late 1939, but all appear to be with their parents. So William and Ellen were not hosting grandchildren by the looks of it. William J's date of birth is given as 17 Aug 1881 and Ellen's as 21 Sep 1881. Ellen is thus identified as the daughter of James William Steeds and Mary Ann Cock, born in the Shepton Mallet RD. But that is where our luck seems to run out. There is only one William James birth recorded in 1881, in the Oct-Dec quarter in Edmonton RD, but that is the man in the Farnham Tree as mentioned above, and there is no James William. William James died in the Winchester RD in Jan-Mar 1951 with a recorded age of 70, not entirely consistent with an Aug 1881 birth. Ellen did not die until Oct-Dec 1974, with her date of birth being included in the entry confirming her identity. William was described as an Engineer in 1939, so perhaps he left a Will? Yes, indeed. Reference to our Probate Calendars extracts turns up an entry for William James Lovelock of Keynsham, St Helens Road, Hedge End who died on 26 Feb 1951, with Probate being granted to his widow Ellen and to George James Spicer. Coming at the Probate entry in the past from a completely different direction we had determined that William was actually the William James Lovelock Woodroff Lovelock born in Devizes in 1880. He was recorded as being 7 months old at the 1881 Census, which would just about match an August 1880 birth, so he was a year out in 1939 with the date of birth he reported. Nothing unusual about that from all the 1939 entries we have looked at. We had previously identified his marriage in Jul-Sep 1916 to Ellen Burgoyne, and going back to Free BMD we find the marriage in Jan-Mar 1906 in the Bristol RD of Charles John Burgoyne and Ellen Steeds. Mr Burgoyne died in Oct-Dec 1939 in the Paddington RD. All I have to do now is make a host of amendments to the Wroughton-Tidcombe Tree, but I think the exercise demonstrates yet again how much can be achieved ... in the end ! ... by using all of the resources we have collected or have access to. The one remaining puzzle is who were the subjects of the 2 Closed records with William and Ellen in 1939 ... or do you already know that? Regards, Graham

Hello Robert, I guess we’ll just have to hope that there will be a new generation of young Lovelocks, with the necessary skills, ready to take up the torch. Any volunteers? Regards, James > On 20 Apr 2018, at 11:41, Robert Sterry <robert.sterry24@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well done James. But what happens in 20 years? Do we need a long term strategy? > > -----Original Message----- > From: James Loveluck <james.loveluck@gmail.com> > Sent: Friday, 20 April 2018 5:22 PM > To: Lovelock mailing list <lovelock@rootsweb.com> > Subject: [LOVELOCK] Safeguarding the Lovelock family history jewels > > Hello all, > > Over the years, the amount of Lovelock material we have collected is very impressive. Of course Graham has been very active in collecting source records and building up family trees, but many others have contributed in the past and are continuing to do so. I’m sure we’re all very grateful for all their efforts. > > As a result, we have a very large collection of data which is of considerable value, at least to Lovelocks and those interested in Lovelock family history. So I would like to describe the precautions we take to make sure none of this treasure is lost, especially after the incident in October 2015, when I accidentally trashed the SQL database while trying to upgrade PhpGedView (which we were using at the time rather than Webtrees). I believe we eventually recovered all relevant data in the corresponding gedcom files, but it was a long and painful process! As we’ve seen recently, even big organisations like Rootsweb/Ancestry can have problems managing large amounts of data and maintaining a reliable service. > > So, here is a summary of the backup techniques and procedures which we are now using. > > For the main Lovelock web site <http://lovelock.free.fr/index.html> all the files are copied to a shared Dropbox folder (Dropbox is a “cloud” storage system, similar to Apple’s iCloud or Google’s iDrive). In fact they are written to the Dropbox folder before being uploaded to the Lovelock web site. Dropbox has their own backup procedures, but in addition to this i make regular backups of all the Dropbox files on my local machine. So in general there will be at least 3 copies of each file. > > For the Lovelock Webtrees site <http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/>, after the Oct 2015 event, each month I downloaded copies of all gedcom files which had been modified in the preceding month. Recently, I switched to a different procedure, which is simpler and preserves all data in the Webtrees database. This involves exporting all the relevant tables from the SQL database each month, and downloading the resulting SQL file. To make sure this SQL file can be exploited, in case of a catastrophic event on the Lovelock Webtrees site, I have set up an analogous server running Webtrees on my local machine. Each time I download the backup SQL file from the main Webtrees site, I import it into the server on my local machine. As a check, I export a couple of gedcom files from the main Webtrees server, and compare them with copies exported from the server on my local machine. So the main result is that I now have a clone of the Webtrees server on my local machine, which is updated monthly to synchronise with changes made on the main Webtrees site. > > I hope I’ve convinced you that the precious Lovelock material is reasonably safe and sound, and that my message hasn’t had the opposite effect of alarming you about the dangers! > > Regards, > > James > > _______________________________________________

Many thanks to James & Graham & all contributors for keeping Lovelocks family history alive :-) Cheers Col ------ Original Message ------ From: "James Loveluck" <james.loveluck@gmail.com> To: "Lovelock mailing list" <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, 20 Apr, 2018 At 5:21 PM Subject: [LOVELOCK] Safeguarding the Lovelock family history jewels Hello all, Over the years, the amount of Lovelock material we have collected is very impressive. Of course Graham has been very active in collecting source records and building up family trees, but many others have contributed in the past and are continuing to do so. I’m sure we’re all very grateful for all their efforts. As a result, we have a very large collection of data which is of considerable value, at least to Lovelocks and those interested in Lovelock family history. So I would like to describe the precautions we take to make sure none of this treasure is lost, especially after the incident in October 2015, when I accidentally trashed the SQL database while trying to upgrade PhpGedView (which we were using at the time rather than Webtrees). I believe we eventually recovered all relevant data in the corresponding gedcom files, but it was a long and painful process! As we’ve seen recently, even big organisations like Rootsweb/Ancestry can have problems managing large amounts of data and maintaining a reliable service. So, here is a summary of the backup techniques and procedures which we are now using. For the main Lovelock web site <http://lovelock.free.fr/index.html> all the files are copied to a shared Dropbox folder (Dropbox is a “cloud” storage system, similar to Apple’s iCloud or Google’s iDrive). In fact they are written to the Dropbox folder before being uploaded to the Lovelock web site. Dropbox has their own backup procedures, but in addition to this i make regular backups of all the Dropbox files on my local machine. So in general there will be at least 3 copies of each file. For the Lovelock Webtrees site <http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/>, after the Oct 2015 event, each month I downloaded copies of all gedcom files which had been modified in the preceding month. Recently, I switched to a different procedure, which is simpler and preserves all data in the Webtrees database. This involves exporting all the relevant tables from the SQL database each month, and downloading the resulting SQL file. To make sure this SQL file can be exploited, in case of a catastrophic event on the Lovelock Webtrees site, I have set up an analogous server running Webtrees on my local machine. Each time I download the backup SQL file from the main Webtrees site, I import it into the server on my local machine. As a check, I export a couple of gedcom files from the main Webtrees server, and compare them with copies exported from the server on my local machine. So the main result is that I now have a clone of the Webtrees server on my local machine, which is updated monthly to synchronise with changes made on the main Webtrees site. I hope I’ve convinced you that the precious Lovelock material is reasonably safe and sound, and that my message hasn’t had the opposite effect of alarming you about the dangers! Regards, James _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ You are receiving this email because you have registered with RootsWeb Mailing Lists. Manage your email preferences at: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/postorius/accounts/subscriptions/ To unsubscribe send an email to mailto:lovelock-leave@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe&body=unsubscribe View the archives for this list at: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/hyperkitty/list/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Your privacy is important to us. View our Privacy Statement at https://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/privacystatement for more information. Use of RootsWeb is subject to our Terms and Conditions https://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/termsandconditions RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Well done James. But what happens in 20 years? Do we need a long term strategy? -----Original Message----- From: James Loveluck <james.loveluck@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, 20 April 2018 5:22 PM To: Lovelock mailing list <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Subject: [LOVELOCK] Safeguarding the Lovelock family history jewels Hello all, Over the years, the amount of Lovelock material we have collected is very impressive. Of course Graham has been very active in collecting source records and building up family trees, but many others have contributed in the past and are continuing to do so. I’m sure we’re all very grateful for all their efforts. As a result, we have a very large collection of data which is of considerable value, at least to Lovelocks and those interested in Lovelock family history. So I would like to describe the precautions we take to make sure none of this treasure is lost, especially after the incident in October 2015, when I accidentally trashed the SQL database while trying to upgrade PhpGedView (which we were using at the time rather than Webtrees). I believe we eventually recovered all relevant data in the corresponding gedcom files, but it was a long and painful process! As we’ve seen recently, even big organisations like Rootsweb/Ancestry can have problems managing large amounts of data and maintaining a reliable service. So, here is a summary of the backup techniques and procedures which we are now using. For the main Lovelock web site <http://lovelock.free.fr/index.html> all the files are copied to a shared Dropbox folder (Dropbox is a “cloud” storage system, similar to Apple’s iCloud or Google’s iDrive). In fact they are written to the Dropbox folder before being uploaded to the Lovelock web site. Dropbox has their own backup procedures, but in addition to this i make regular backups of all the Dropbox files on my local machine. So in general there will be at least 3 copies of each file. For the Lovelock Webtrees site <http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/>, after the Oct 2015 event, each month I downloaded copies of all gedcom files which had been modified in the preceding month. Recently, I switched to a different procedure, which is simpler and preserves all data in the Webtrees database. This involves exporting all the relevant tables from the SQL database each month, and downloading the resulting SQL file. To make sure this SQL file can be exploited, in case of a catastrophic event on the Lovelock Webtrees site, I have set up an analogous server running Webtrees on my local machine. Each time I download the backup SQL file from the main Webtrees site, I import it into the server on my local machine. As a check, I export a couple of gedcom files from the main Webtrees server, and compare them with copies exported from the server on my local machine. So the main result is that I now have a clone of the Webtrees server on my local machine, which is updated monthly to synchronise with changes made on the main Webtrees site. I hope I’ve convinced you that the precious Lovelock material is reasonably safe and sound, and that my message hasn’t had the opposite effect of alarming you about the dangers! Regards, James _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ You are receiving this email because you have registered with RootsWeb Mailing Lists. Manage your email preferences at: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/postorius/accounts/subscriptions/ To unsubscribe send an email to mailto:lovelock-leave@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe&body=unsubscribe View the archives for this list at: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/hyperkitty/list/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Your privacy is important to us. View our Privacy Statement at https://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/privacystatement for more information. Use of RootsWeb is subject to our Terms and Conditions https://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/termsandconditions RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Well done, James! The time and energy you put into this project is amazing. Yann On Friday, 20 April 2018, 08:22:22 GMT+1, James Loveluck <james.loveluck@gmail.com> wrote: Hello all, Over the years, the amount of Lovelock material we have collected is very impressive. Of course Graham has been very active in collecting source records and building up family trees, but many others have contributed in the past and are continuing to do so. I’m sure we’re all very grateful for all their efforts. As a result, we have a very large collection of data which is of considerable value, at least to Lovelocks and those interested in Lovelock family history. So I would like to describe the precautions we take to make sure none of this treasure is lost, especially after the incident in October 2015, when I accidentally trashed the SQL database while trying to upgrade PhpGedView (which we were using at the time rather than Webtrees). I believe we eventually recovered all relevant data in the corresponding gedcom files, but it was a long and painful process! As we’ve seen recently, even big organisations like Rootsweb/Ancestry can have problems managing large amounts of data and maintaining a reliable service. So, here is a summary of the backup techniques and procedures which we are now using. For the main Lovelock web site <http://lovelock.free.fr/index.html> all the files are copied to a shared Dropbox folder (Dropbox is a “cloud” storage system, similar to Apple’s iCloud or Google’s iDrive). In fact they are written to the Dropbox folder before being uploaded to the Lovelock web site. Dropbox has their own backup procedures, but in addition to this i make regular backups of all the Dropbox files on my local machine. So in general there will be at least 3 copies of each file. For the Lovelock Webtrees site <http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/>, after the Oct 2015 event, each month I downloaded copies of all gedcom files which had been modified in the preceding month. Recently, I switched to a different procedure, which is simpler and preserves all data in the Webtrees database. This involves exporting all the relevant tables from the SQL database each month, and downloading the resulting SQL file. To make sure this SQL file can be exploited, in case of a catastrophic event on the Lovelock Webtrees site, I have set up an analogous server running Webtrees on my local machine. Each time I download the backup SQL file from the main Webtrees site, I import it into the server on my local machine. As a check, I export a couple of gedcom files from the main Webtrees server, and compare them with copies exported from the server on my local machine. So the main result is that I now have a clone of the Webtrees server on my local machine, which is updated monthly to synchronise with changes made on the main Webtrees site. I hope I’ve convinced you that the precious Lovelock material is reasonably safe and sound, and that my message hasn’t had the opposite effect of alarming you about the dangers! Regards, James _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ You are receiving this email because you have registered with RootsWeb Mailing Lists.  Manage your email preferences at: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/postorius/accounts/subscriptions/ To unsubscribe send an email to mailto:lovelock-leave@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe&body=unsubscribe View the archives for this list at: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/hyperkitty/list/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Your privacy is important to us.  View our Privacy Statement at https://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/privacystatement for more information.  Use of RootsWeb is subject to our Terms and Conditions https://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/termsandconditions RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

I endorse Sue special thanks and appreciation for all the hard work you have done over the many years and continue to do so. Best wishes and kind regards Malcolm -----Original Message----- From: "SUE LOVELOCK via LOVELOCK" <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: ‎20/‎04/‎2018 08:26 To: "Lovelock family history" <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Cc: "SUE LOVELOCK" <lovelocks6@btinternet.com> Subject: [LOVELOCK] Re: Safeguarding the Lovelock family history jewels Hello James, Many thanks for your reassuring message, and especially for all the work which you do behind the scenes - it's very much appreciated. Kind regards Sue Lovelock ----Original message---- From : james.loveluck@gmail.com Date : 20/04/2018 - 08:21 (GMTST) To : lovelock@rootsweb.com Subject : [LOVELOCK] Safeguarding the Lovelock family history jewels Hello all, Over the years, the amount of Lovelock material we have collected is very impressive. Of course Graham has been very active in collecting source records and building up family trees, but many others have contributed in the past and are continuing to do so. I’m sure we’re all very grateful for all their efforts. As a result, we have a very large collection of data which is of considerable value, at least to Lovelocks and those interested in Lovelock family history. So I would like to describe the precautions we take to make sure none of this treasure is lost, especially after the incident in October 2015, when I accidentally trashed the SQL database while trying to upgrade PhpGedView (which we were using at the time rather than Webtrees). I believe we eventually recovered all relevant data in the corresponding gedcom files, but it was a long and painful process! As we’ve seen recently, even big organisations like Rootsweb/Ancestry can have problems managing large amounts of data and maintaining a reliable service. So, here is a summary of the backup techniques and procedures which we are now using. For the main Lovelock web site <http://lovelock.free.fr/index.html> all the files are copied to a shared Dropbox folder (Dropbox is a “cloud” storage system, similar to Apple’s iCloud or Google’s iDrive). In fact they are written to the Dropbox folder before being uploaded to the Lovelock web site. Dropbox has their own backup procedures, but in addition to this i make regular backups of all the Dropbox files on my local machine. So in general there will be at least 3 copies of each file. For the Lovelock Webtrees site <http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/>, after the Oct 2015 event, each month I downloaded copies of all gedcom files which had been modified in the preceding month. Recently, I switched to a different procedure, which is simpler and preserves all data in the Webtrees database. This involves exporting all the relevant tables from the SQL database each month, and downloading the resulting SQL file. To make sure this SQL file can be exploited, in case of a catastrophic event on the Lovelock Webtrees site, I have set up an analogous server running Webtrees on my local machine. Each time I download the backup SQL file from the main Webtrees site, I import it into the server on my local machine. As a check, I export a couple of gedcom files from the main Webtrees server, and compare them with copies exported from the server on my local machine. So the main result is that I now have a clone of the Webtrees server on my local machine, which is updated monthly to synchronise with changes made on the main Webtrees site. I hope I’ve convinced you that the precious Lovelock material is reasonably safe and sound, and that my message hasn’t had the opposite effect of alarming you about the dangers! Regards, James _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ You are receiving this email because you have registered with RootsWeb Mailing Lists. Manage your email preferences at: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/postorius/accounts/subscriptions/ To unsubscribe send an email to mailto:lovelock-leave@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe&body=unsubscribe View the archives for this list at: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/hyperkitty/list/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Your privacy is important to us. View our Privacy Statement at https://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/privacystatement for more information. Use of RootsWeb is subject to our Terms and Conditions https://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/termsandconditions RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ You are receiving this email because you have registered with RootsWeb Mailing Lists. Manage your email preferences at: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/postorius/accounts/subscriptions/ To unsubscribe send an email to mailto:lovelock-leave@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe&body=unsubscribe View the archives for this list at: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/hyperkitty/list/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Your privacy is important to us. View our Privacy Statement at https://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/privacystatement for more information. Use of RootsWeb is subject to our Terms and Conditions https://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/termsandconditions RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Hello James, Many thanks for your reassuring message, and especially for all the work which you do behind the scenes - it's very much appreciated. Kind regards Sue Lovelock ----Original message---- From : james.loveluck@gmail.com Date : 20/04/2018 - 08:21 (GMTST) To : lovelock@rootsweb.com Subject : [LOVELOCK] Safeguarding the Lovelock family history jewels Hello all, Over the years, the amount of Lovelock material we have collected is very impressive. Of course Graham has been very active in collecting source records and building up family trees, but many others have contributed in the past and are continuing to do so. I’m sure we’re all very grateful for all their efforts. As a result, we have a very large collection of data which is of considerable value, at least to Lovelocks and those interested in Lovelock family history. So I would like to describe the precautions we take to make sure none of this treasure is lost, especially after the incident in October 2015, when I accidentally trashed the SQL database while trying to upgrade PhpGedView (which we were using at the time rather than Webtrees). I believe we eventually recovered all relevant data in the corresponding gedcom files, but it was a long and painful process! As we’ve seen recently, even big organisations like Rootsweb/Ancestry can have problems managing large amounts of data and maintaining a reliable service. So, here is a summary of the backup techniques and procedures which we are now using. For the main Lovelock web site <http://lovelock.free.fr/index.html> all the files are copied to a shared Dropbox folder (Dropbox is a “cloud” storage system, similar to Apple’s iCloud or Google’s iDrive). In fact they are written to the Dropbox folder before being uploaded to the Lovelock web site. Dropbox has their own backup procedures, but in addition to this i make regular backups of all the Dropbox files on my local machine. So in general there will be at least 3 copies of each file. For the Lovelock Webtrees site <http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/>, after the Oct 2015 event, each month I downloaded copies of all gedcom files which had been modified in the preceding month. Recently, I switched to a different procedure, which is simpler and preserves all data in the Webtrees database. This involves exporting all the relevant tables from the SQL database each month, and downloading the resulting SQL file. To make sure this SQL file can be exploited, in case of a catastrophic event on the Lovelock Webtrees site, I have set up an analogous server running Webtrees on my local machine. Each time I download the backup SQL file from the main Webtrees site, I import it into the server on my local machine. As a check, I export a couple of gedcom files from the main Webtrees server, and compare them with copies exported from the server on my local machine. So the main result is that I now have a clone of the Webtrees server on my local machine, which is updated monthly to synchronise with changes made on the main Webtrees site. I hope I’ve convinced you that the precious Lovelock material is reasonably safe and sound, and that my message hasn’t had the opposite effect of alarming you about the dangers! Regards, James _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ You are receiving this email because you have registered with RootsWeb Mailing Lists. Manage your email preferences at: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/postorius/accounts/subscriptions/ To unsubscribe send an email to mailto:lovelock-leave@rootsweb.com?subject=unsubscribe&body=unsubscribe View the archives for this list at: https://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/hyperkitty/list/lovelock@rootsweb.com/ Your privacy is important to us. View our Privacy Statement at https://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/privacystatement for more information. Use of RootsWeb is subject to our Terms and Conditions https://www.ancestry.com/cs/legal/termsandconditions RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Hello all, Over the years, the amount of Lovelock material we have collected is very impressive. Of course Graham has been very active in collecting source records and building up family trees, but many others have contributed in the past and are continuing to do so. I’m sure we’re all very grateful for all their efforts. As a result, we have a very large collection of data which is of considerable value, at least to Lovelocks and those interested in Lovelock family history. So I would like to describe the precautions we take to make sure none of this treasure is lost, especially after the incident in October 2015, when I accidentally trashed the SQL database while trying to upgrade PhpGedView (which we were using at the time rather than Webtrees). I believe we eventually recovered all relevant data in the corresponding gedcom files, but it was a long and painful process! As we’ve seen recently, even big organisations like Rootsweb/Ancestry can have problems managing large amounts of data and maintaining a reliable service. So, here is a summary of the backup techniques and procedures which we are now using. For the main Lovelock web site <http://lovelock.free.fr/index.html> all the files are copied to a shared Dropbox folder (Dropbox is a “cloud” storage system, similar to Apple’s iCloud or Google’s iDrive). In fact they are written to the Dropbox folder before being uploaded to the Lovelock web site. Dropbox has their own backup procedures, but in addition to this i make regular backups of all the Dropbox files on my local machine. So in general there will be at least 3 copies of each file. For the Lovelock Webtrees site <http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/>, after the Oct 2015 event, each month I downloaded copies of all gedcom files which had been modified in the preceding month. Recently, I switched to a different procedure, which is simpler and preserves all data in the Webtrees database. This involves exporting all the relevant tables from the SQL database each month, and downloading the resulting SQL file. To make sure this SQL file can be exploited, in case of a catastrophic event on the Lovelock Webtrees site, I have set up an analogous server running Webtrees on my local machine. Each time I download the backup SQL file from the main Webtrees site, I import it into the server on my local machine. As a check, I export a couple of gedcom files from the main Webtrees server, and compare them with copies exported from the server on my local machine. So the main result is that I now have a clone of the Webtrees server on my local machine, which is updated monthly to synchronise with changes made on the main Webtrees site. I hope I’ve convinced you that the precious Lovelock material is reasonably safe and sound, and that my message hasn’t had the opposite effect of alarming you about the dangers! Regards, James

Hello all, The 'Findagrave' website has an interesting memorial in Miami County, Ohio: https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/54346885/william-thomas-lovelock The entry quotes precise dates for the birth and death of William Thomas Lovelock, based on the information on the memorial, and states that he was born in England. Neither he nor his wife Mary seem to be identifiable in any of the US Census extracts on our website. Can anyone add to the information at Findagrave? Regards, Graham

Hello all, If you are as stumped as I for where to turn next for answers to the Luckington Tree puzzle you might like to turn your attention instead to some Northamptonshire data, which has hardly ever made it into our spotlight. Our Miscellaneous Counties collection reveals that on 9 Jun 1890 Mary Ann Lovelock married Charles Tero. Charles' comparatively unusual surname does enable easy identification of family members in the 1891, 1901 and 1911 Census Returns and the 1939 Register. However, it never turns out to be quite so simple, does it? Take Mary Ann's stated age for instance: 1890 - 25 1891 - 25 1901 - 32 1911 - 48 1923 - 55 (when she died) Of course it is quite possible for her to be 25 on 9 Jun 1890 and still 25 on 5 Apr 1891, but she must have aged more than 7 years between 1891 and 1901, less than 16 years between 1901 and 1911, and more than 7 years between 1911 and 1923. All that the numbers tell us is that she was possibly born between 1863 and 1869. The 1891 and 1901 Returns also tell us that she was born in Wandsworth, where I sit penning these words, but Free BMD declares that there was not a single Lovelock birth, let alone a Mary Ann, in Wandsworth over that period, nor a year either side. In case the idea of a previous marriage for Mary Ann has occurred to you, this is countered by her claim when she married that her father was George Lovelock, and that the maiden name quoted in the birth entries for her children with Charles Tero is Lovelock. But that is by no means the only mystery associated with Mary Ann. Charles was a widower when he married her so it is no surprise to find that the household in 1891, who were all born in Northampton apart from Charles' wife, comprised: Charles Tero aged 41 Mary Ann Tero aged 25 Frederick Tero aged 17 Mary Ann Tero aged 10 Kate Lovelock aged 4 Elizth Lovelock aged 2 Ada Tero aged 1 month The two Lovelock girls are recorded as step-daughters and so I assumed were Mary Ann's illegitimate offspring. There were indeed two Lovelock girls' births recorded in the Northampton RD prior to the 1891 Census, but they were of Eliza May in Apr-Jun 1888 and Alice in Oct-Dec 1889. No mother's surname is recorded for either, which normally indicates an illegitimate birth. Eliza May is probably 'Elizth' but Alice can not be Kate. In fact the Miscellaneous Counties data also records the baptism of 'Alice, the daughter of Charles Tero and Mary Ann Lovelock' on 21 Apr 1890, just under two months before her parents married, and Free BMD has her death, as Alice Lovelock, in Apr-Jun 1890. Apart from the two above there are no Lovelock births in the Northampton RD in the 1880s or 1870s. There was a Katherine Mary born in 1887 in the Stone RD, in Staffordshire, but her mother's maiden name was Smith, and they are members of the Wallingford Line. So Kate is a mystery too. In 1901 she was recorded as Kate Tero, but still born in Northampton, and there is no record of a birth under that surname either. Going back to Mary Ann, she was apparently in Northampton by 1881, recorded as Mary A with the Gibbs family in Ash Street, but her place of birth is recorded as 'N K'. She was aged 17, consistent with a birth in 1863 or 1864, but there's nothing in Free BMD's records to match. It rather looks as though father George Lovelock, his occupation as a Carpenter, and a birthplace of Wandsworth were all figments of Mary Ann's imagination. Unless you know different ..... Regards, Graham