HI Graham I don't think Alec Charles LOVELOCK is the son of George Walter LOVELOCK (b.1876) George Walter LOVELOCK's wife was Ellen Louisa BAILEY and their 3 children - George Walter b. 1901, Charles James b.1902, and Helena May b.1906, have BAILEY as their mother's maiden name. According to the 1901 Census, Ellen was born 1877 in Islington. There is an Ellen Louisa BAILEY born Mar 1877 Islington, mothers maiden name OFFORD. There is also the Ellen Louisa FRENCH born Mar 1877 in Spalding Lincolnshire, as you mentioned, mother's maiden name DRING. Try as I may, I can't find a link between Alec Charles (or Alen as recorded on findmypast) to Jessie DOWNS. He is supposedly her nephew in 1911 Census. She was Jessie HARLEY, born Sep 1861 Newmarket, Cambridgeshire, mother's maiden name FAIRCLIFF. I believe she married Arthur DOWNS Jun 1881 in Newmarket and they had 3 children there. He must have died before 1891 census, as she was recorded as widow. Another child was born in 1898 and listed as 'daughter' in 1901 census, but has no mother's maiden name on birth registration. ... unless Alec Charles was nephew to Arthur DOWNS??? Can't seem to track him down. Maybe someone else has some clues Vicki Houlbrooke On 8 February 2017 at 12:06, Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> wrote: > Hello all, > > > Here's one more to round off 'Puzzle tuesday'. > > > Alec Charles Lovelock was born in Edmonton RD in Jul-Sep 1903, mother's > maiden name French. > > > No Lovelock-French marriage in the preceding 15 years. > > > However, George Walter Lovelock married Ellen Louisa Bailey in Islington > RD in Oct-Dec 1899. > > > Alec Charles was in the household of Jessie Downs in Cambridge in 1911, > recorded as her nephew. > > > Ellen Louisa Lovelock died in Edmonton RD in Jan-Mar 1908 aged 31. > > > Ellen Louisa French was born in Spalding RD in Jan-Mar 1877. > > > That all seems to fit a story, so long as Ellen Louisa married a Mr Bailey > before marrying George Walter Lovelock. Alas there is no such marriage. > > > So was Alec Charles the son of George Walter or not? > > > Good sleuthing opportunities there, I think. > > > Regards, > > > Graham > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hello Graham, Findmypast also records this marriage as being between Sidney C L Platt and Vera Bunning - in other words, the L indicating the initial of a second forename rather than a double-barrelled surname. I found Sidney C Platt (without the L) in the 1911 census (in Manchester), being the son of Henry Platt and his wife Mary S, both of whom are from Wiltshire, and Sidney's place of birth is shown as Kintbury in Berkshire. Another quick search showed that Henry Platt married Mary Susanna Lovelock in Q3 1878 in Newbury RD, which ties in nicely with the dates and place of birth of at least some of their other children. Mary's own birth was registered Q3 1862 in Pewsey RD, so she was only 16 when she married Henry! In fact the 1881 census records her place of birth as Burbage. Mary Susanna appears to be the daughter of Silas Lovelock and his wife Ellen, who were still living in Burbage at the time of the 1871 census. The interesting thing is that there is no entry on Findmypast or FreeBMD for the birth of Sidney C Platt in 1903, but there is of course Sidney C Lovelock in the Hungerford RD (which covers Kintbury). So, I wonder if there was some mix-up at registration between his father's name and his mother's maiden name, and so to make sure he was covered either way he called himself Sidney Charles Lovelock Platt? Or for some other reason he wanted to acknowledge his maternal line? Or he didn't want to have the same name as his father?? As we know from other entries (1939 Register, death of Vera in 1968, his 2nd marriage in 1970 & his death in 1976), he became simply Lovelock in later life. I hope the evidence stands up to scrutiny, and I would be very interested to hear any other theories for the name change. Kind regards Sue ----Original message---- >From : lovelockgraham@hotmail.com Date : 06/02/2017 - 18:05 (GMTST) To : lovelock@rootsweb.com Subject : [LOVELOCK] Sidney Charles Lovelock Hello all, Can any one explain why SIdney Charles (born 1903) used the surname Lovelock-Platt when he married Vera May Bunning in the Oxford RD in Oct-Dec 1925? Regards, Graham ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I agree, Vicki, that Alec was not George's son, but I was struck by the coincidence of George marrying an Ellen Louisa born at more or less the same time as the lady I thought of as Alec's possible mother, especially as there is no Lovelock-French marriage whatsoever. You will have found that the only marriage of Ellen Louisa French before 1903 was to a Chilton or King, names hardly likely to be confused with Lovelock, in Middlesbrough in 1895. So, a different tack entirely seems to be needed. I've just checked for deaths of Ellen Louisa Lovelock and there seems to be only the one, that in 1908, which must therefore be Ellen Louisa Bailey, and leaves me pondering what Alec's mother's forename was. The only thing I can think of is that she was a widow when she married Mr Lovelock, but if so that could result in quite a mammoth task to follow up all the potential Lovelock spouses for what? twenty years? before 1903. A quick check shows more than 100 of them! Hmmmm .......! Only 4 in Edmonton RD though ... Regards, Graham ________________________________ From: LOVELOCK <lovelock-bounces+lovelockgraham=hotmail.com@rootsweb.com> on behalf of Vicki Houlbrooke <vicki@houlbrooke.co.nz> Sent: 08 February 2017 07:58 To: lovelock@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LOVELOCK] Alec Charles Lovelock HI Graham I don't think Alec Charles LOVELOCK is the son of George Walter LOVELOCK (b.1876) George Walter LOVELOCK's wife was Ellen Louisa BAILEY and their 3 children - George Walter b. 1901, Charles James b.1902, and Helena May b.1906, have BAILEY as their mother's maiden name. According to the 1901 Census, Ellen was born 1877 in Islington. There is an Ellen Louisa BAILEY born Mar 1877 Islington, mothers maiden name OFFORD. There is also the Ellen Louisa FRENCH born Mar 1877 in Spalding Lincolnshire, as you mentioned, mother's maiden name DRING. Try as I may, I can't find a link between Alec Charles (or Alen as recorded on findmypast) to Jessie DOWNS. He is supposedly her nephew in 1911 Census. She was Jessie HARLEY, born Sep 1861 Newmarket, Cambridgeshire, mother's maiden name FAIRCLIFF. I believe she married Arthur DOWNS Jun 1881 in Newmarket and they had 3 children there. He must have died before 1891 census, as she was recorded as widow. Another child was born in 1898 and listed as 'daughter' in 1901 census, but has no mother's maiden name on birth registration. ... unless Alec Charles was nephew to Arthur DOWNS??? Can't seem to track him down. Maybe someone else has some clues Vicki Houlbrooke On 8 February 2017 at 12:06, Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> wrote: > Hello all, > > > Here's one more to round off 'Puzzle tuesday'. > > > Alec Charles Lovelock was born in Edmonton RD in Jul-Sep 1903, mother's > maiden name French. > > > No Lovelock-French marriage in the preceding 15 years. > > > However, George Walter Lovelock married Ellen Louisa Bailey in Islington > RD in Oct-Dec 1899. > > > Alec Charles was in the household of Jessie Downs in Cambridge in 1911, > recorded as her nephew. > > > Ellen Louisa Lovelock died in Edmonton RD in Jan-Mar 1908 aged 31. > > > Ellen Louisa French was born in Spalding RD in Jan-Mar 1877. > > > That all seems to fit a story, so long as Ellen Louisa married a Mr Bailey > before marrying George Walter Lovelock. Alas there is no such marriage. > > > So was Alec Charles the son of George Walter or not? > > > Good sleuthing opportunities there, I think. > > > Regards, > > > Graham > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello all, Here's one more to round off 'Puzzle tuesday'. Alec Charles Lovelock was born in Edmonton RD in Jul-Sep 1903, mother's maiden name French. No Lovelock-French marriage in the preceding 15 years. However, George Walter Lovelock married Ellen Louisa Bailey in Islington RD in Oct-Dec 1899. Alec Charles was in the household of Jessie Downs in Cambridge in 1911, recorded as her nephew. Ellen Louisa Lovelock died in Edmonton RD in Jan-Mar 1908 aged 31. Ellen Louisa French was born in Spalding RD in Jan-Mar 1877. That all seems to fit a story, so long as Ellen Louisa married a Mr Bailey before marrying George Walter Lovelock. Alas there is no such marriage. So was Alec Charles the son of George Walter or not? Good sleuthing opportunities there, I think. Regards, Graham

Hello all, Here I am again. Geoffrey John Lovelock was born on 22 Jan 1929 in the Cardiff RD and died in Dec 1995 in the St Austell RD. His mother's maiden name was Hubbard, but there is no Lovelock-Hubbard marriage in the records. This usually indicates that his mother had a previous marriage, but it is not obvious which that might be. Does anyone know? Regards, Graham

Hello all, Here's one that I do not think we have explored before, but no doubt I shall be put right if wrong! It all starts with the marriage of Thomas Harold Lovelock (aged 20) to Eva Alice Cooper on 26 Aug 1919 in Broadstone, Dorset (in our Lovelocks in Dorset data). Search as you may you will not find the birth of a single Thomas Harold anywhere in the Free BMD data between 1837 and 1905. In fact the only 'near miss' is Thomas Harry J born in 1894, but he was my 'Uncle Harry', killed in 1918. Free BMD does have Harold Tom, born 1881, and Harold Thomas, born 1885, but both would obviously have been much older than 20 in 1919. Furthermore Thomas and Eva appear in the 1939 Register, living in Luton in Bedfordshire, when Thomas declared his birthdate to be 4 December 1899. There are some other clues in the Dorset marriage entry. Thomas claimed his father Henry was a deceased miner, and one of the witnesses was a William Henry Lovelock. Could the 'miner' indicate a Welsh connection, and could William Henry be a brother? Turning to Free BMD again there are a lot of potential candidates for William Henry, but one that leaps out is the birth registered in the Pontypool RD in Jul-Sep 1894. A quick check in the GRO Online data reveals that the mother's maiden name in that case was Jones. Further Free BMD rummaging turns up the marriage in Oct-Dec 1893 in the Pontypool RD of Henry James Lovelock and Emily Gwendoline Jones. Yet more Free BMD research identifies only three Henry James births between 1850 and 1877, which seems a reasonable timespan, and of the three two died within a year of their birth. That leaves only Henry James born in Apr-Jun 1872 in the Pewsey RD, I2996 in the Lieflock file at Webtrees. We already have him married to Emily Jones, but at present their family consists only of Gladys Gwendoline (born 1896) and Lily Clementina (born 1904). So on the balance of the evidence I was going to ask should we add William Henry and Thomas Harold to the family of Henry and Emily? That is until I came across a rather odd 1911 Census entry. The entry is for 36 Francis Street, Bargoed, South Wales and lists the following: Emily Gwendoline Jones; Head; 35, Widow (but married 17 years with 3 children, all still living);Charwoman;born Pontnewydd, Monmouthshire William Henry Jones;Son;16;Coal Miner, Hewer's Boy;born Pontnewydd, Monmouthshire Lily Clementine Jones;Daur;6;;born Abertillery, Monmouthshire Edna May Jones;Daur;4;;born Barnsley, Yorkshire As if that is not weird enough, a check in the GRO Online data reveals that Edna May's birth was indeed registered in the Barnsley RD in Jan-Mar 1907, but the mother's maiden name was recorded as Lovelock! I can not find a death entry for Emily's husband as either a Lovelock or a Jones. One wonders if he had died just before Edna was born, and reporting the birth in a distraught state Emily had confused her maiden and married names. But even so, she surely could not have failed to report her husband's death? And why resort to her maiden name after his death? Anyway, it is, I think, clear that William Henry should be added to the family, and indeed Edna May, but this gets us no further forward in identifying Thomas Harold. I did wonder if he had been registered as Thomas Harold Jones, but there is no 1899 birth in Free BMD if so, in either Oct-Dec 1899 or Jan-Mar 1900. Emily's recording of only 3 children in 1911, all of whom were with her, causes another problem for Gladys Gwendoline would seem then not to be her daughter, as she had died in 1897 so should have been implied, if not named, in the 1911 entry. If anyone can think of any other lines of enquiry please let us know. Regards, Graham

Hello again all, George Lovelock of the Wootton Rivers Tree was born in 1838 and was recorded as GL in 1841 and 1851. However, by the time of his first marriage in 1858 he had adopted the extra epithet of ‘Spicer’, which he retained for the rest of his life. So his second wife, Hannah Rawlings (married in 1869) became Hannah Spicer Lovelock, which is how her entry appears in the National Probate Calendars. Hannah died on 1 Jul 1928, Administration of her estate being granted to Fanny Louise Light (wife of Charles Edward Light) and Sarah Annie Smith (wife of William John Smith). So far so good. Reference to Free BMD confirms that Charles Edward Light married Fanny Louise Rawlings in 1886, and that William John Smith married Sarah Annie Light in 1908. The 1939 Register then provides a date of birth of 3 Apr 1887 for Sarah Annie Smith, linking her to the Apr-Jun 1887 Free BMD entry of birth for Sarah Ann Light in the Pewsey RD. George’s next-youngest brother, Silas, had a daughter Sarah Annie in 1881, and we previously had her linked in marriage to William John Smith, which is now shown to be an error. We currently have her as the mother of the Sidney Charles Lovelock who was the subject of my previous message, but, although Sidney was assuredly illegitimate, as revealed by the GRO Online data (no mother’s maiden name quoted), we do not have a source specified that actually links the two of them. That is to say that we have no baptism record nor a 1911 Census entry, either of which would provide the evidence. Does anyone have any information to help fill the gaps? Regards, Graham

Hello all, Can any one explain why SIdney Charles (born 1903) used the surname Lovelock-Platt when he married Vera May Bunning in the Oxford RD in Oct-Dec 1925? Regards, Graham

Hello all, A start has been made on attempting to attribute the Scottish data to one or other of our family trees, so far with only modest success. Can anybody help with the following: 1. Is the Frederick William Lovelock who died in 1979 at the age of 69 the Frederick William born in the Hungerford RD in Apr-Jun 1910? 2. Is the Reginald Ernest Lovelock who died in 1994 at the age of 76 the Reginald E born in the Hungerford RD in Jul-Sep 1918? 3. Is the Robert James Lovelock who died in 2006 at the age of 68 the Robert J born in the Winchester RD in Jan-Mar 1938? There are no Scottish births recorded for any of the three. Any help with these and with any of the other entries will be much appreciated. Regards, Graham

Thanks to you all, Sue, Graham & James, for your hard work & I appreciate what you do for us Lovies. I will have a look soon & get back. Cheers Col ------ Original Message ------ From: "Graham Lovelock" <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> To: "Lovelock mailing list" <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, 30 Jan, 2017 At 9:34 PM Subject: [LOVELOCK] The 1939 Project Hello all, Great news - the last part of the 1939 jigsaw, the Middlesex data, has now been transcribed by Sue Lovelock, 'massaged' by James, and uploaded to the website. All 1900 or so entries have now been extracted and posted in a little over 7 weeks which, with Christmas and New Year getting in the way, is a significant achievement. Grateful thanks to Sue and James for all their work. There are, as viewers of the data will have discovered, a significant number of entries which simply say 'Officially closed record'. These are for people who did not die before 1992, or who may still be living. In time some of these will be revealed, when 100 years since their births has elapsed, or someone provides Findmypast with the evidence, in the form of a copy of the death certificate, that the record of a person which is currently 'hidden' should be disclosed. It will be extremely difficult to spot some of these , so if you know of one from here on please let us know. Do have a sift through the data if you have not already done so and let us know of anything you find that adds to or amends any of our previous data. Kind regards, Graham ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Thanks Graham, I’ll check out the Scottish LovelUck records. I did use the Scotlands People paying service in the past, but it was mostly for my McPherson ancestors on my mother’s side. Regards, James > On 30 Jan 2017, at 19:21, Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Ooops! > > > The LovelUck records are now included ..... > > > Sorry, James! > > > Graham > ---------------------------------------------------------------- >

Ooops! The LovelUck records are now included ..... Sorry, James! Graham

Dear All, A significant gap in our data hitherto has been information from Scottish records, due mainly, one suspects, to the fact that we had to pay to see any significant details! However, as from today National Records of Scotland have made searches of their indexes absolutely free through the 'Scotlands People' website: https://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/search-our-records?utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=search%20our%20indexes%20for%20free&utm_campaign=Newsletter_Jan_2017_send5&utm_source=Newsletters Lovelock Births, Marriages and Deaths which meet our publishing criteria (ie Births more than 100 years ago except where the individual is known to be no longer living, and Marriages more than 80 years ago except where both spouses are known to be no longer living) have been extracted and a Scottish Records page added to the website: http://lovelock.free.fr/Scottish-records.html If you know of any additional records that could be added to the page please let us know. Regards, Graham

Hello all, Great news - the last part of the 1939 jigsaw, the Middlesex data, has now been transcribed by Sue Lovelock, 'massaged' by James, and uploaded to the website. All 1900 or so entries have now been extracted and posted in a little over 7 weeks which, with Christmas and New Year getting in the way, is a significant achievement. Grateful thanks to Sue and James for all their work. There are, as viewers of the data will have discovered, a significant number of entries which simply say 'Officially closed record'. These are for people who did not die before 1992, or who may still be living. In time some of these will be revealed, when 100 years since their births has elapsed, or someone provides Findmypast with the evidence, in the form of a copy of the death certificate, that the record of a person which is currently 'hidden' should be disclosed. It will be extremely difficult to spot some of these , so if you know of one from here on please let us know. Do have a sift through the data if you have not already done so and let us know of anything you find that adds to or amends any of our previous data. Kind regards, Graham

Hi Again, A couple more thoughts! The bungalow that my Grandmother lived in was called Craven Deane and was, I think, in The Broadway, Minster. I have childhood memories of a concrete ramp into the sea covered with shellfish at the end of the road - I think of the smell every time I have a seafood soup at our local chinese restaurant! My older cousin Clive (who has also migrated to Australia) used to take us on explorations around the area and I remember a dirt cave in the hillside behind the house which we didn't dare go in in case it collapsed. Many years later (early 60's) we also camped at Eastchurch after a camping tour of Europe and on the way back to London from Dover (not very direct)! Regards Roger On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Alyson Lovelock <alysonlovelock@yahoo.com> wrote: > Hi, > This may be a coincidence, but as a child, in the 50's and early 60's we > always went to the Isle of Sheppey, we had a bungalow at Eastchurch. We > were always told we had relations in Minster, but had lost contact with > them over the years, I do not ever remember going to see them, but I do > remember it was at Minister, because I hated the place, the bus used rock > and roll as it went up the hill there. However it could have been my Mum's > relations, maybe not my Dad's. It certainly made the hairs on the back of > my neck stand up, when I read your earlier email. > Best Wishes > Alyson Lovelock > > From: Roger Lovelock <lovelockrg@gmail.com> > To: lovelock@rootsweb.com > Sent: Tuesday, 17 January 2017, 11:00 > Subject: Re: [LOVELOCK] The 1939 Project > > Hi Graham, > Yes, my grandparents were James and Frances. My father (Robert)was born in > Chatham in 1912 so it is strange that they don't appear in the 1911 > census. I know my grandfather served in the navy in both world wars and had > a 'cushy' job as a Chief Petty Officer Cook in charge of the officers mess > at Chatham in ww2. I didn't know him as he died while I was very young but > we used to visit my grandmother in Minster for several years before she > moved in with an aunt. Possibly my grandfather may have been stationed > overseas at some stage - I think he was on board ship during ww1. I don 't > know how being a serviceman may have affected census records. His ww2 > service was due to being re-enlisted as a reservist. > Regards > Roger > > On 17/01/2017 9:34 PM, "Graham Lovelock" <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hello Roger, > > > > > > Thanks for the message. It made me look at the Fragment, which I am sure > I > > have not done for some time. > > > > > > Hunting about I found the marriage of John Lovelock and Maria Case in > 1815 > > on the FamilySearch website, but not much else. Certainly nothing to tell > > us where John was born (apart from 'Not in Kent') so that we could do a > bit > > more than speculate. In 1851 a couple named John and Maria Case were in > > Minster-in-Sheppey, and Maria was born in Middlesex in about 1817. > > Speculation suggests she was the daughter of John and Maria who had > perhaps > > married her cousin John, but I can find no further trace of them, and > > certainly not of their marriage. Although the 1815 marriage was in > Minster, > > perhaps in accordance with custom, the couple may have returned to London > > initially to live, although baptism records suggest they had returned to > > Minster by the end of 1819. > > > > > > But John and Maria Case are not the only ones difficult to find. When you > > mention your grandparents I assume you mean James and Frances Lovelock? > We > > have their marriage details - just before the 1911 Census was taken - but > > they do not seem to appear in the Census itself. Nor can I find them in > the > > 1939 Register. And although Frances is easily found in 1891 I can't find > > the family in 1901. > > > > > > 'Twas ever thus! > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Graham > > > > ________________________________ > > From: LOVELOCK <lovelock-bounces+lovelockgraham=hotmail.com@rootsweb.com > > > > on behalf of Roger Lovelock <lovelockrg@gmail.com> > > Sent: 16 January 2017 23:23 > > To: lovelock@rootsweb.com > > Subject: Re: [LOVELOCK] The 1939 Project > > > > Hi, > > Just thought I'd check out the Kent section of the site after the email > re > > the 1939 project as my grandparents lived at Minster on Sheppey at that > > time - and of course, came across the Sheerness Fragment. Could be > > completely coincidental - but my Grandfather (Navy) was stationed at > > Chatham and my grandparents lived for many years in Minster (adjacent to > > Sheerness) - we often visited when I was a child - I don't know of any > > earlier family connection to Sheppey - but my tree (Bethnal Green) goes > > back to a John Lovelock (common name of course) at about the same time as > > the Sheerness fragment. > > > > Probably just coincidence, but I'd love to take my tree a little further > > back, and indeed connect up to other trees possibly. > > > > Regards > > Roger Lovelock > > (Melbourne, Australia) > > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Graham Lovelock < > > lovelockgraham@hotmail.com > > > wrote: > > > > > Hello all, > > > > > > > > > This is just to let you know that the 1939 data for Berkshire, > Hampshire, > > > Kent and Surrey has been added to the website and can be accessed > through > > > the appropriate County Records pages. > > > > > > > > > There is also a small amount of data for Monmouthshire which can be > > > accessed through the Miscellaneous Counties page. > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > Graham > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > > > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > > > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > > > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > > > ------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

HI Graham I can link 3 ? (question marks) together, but can't place them in a tree. *Willie Lovelock* of 109 Purfleet-road, Aveley, Essex 10 Oct 1949 Elizabeth Mary Florence Lovelock, Widow ? *Alfreda May Victoria Lovelock* of 38 Penrose Street, North Road, Plymouth, Devon (died at 34 Redfield Hill, Oldland Common, Bitton, Glos) 17 Jun 1966 Gerald Adolphus Full, Draughtsman ? *Ada Alice Lovelock* of 77 Seabrook Road, Hythe, Kent 13 Jul 1994 *?* *Willie Lovelock* was the son of William Lovelock and Eliza Westwood. On the Lovelock website, under Lovelocks in Middlesex, at Islington All Saints, is recorded the marriage of William Lovelock and Eliza Westwood on 1 Nov 1896. No father recorded for William... Using GRO site with Westwood maiden name, there are 4 children born to this couple (also confirmed in 1911 census - 4 children born and 1 died. *There is another Lovelock - Westwood couple who have 1 child at about the same time. Children - Frederick Charles LOVELOCK b. Mar 1897 Islington, d. Mar 1897 Islington -* Willie LOVELOCK* b. Dec 1899 West Ham, Essex, d. Dec 1949 Thurrock, Essex + Elizabeth Mary Florence MOLE Sep 1922 West Ham, Essex (child - Josephine E LOVELOCK b. Sep 1929 W. Ham, Essex; married White according to 1939 Register) - Albert Edward LOVELOCK b. Sep 1902 Colchester, Essex, d. Dec 1972 Surrey S W + *Ada Alice TANNER* Jun 1940 Surrey Mid E - Frederick George John LOVELOCK b. Dec 1905 Woolwich, London / Kent, d. 1940 WWII + *Alfreda May Victoria WILLS* Jun 1931, Plymouth, Devon (child - Maurice W A b. Jun 1932 E. Stonehouse, Devon, d. Jun 1932 E. Stonehouse (child - daughter b. Jun 1936 Plymouth; married PORTEOUS Mar 1960 Plymouth) Back in Jun 2014, you wrote about Frederick George John LOVELOCK, looking for where to place him. Unfortunately, I have been unable to link these people to a tree either. In 1901 Census, William LOVELOCK is recorded as a soldier in 4th Liverpool, and in 1911 he was a Miner's Labourer Underground in Wales *.* Other possible records:- ? 1939 Register - Barclays Bank Market Hill, Clare RD, Suffolk - William LOVELOCK, DOB 21 Dec 1867, Coal Pit Miner (Retired) Widowed ? UK Deaths Dec 1944 - William LOVELOCK, 77, Willesden, MIddlesex, 3a, 407 ? UK Deaths Sep 1939 - Eliza LOVELOCK, 65, Newmarket, Suffolk, 4a, 1130 Regards Vicki Houlbrooke New Zealand

Hi Graham, Yes, my grandparents were James and Frances. My father (Robert)was born in Chatham in 1912 so it is strange that they don't appear in the 1911 census. I know my grandfather served in the navy in both world wars and had a 'cushy' job as a Chief Petty Officer Cook in charge of the officers mess at Chatham in ww2. I didn't know him as he died while I was very young but we used to visit my grandmother in Minster for several years before she moved in with an aunt. Possibly my grandfather may have been stationed overseas at some stage - I think he was on board ship during ww1. I don 't know how being a serviceman may have affected census records. His ww2 service was due to being re-enlisted as a reservist. Regards Roger On 17/01/2017 9:34 PM, "Graham Lovelock" <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> wrote: > Hello Roger, > > > Thanks for the message. It made me look at the Fragment, which I am sure I > have not done for some time. > > > Hunting about I found the marriage of John Lovelock and Maria Case in 1815 > on the FamilySearch website, but not much else. Certainly nothing to tell > us where John was born (apart from 'Not in Kent') so that we could do a bit > more than speculate. In 1851 a couple named John and Maria Case were in > Minster-in-Sheppey, and Maria was born in Middlesex in about 1817. > Speculation suggests she was the daughter of John and Maria who had perhaps > married her cousin John, but I can find no further trace of them, and > certainly not of their marriage. Although the 1815 marriage was in Minster, > perhaps in accordance with custom, the couple may have returned to London > initially to live, although baptism records suggest they had returned to > Minster by the end of 1819. > > > But John and Maria Case are not the only ones difficult to find. When you > mention your grandparents I assume you mean James and Frances Lovelock? We > have their marriage details - just before the 1911 Census was taken - but > they do not seem to appear in the Census itself. Nor can I find them in the > 1939 Register. And although Frances is easily found in 1891 I can't find > the family in 1901. > > > 'Twas ever thus! > > > Regards, > > > Graham > > ________________________________ > From: LOVELOCK <lovelock-bounces+lovelockgraham=hotmail.com@rootsweb.com> > on behalf of Roger Lovelock <lovelockrg@gmail.com> > Sent: 16 January 2017 23:23 > To: lovelock@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [LOVELOCK] The 1939 Project > > Hi, > Just thought I'd check out the Kent section of the site after the email re > the 1939 project as my grandparents lived at Minster on Sheppey at that > time - and of course, came across the Sheerness Fragment. Could be > completely coincidental - but my Grandfather (Navy) was stationed at > Chatham and my grandparents lived for many years in Minster (adjacent to > Sheerness) - we often visited when I was a child - I don't know of any > earlier family connection to Sheppey - but my tree (Bethnal Green) goes > back to a John Lovelock (common name of course) at about the same time as > the Sheerness fragment. > > Probably just coincidence, but I'd love to take my tree a little further > back, and indeed connect up to other trees possibly. > > Regards > Roger Lovelock > (Melbourne, Australia) > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Graham Lovelock < > lovelockgraham@hotmail.com > > wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > > > This is just to let you know that the 1939 data for Berkshire, Hampshire, > > Kent and Surrey has been added to the website and can be accessed through > > the appropriate County Records pages. > > > > > > There is also a small amount of data for Monmouthshire which can be > > accessed through the Miscellaneous Counties page. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Graham > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hi, This may be a coincidence, but as a child, in the 50's and early 60's we always went to the Isle of Sheppey, we had a bungalow at Eastchurch. We were always told we had relations in Minster, but had lost contact with them over the years, I do not ever remember going to see them, but I do remember it was at Minister, because I hated the place, the bus used rock and roll as it went up the hill there. However it could have been my Mum's relations,  maybe not my Dad's. It certainly made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up, when I read your earlier email. Best Wishes Alyson Lovelock From: Roger Lovelock <lovelockrg@gmail.com> To: lovelock@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, 17 January 2017, 11:00 Subject: Re: [LOVELOCK] The 1939 Project Hi Graham, Yes, my grandparents were James and Frances. My father (Robert)was born in Chatham in 1912 so it is strange  that they don't appear in the 1911 census. I know my grandfather served in the navy in both world wars and had a 'cushy' job as a Chief Petty Officer Cook in charge of the officers mess at Chatham in ww2. I didn't know him as he died while I was very young but we used to visit my grandmother in Minster for several years before she moved in with an aunt. Possibly my grandfather may have been stationed overseas at some stage - I think he was on board ship during ww1. I don 't know how being a serviceman may have affected census records. His ww2 service was due to being re-enlisted as a reservist. Regards Roger On 17/01/2017 9:34 PM, "Graham Lovelock" <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> wrote: > Hello Roger, > > > Thanks for the message. It made me look at the Fragment, which I am sure I > have not done for some time. > > > Hunting about I found the marriage of John Lovelock and Maria Case in 1815 > on the FamilySearch website, but not much else. Certainly nothing to tell > us where John was born (apart from 'Not in Kent') so that we could do a bit > more than speculate.  In 1851 a couple named John and Maria Case were in > Minster-in-Sheppey, and Maria was born in Middlesex in about 1817. > Speculation suggests she was the daughter of John and Maria who had perhaps > married her cousin John, but I can find no further trace of them, and > certainly not of their marriage. Although the 1815 marriage was in Minster, > perhaps in accordance with custom, the couple may have returned to London > initially to live, although baptism records suggest they had returned to > Minster by the end of 1819. > > > But John and Maria Case are not the only ones difficult to find. When you > mention your grandparents I assume you mean James and Frances Lovelock? We > have their marriage details - just before the 1911 Census was taken - but > they do not seem to appear in the Census itself. Nor can I find them in the > 1939 Register. And although Frances is easily found in 1891 I can't find > the family in 1901. > > > 'Twas ever thus! > > > Regards, > > > Graham > > ________________________________ > From: LOVELOCK <lovelock-bounces+lovelockgraham=hotmail.com@rootsweb.com> > on behalf of Roger Lovelock <lovelockrg@gmail.com> > Sent: 16 January 2017 23:23 > To: lovelock@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [LOVELOCK] The 1939 Project > > Hi, > Just thought I'd check out the Kent section of the site after the email re > the 1939 project as my grandparents lived at Minster on Sheppey at that > time - and of course, came across the Sheerness Fragment. Could be > completely coincidental - but my Grandfather (Navy) was stationed at > Chatham and my grandparents lived for many years in Minster (adjacent to > Sheerness) - we often visited when I was a child - I don't know of any > earlier family connection to Sheppey - but my tree (Bethnal Green) goes > back to a John Lovelock (common name of course) at about the same time as > the Sheerness fragment. > > Probably just coincidence, but I'd love to take my tree a little further > back, and indeed connect up to other trees possibly. > > Regards > Roger Lovelock > (Melbourne, Australia) > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Graham Lovelock < > lovelockgraham@hotmail.com > > wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > > > This is just to let you know that the 1939 data for Berkshire, Hampshire, > > Kent and Surrey has been added to the website and can be accessed through > > the appropriate County Records pages. > > > > > > There is also a small amount of data for Monmouthshire which can be > > accessed through the Miscellaneous Counties page. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Graham > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I guess the possible reason for the non-appearance in 1911, Roger, is that they were on honeymoon and were somehow overlooked when the owners of their accommodation filled in the return. Unless they were thoroughly modern and had a foreign honeymoon! Graham ________________________________ From: LOVELOCK <lovelock-bounces+lovelockgraham=hotmail.com@rootsweb.com> on behalf of Roger Lovelock <lovelockrg@gmail.com> Sent: 17 January 2017 11:00 To: lovelock@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LOVELOCK] The 1939 Project Hi Graham, Yes, my grandparents were James and Frances. My father (Robert) was born in Chatham in 1912 so it is strange that they don't appear in the 1911 census. I know my grandfather served in the navy in both world wars and had a 'cushy' job as a Chief Petty Officer Cook in charge of the officers mess at Chatham in ww2. I didn't know him as he died while I was very young but we used to visit my grandmother in Minster for several years before she moved in with an aunt. Possibly my grandfather may have been stationed overseas at some stage - I think he was on board ship during ww1. I don 't know how being a serviceman may have affected census records. His ww2 service was due to being re-enlisted as a reservist. Regards Roger On 17/01/2017 9:34 PM, "Graham Lovelock" <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> wrote: > Hello Roger, > > > Thanks for the message. It made me look at the Fragment, which I am sure I > have not done for some time. > > > Hunting about I found the marriage of John Lovelock and Maria Case in 1815 > on the FamilySearch website, but not much else. Certainly nothing to tell > us where John was born (apart from 'Not in Kent') so that we could do a bit > more than speculate. In 1851 a couple named John and Maria Case were in > Minster-in-Sheppey, and Maria was born in Middlesex in about 1817. > Speculation suggests she was the daughter of John and Maria who had perhaps > married her cousin John, but I can find no further trace of them, and > certainly not of their marriage. Although the 1815 marriage was in Minster, > perhaps in accordance with custom, the couple may have returned to London > initially to live, although baptism records suggest they had returned to > Minster by the end of 1819. > > > But John and Maria Case are not the only ones difficult to find. When you > mention your grandparents I assume you mean James and Frances Lovelock? We > have their marriage details - just before the 1911 Census was taken - but > they do not seem to appear in the Census itself. Nor can I find them in the > 1939 Register. And although Frances is easily found in 1891 I can't find > the family in 1901. > > > 'Twas ever thus! > > > Regards, > > > Graham > > ________________________________ > From: LOVELOCK <lovelock-bounces+lovelockgraham=hotmail.com@rootsweb.com> > on behalf of Roger Lovelock <lovelockrg@gmail.com> > Sent: 16 January 2017 23:23 > To: lovelock@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [LOVELOCK] The 1939 Project > > Hi, > Just thought I'd check out the Kent section of the site after the email re > the 1939 project as my grandparents lived at Minster on Sheppey at that > time - and of course, came across the Sheerness Fragment. Could be > completely coincidental - but my Grandfather (Navy) was stationed at > Chatham and my grandparents lived for many years in Minster (adjacent to > Sheerness) - we often visited when I was a child - I don't know of any > earlier family connection to Sheppey - but my tree (Bethnal Green) goes > back to a John Lovelock (common name of course) at about the same time as > the Sheerness fragment. > > Probably just coincidence, but I'd love to take my tree a little further > back, and indeed connect up to other trees possibly. > > Regards > Roger Lovelock > (Melbourne, Australia) > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Graham Lovelock < > lovelockgraham@hotmail.com > > wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > > > This is just to let you know that the 1939 data for Berkshire, Hampshire, > > Kent and Surrey has been added to the website and can be accessed through > > the appropriate County Records pages. > > > > > > There is also a small amount of data for Monmouthshire which can be > > accessed through the Miscellaneous Counties page. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Graham > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello Roger, Thanks for the message. It made me look at the Fragment, which I am sure I have not done for some time. Hunting about I found the marriage of John Lovelock and Maria Case in 1815 on the FamilySearch website, but not much else. Certainly nothing to tell us where John was born (apart from 'Not in Kent') so that we could do a bit more than speculate. In 1851 a couple named John and Maria Case were in Minster-in-Sheppey, and Maria was born in Middlesex in about 1817. Speculation suggests she was the daughter of John and Maria who had perhaps married her cousin John, but I can find no further trace of them, and certainly not of their marriage. Although the 1815 marriage was in Minster, perhaps in accordance with custom, the couple may have returned to London initially to live, although baptism records suggest they had returned to Minster by the end of 1819. But John and Maria Case are not the only ones difficult to find. When you mention your grandparents I assume you mean James and Frances Lovelock? We have their marriage details - just before the 1911 Census was taken - but they do not seem to appear in the Census itself. Nor can I find them in the 1939 Register. And although Frances is easily found in 1891 I can't find the family in 1901. 'Twas ever thus! Regards, Graham ________________________________ From: LOVELOCK <lovelock-bounces+lovelockgraham=hotmail.com@rootsweb.com> on behalf of Roger Lovelock <lovelockrg@gmail.com> Sent: 16 January 2017 23:23 To: lovelock@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LOVELOCK] The 1939 Project Hi, Just thought I'd check out the Kent section of the site after the email re the 1939 project as my grandparents lived at Minster on Sheppey at that time - and of course, came across the Sheerness Fragment. Could be completely coincidental - but my Grandfather (Navy) was stationed at Chatham and my grandparents lived for many years in Minster (adjacent to Sheerness) - we often visited when I was a child - I don't know of any earlier family connection to Sheppey - but my tree (Bethnal Green) goes back to a John Lovelock (common name of course) at about the same time as the Sheerness fragment. Probably just coincidence, but I'd love to take my tree a little further back, and indeed connect up to other trees possibly. Regards Roger Lovelock (Melbourne, Australia) On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com > wrote: > Hello all, > > > This is just to let you know that the 1939 data for Berkshire, Hampshire, > Kent and Surrey has been added to the website and can be accessed through > the appropriate County Records pages. > > > There is also a small amount of data for Monmouthshire which can be > accessed through the Miscellaneous Counties page. > > > Regards, > > > Graham > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LOVELOCK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message