Hello Edie and List,   Belcher is listed as master for her June 4 1864 arrival in Bombay.   http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=VmxDAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA529&dq=%22Colombo,+Belcher%22&hl=en&ei=t9wxTra5BaTy0gH-9MnfCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Colombo%2C%20Belcher%22&f=true   Perhaps she then made an outward trip from Bombay to Colombo and back to Bombay. Otherwise I can't see her still hanging aound India until October and I doubt she had time to make another round trip to England in the four months remaining to her.   Regards, Adi

Hello David,   Now that is v-e-e-e-r-r-r-y interesting, especially the second last line "William Henry Belcher, Cork, master mariner, with 8/64ths." because in an earlier post of mine, I had discounted the Colombo with Belcher as Master as being the 'wrong' one.   She left Liverpool for Bombay on 7 January, 1864, was spoken 21 S., 20 W., on 2 March, 1864 arrived Bombay 4 June, 1864   and was apparently back at Deal, from Colombo on 31 August 1864 and outward bound from Deal again for Colombo 16 November 1864.   Now it looks as if those last two citations were for a different COLOMBO, but the first three are for the 'right' one. So when did the change of master occur - from Belcher to Evans?   It is frustrating that the Bombay Arrivals and Departures on FIBIS don't go up to 1864: http://search.fibis.org/frontis/bin/aps_browse_sources.php?mode=browse_components&id=29&s_id=108   Regards, Adi --- On Thu, 7/28/11, David Asprey <dasprey@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: Today I had a chance to look out the original registration papers of ON 37096 in the National Archives.  These are the contemporary copies from the register books in Quebec and Liverpool which were sent to the Registrar General (who was also the compiler of the Mercantile Navy List).  We were reminded earlier today that no documentary source can be assumed to be completely error free - but this is what I found: The Quebec registration [ref BT 108/290 & 109/912] was clearly in the name BUDGET - the name appears twice on the register transcript as well as on some other papers:  933 tons  170.0 x 35.2 x 21.0ft  ship rigged completed 8/5/1861 in Quebec (wood) [in the 1860s the builder was not shown on the transcripts] 4/6/1861 registered at Quebec (No 15/1861) in name of Hyppolite Dubord, Quebec, shipowner 24/12/1863 sold at Liverpool to a foreign subject (after a mortgage had been discharged on 18/12/1863) 11/1/1864 register closed as "sold to foreigner" The Liverpool registration [ref BT 108/81 & 109/78,86] gives her previous name as BUDGET [that is what I would expect, as the Quebec registration certificate would probably have been produced in Liverpool]: [technical description as above] ex-foreign as COLOMBO and previously BUDGET (Quebec) "sold foreign 5/5/1862 [this date looks odd] by Matthew J Wilson, attorney for H Dubord, under certificate of sale of 13/6/1861" 24/12/1863 registered at Liverpool (No 520/1863) in names of William Thompson Dixon and Edward Williams Wynne, both Liverpool merchants, with 28/64ths each, and William Henry Belcher, Cork, master mariner, with 8/64ths. 4/1/1866 register closed as "lost at Calcutta in October 1864"

Afternoon Bud, according to Lloyds Register 1944-45 : S.S. AZALEA CITY Built : Gulf S.B. Corporation, Chickasaw, Ala. 1943 Owner : Watermann S.S. Corporation, Mobile, Ala. 449' x 63.1' x 26.9' 6165 gross 3519 net 3 decks cruiser stern 2 steam turbines DR geared to single shaft G E C Lynn, Mass Cheers Colin Colin Boyd Documentation Assistant Collections and Exhibitions Tyne & Wear Archives & Museums Tel: 0191 2772177 Fax: 0191 2302614 Email: colin.boyd@twmuseums.org.uk R ead Tyne & Wear Archives & Museums' new blog, and get involved with our social media, games and digital projects here - http://www.twmuseums.org.uk/engage/ Leader of the North East Regional Museums Hub Our mission is to help people determine their place in the world and define their identities, so enhancing their self-respect and respect for others. Find out more at: www.twmuseums.org.uk 2009 North East Public Sector Organisation of the year. v.1TWAM From: mariners-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:mariners-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Bud Shortridge Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 11:46 AM To: MARINERS [TO POST] Subject: [MAR] SS Azalea City Greetings' I am attempting to find out if there were two merchant ships named the SS Azalea City. I am well aware of one such vessel with that name being sunk by U-432 on February 20, 1942, but was there 'another' with the same named that existed on or around the time frame of 1945 or so. If anyone can shed any thoughts on this I would certainly appreciate hearing from you. Many "Thanks" in advance. Bud & R.J....We Wish You Well MY BLOG FOR NAVAL ARTICLES MY MERCHANT SHIP HISTORY SITE ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify your IT department. All incoming and outgoing email are monitored for compliance with Tyne and Wear Museums email, Internet and security policy. This email has been swept by MIMEsweeper.

Hi Bud Miramar list two Waterbury (219918) Built 1920 , 5510 tons, became Azalea City in 1939 Torpedoed 20.02.1942 Azalea City (243436) Built 1943 6165 tons , BU Vigo 06.04.76 Mick Mariners List ----- Original Message ----- From: Bud Shortridge To: MARINERS [TO POST] Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 11:45 AM Subject: [MAR] SS Azalea City

Hello Listers With reference to my request for information about my great grandfather's 'jumping off' of HMS Sandfly when it was docked in Sydney harbour in 1875; I would just like to thank all who have replied to this request for help and information - both on and 'off post'. I really appreciate it. Thanks again - and keep up the good work. Chris

Hi Pete and listers, This is why I have gone on and on until I was satisfied the information was correct or at least something more concrete to work with. We genies always say you should have at least two example of record for the person or Ship whatever of interest. Edie >From Pete who sums it up nicely. It should be basic good practice to quote your source for every last bit of data you present - then other researchers can follow your trail. The approach we take with CLIP is to work from original sources as much as possible, make the most reliable transcription we can manage, always make clear what our source was, and make an image of the source available if we can (not all there yet, but we're working on it). We leave it up to others to enjoy the discussion as to what the vessel's name actually was. Best wishes Pete ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mick" <mick@irishshipwrecks.com> To: "Mariners List" <mariners@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 7:07 AM Subject: [MAR] Transcription Of Maritime Records > Posting on behalf of Pete Owens, Crew List Index Project. > > The Bridget/Budget discussion nicely illustrates several points about > records of shipping. >

Thanksa for that Adi. I note there is another Colombo with number of London in there too. Lots more Coluimbus for you Alex. Edie ----- Original Message ----- From: Mme_N_Carmichael To: Edie McArthur Cc: MARINERS@rootsweb.com Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 6:02 AM Subject: BUDGET/BRIDGET/COLOMBO Hello Edie, She is also BUDGET in 1862 Volume of Mercantile Navy List. Regards, Adi Please see Page 560 in January 01, 1862 issue of Mercantile Navy List

Greetings' I am attempting to find out if there were two merchant ships named the SS Azalea City. I am well aware of one such vessel with that name being sunk by U-432 on February 20, 1942, but was there 'another' with the same named that existed on or around the time frame of 1945 or so. If anyone can shed any thoughts on this I would certainly appreciate hearing from you. Many "Thanks" in advance. Bud & R.J....We Wish You Well MY BLOG FOR NAVAL ARTICLES MY MERCHANT SHIP HISTORY SITE

Funnily enough Piers, it had crossed my mind it maybe something to do with the Budget. though it appears as if she had been registered for a certain time as Bridget. bridget/Budget/Colombo her number is 37096. Something can be done with that. edie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Piers Smith-Cresswell" <piers@ps-c.demon.co.uk> To: <jduerkop@cogeco.ca>; "'alex borgogno'" <alex442@virgilio.it>; <mariners-l@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 1:26 AM Subject: Re: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget/Budget > Perhaps that's the answer. > > BRIDGET's building costs overran badly and the builders, unable to get any > more money out of the buyer, "misread" the name on the contract (Dubord > and > his men were presumably French speakers, and would have been more familiar > with the French form of the name, BRIGITTE) and launched her as BUDGET in > revenge.... > > Pure speculation, of course.... ;-) > > > Cheers > Piers > > > -----Original Message----- > From: mariners-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:mariners-bounces@rootsweb.com] > On Behalf Of jduerkop@cogeco.ca > Sent: 27 July 2011 04:33 > To: alex borgogno; mariners-l@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget > > The translated transcript of the contracts to build the ship at Pointe aux > Trembles are quite clear. Her name was to be BRIDGET. The translation > was > done by Parks Canada. Incidentally, Mr. Angers made a profit of 37 > pounds, > 14 shillings and 1 pence in building her. That was a profit of less than 2 > %. > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I amseeing that now. Thanks for all of your hard work too Adi. Especially for all the newspape reports. Much appreciated. Edie ----- Original Message ----- From: Mme_N_Carmichael To: alex borgogno ; mariners-l@rootsweb.com ; Edie McArthur Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 12:29 AM Subject: Re: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget/Budget Hello Edie, No, that's what Piers was trying to tell you. The American Lloyd's continued to list her until 1869, but without any solid evidence that she was still in existence after 1863. She could still very well be your BUDGET/COLOMBO. Regards, Adi --- On Wed, 7/27/11, Edie McArthur <ediemc@bigpond.com> wrote: BUDGET continues to appear in editions up to 1869, but it should be noted that in 1869 she was recorded as last "seen" in NY in 1863, so it goes to show that such things aren't necessarily all that accurate and shouldn't be absolutely relied upon! So if she was being recorded still in 1869 not our Colombo. Edie

Hopefully Alex, someone else on the list has been given some clues as to where to look for their ancestors information. I find the book in question interesting for another of my ancestors John and Isabella McArthur who came to Tasmania or Van Diemans land as it was then on the "Broomielaw" she left the Clyde on her maiden voyage 15th December 1856 and arrived in Launceston Tasmania 31 March 1857. I was quite an evenful trip with man overboard a storm which caused the mast to topple, a birth and a child death . The good thing about this ship was that on the day she arrived the passengers sent a letter to the local newspapers the Examiner, thanking the ships Captain for getting them safely to tasmania against all odds. It was a good letter, I was able to put nto my family history records. Sad though, I cannot, not can anyone else find a print or phot of her. I have actually been to this Quebec ZPort in 1998 and looked fo myself thechap behind the counter looked into his book of ships and found her entry obutno photograph. Isnt it always the way, you do not need something until you have been acome back.. I could have made these enquiries for the family about the Colombo whilst there if it was bing researched at the time. Edie ----- Original Message ----- From: "alex borgogno" <alex442@virgilio.it> To: <mariners-l@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 11:54 PM Subject: [MAR] Colombo/Budget/Bridget > Most of us have checked now and then the Canadian site, and had the > opportunity to notice that Eileen Marcil is often quoted as the > referential source for data offered on many Quebec's vessels, which should > be proof enough of the research done by her and the great consideration > for it. > Up at this moment what we have, Marcil tells that this vessel was > contracted in 1860 to be named Bridget, and was completed by 1861. It > would shade some light if it was possible to learn who was the first > contracted buyer. It may seem that the sale did not succeed, since we see > the vessel calling at New York as the Budget. > At this pont the vessel arrives at Liverpool, as Budget (?), and it is > registered as Colombo, the clerk registers the former name as the Bridget, > this may be because some document indicated the name the vessel was first > launched as Bridget. And this could be the only explanation I can thing > of. > However other documentations indicate the name as Budget, so we are two > documentations to three. > The Bengal book, confirms that the vessel was lost and the obvious date. > An entry from the Glasgow Herald ties (finally), the name of Evans as > master of the lost Colombo, but gives exactly what the Lloyd's List > gives:- ship Colombo, no news. > So I think that more data can be found for this vessel, to help out with > the dilemma Bridget/Budget, and our friend Edie. > What I find very interesting, is that so many members of the List have > taken the time to come up with a contribution to this Forum. This surley > reflects the great spirit of this community which is helping others, and > sharing our data with others. I am surly proud to be a member of such > community. > Much Alohas and Mahalo Nui Loa to everyone > Alex > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Well there will be no doubt a copy will be at the British Library Museum and Bodelian Library at Oxford. I will enquire as to whether there is a copy in Tasmania or he mainland somewhere. I may be able to get it on interlibrary loan. Thankyou Edie ----- Original Message ----- From: <jduerkop@cogeco.ca> To: "Edie McArthur" <ediemc@bigpond.com>; "alex borgogno" <alex442@virgilio.it>; <mariners-l@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 10:20 PM Subject: Re: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget > Eileen Reid Marcil's book "The Charley-Man" is subtitled "A History of > Wooden Shipbuilding at Quebec 1763-1893". The English version of the book > appeared in 1995, I think the French one preceded it by a couple of years. > > It contains what is given as a complete list of all seagoing vessels built > in the area. There is no BUDGET listed. I think it possible that the > CHIN reference previously cited is incorrect as to the name. It has > happened before with that source. The person doing the data entry to the > CHIN website probably read "BRIDGET" as "BUDGET", which would be very easy > to do with handwritten entries. > > As far as I am aware the material Marcil collected is not available on > line as such. I do know that she has donated at least some of her > research materials to various institutions. > > John > > > From: "Edie McArthur" <ediemc@bigpond.com> > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 2:23 AM > To: <jduerkop@cogeco.ca>; "alex borgogno" <alex442@virgilio.it>; > <mariners-l@rootsweb.com> > Subject: Re: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget > >> Isthere anything else in the data you are looking at please and can I go >> to a website and view. >> Thanks >> Edie >> ps Sorry about all f these posts but maybe one day someone else may be >> asking the same questions but it will be there for them. >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: <jduerkop@cogeco.ca> >> To: "alex borgogno" <alex442@virgilio.it>; <mariners-l@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 1:33 PM >> Subject: Re: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget >> >> >>> The translated transcript of the contracts to build the ship at Pointe >>> aux >>> Trembles are quite clear. Her name was to be BRIDGET. The translation >>> was >>> done by Parks Canada. Incidentally, Mr. Angers made a profit of 37 >>> pounds, >>> 14 shillings and 1 pence in building her. That was a profit of less than >>> 2 >>> %. >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------- >>> From: "alex borgogno" <alex442@virgilio.it> >>> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 10:03 PM >>> To: <mariners-l@rootsweb.com> >>> Subject: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget >>> >>>> It is becoming very interesting. I managed to check my early hand >>>> written >>>> transcription from the "Liverpool Ships Register" to see if I made an >>>> error typing this data into my PC, the name I see is Bridget. >>>> The American Lloyd's Register gives correct data on this vessel. I had >>>> not >>>> checked it before for her, probably due to her short life, which did >>>> not >>>> make it much interested to me. >>>> At this point I can only think that, either I made an early error of >>>> transcription, or the Liverpool Ships Register got the wrong name >>>> entered. >>>> Yes the MNL gives the name Budget, I remember I thought that it was an >>>> error, due to my previous findings. >>>> The only think to do now, to clear the issue, is to check the Canadian >>>> Register for the name Budget. >>>> Those vessels name Bridget listed, do not seem to have to correct >>>> tonnage >>>> to qualify. >>>> Alex >>>> >>>> ------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>>> MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> > >

Posting on behalf of Pete Owens, Crew List Index Project. The Bridget/Budget discussion nicely illustrates several points about records of shipping. All of these records started out as hand written and transcription from them is never easy. That applies to everyone - with all respect to distinguished researchers, they are as prone to error as anyone else. What they record is NOT definitive. We and our CLIP transcribers have probably transcribed as many maritime records as anyone but we freely admit to errors in our transcription. We use several data-checking systems and any CLIP database record has been looked at by at least two people, but we still would not claim an error rate of much better than 1% on the more difficult records. We would be sceptical of anyone who claimed to do better, especially if they are working single handed. That 1% is still less than the discrepancy rate between sources used at the time, such as the Shipping registers, Appropriation Books and MNL, if you cross-check them. The Victorian clerks were themselves working from hand-written records, and made mistakes like anyone else. There's some circumstantial evidence that some of it was dictated from one clerk to another - discrepancies which are sound-alikes are common (Bridget/Budget is a good example). There are also examples where errors propogate through several editions of MNL and are then corrected, and it's not clear what sources were being used and what checking was done. The shipowners and masters who should have know best of all, were themselves quite flexible in their spelling of the name of their vessel, though they do seem to have got the ON right, most of the time. Printed sources of any sort are no more reliable just for being printed. Anyone who has read a newspaper report of an incident in which they have been involved will have been amazed at just how wrong the report can be. The same applies to online catalogues and databases - the catalogues of some major institutions crawl with obvious errors. It should be basic good practice to quote your source for every last bit of data you present - then other researchers can follow your trail. The approach we take with CLIP is to work from original sources as much as possible, make the most reliable transcription we can manage, always make clear what our source was, and make an image of the source available if we can (not all there yet, but we're working on it). We leave it up to others to enjoy the discussion as to what the vessel's name actually was. Best wishes Pete www.crewlist.org.uk

Thankyou Piers and Mick, Peter and Alex, John and several others who have helped in any way.We do appreciate it. thankyou Edie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Piers Smith-Cresswell" <piers@ps-c.demon.co.uk> To: "'Edie McArthur'" <ediemc@bigpond.com>; "'Mariners List'" <mariners@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 8:39 PM Subject: RE: [MAR] Bridget/Budget/Colombo > No Edie, my point is that BUDGET *WASN'T* still around in 1869. > > The name still appeared in American Lloyds up to 1869, sure, but American > Lloyds wasn't an official register. The last they heard of BUDGET was in > 1863 in New York (see the last column). As a reactive record they just > kept > reprinting the 1863 details until either someone got round to telling them > to take them out, or they weeded it out themselves on the grounds that the > info was now so old as to be unreliable. There was no obligation on > anyone > to tell them of the change. > > So since their last information was that BUDGET was seen in NY in 1863, it > is entirely consistent with her being sold in December 1863 and thus the > name disappearing from reports. After that she changed her name and there > was nothing to connect COLOMBO with the former BUDGET, and she was wrecked > not so long after that. No reports meant no updating, so American Lloyds > just kept her in because for all they know she was laid up somewhere. The > American Civil War being on at the time would probably not have made it > easy > to keep updated. > > What it does confirm, though, is that American Lloyds, at least, also read > the Quebec-built 933-ton ship's name as BUDGET rather than BRIDGET. As > did > the Mercantile Navy List in 1864 (p650 on the link sent by Peter Klein). > Note that this too was out of date, as the vessel's name seems to have > changed in 1863. > > But you *DO* have an official proof that vessel ON 37096, named BUDGET > (ok, > or possibly BRIDGET), built in 1861 became COLOMBO of Liverpool in 1863 > because you have a copy of the appropriation book (courtesy of Mick and > Peter Owens). Personally I also read the entry as "Budget". It is a > tricky > one, but the "R" isn't formed in the same way as it was for CHERUB above, > or > MAGGIE LANDER below, and there is no dot above the "I", and I can't really > see how else one would write "Budget" in joined-up script. Of course for > all we know that could itself be a misreading of someone else's > handwriting! > > > The Canadian Public Archives (the other link provided by Mick) also read > the > vessel's name as BUDGET. This doesn't explain the references to BRIDGET > except as errors in transcription somewhere along the line, but such > things > happened. I have researched an American vessel of the same period whose > name was ALICE VENNARD but I have come across references to her in various > sources as ALICE VENARD, KENNARD, VONNARD etc. Other evidence made it > clear > that it was the same vessel in each case, but the name just got constantly > garbled. > > The link to the COLOMBO lost in the Calcutta Cyclone is on page 144 of the > Government of Bengal's Report (on Google Books > http://tinyurl.com/44a66w7 ). > That vessel was recorded at 932 tons which is close enough, given the > comparative rarity of the name, to suggest that it is the same vessel as > the > ex-BUDGET. You really want to tie her in more closely than that of course; > Merseyside Maritime Museum might be a good place to start, as they have a > blog post specifically about the 1864 Calcutta Cyclone which apparently > bankrupted many Liverpool insurance companies. As BUDGET was > re-registered > at Liverpool COLOMBO might well appear somewhere in their records: see > http://tinyurl.com/3vvt9ux > > Have a look at the Southampton website too: > > http://www.plimsoll.org/RegistersAndRecords/ > > > Cheers > Piers > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Edie McArthur [mailto:ediemc@bigpond.com] > Sent: 27 July 2011 07:12 > To: Piers Smith-Cresswell; 'Mariners List' > Subject: Re: [MAR] Bridget/Colombo > > Thanks for that Piers. Actually the Broomielawwas of interest as that is > the ship on her miaden voyage that brough our McArthur family to > Australia. > We actually went to Quebec port to see about a photo for her but there has > never been a photo anywhere. > > Still nothing official to prove the Budget Bridget or any other ship > became > the Colombo who sunk in the Cyclones off Calcutta in 1864. > > Thankyou to everyon who have tried to help. We really need the right > Colombo to get the O/N If the Budget is the one mentioned earlier that was > stillabout in 1869 it cannot be our Colombo as she was sunk in 1864 > Edie > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Piers Smith-Cresswell" <piers@ps-c.demon.co.uk> > To: "'Mariners List'" <mariners@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 7:04 AM > Subject: Re: [MAR] Bridget/Colombo > > >> Looks like she was BUDGET: the 1862 American Lloyds Register of American >> and >> Foreign Shipping has a 933 ton Quebec ship of that name in 1862 edition, >> other details tally: http://tinyurl.com/3z4p63a . If there was a >> transcription error then it evidently made it onto that as well. >> >> BUDGET continues to appear in editions up to 1869, but it should be noted >> that in 1869 she was recorded as last "seen" in NY in 1863, so it goes to >> show that such things aren't necessarily all that accurate and shouldn't >> be >> absolutely relied upon! >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mariners-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:mariners-bounces@rootsweb.com] >> On Behalf Of Mick >> Sent: 26 July 2011 18:31 >> To: Mariners List >> Subject: Re: [MAR] Bridget/Colombo >> >> >> Pete owns from the Clip Website has sent me a cutting from the >> Appropriation >> >> books this shows her entry in the Book as Budget and subsequently sold to >> Liverpool under a new name, what you don't see in the clip is that she >> was >> first reg,d in Quebec in 1861 but take it from me its there. >> >> I have posted it here and sent a copy to Edie >> >> > http://www.mariners-list.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=6&pid=47#top_dis >> play_media >> >> >> My link in the last post seems to have an error so try this one. and >> search >> by number. >> >> > http://www.pro.rcip-chin.gc.ca/bd-dl/nav-ship-eng.jsp?emu=en.vessel:/Proxapp >> /ws/vessel/public/vessel/SearchForm >> >> >> >> Mick O Rourke >> >> Mariners List >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes >> in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > >

Hi Adi Probably consular records again, at the National Archives, and they're unlikely to be online. If you can track down the Crew Agreement for the voyage, it should contain an endorsement by the consul to the effect that so-and-so was discharged at such and such a place by reason of sickness or injury and that the master had deposited a sum to cover his hospital expenses. That's assuming that the port in question had a consul. SOMEONE would have had to have signed him off the ship, but if there was no consul then there probably isn't a record. I know that the ship's original papers would have been lost with the vessel, but there was a system by 1910 at least whereby copies of changes to the original agreement were forwarded to the BoT so that they could reconstruct the crew list for a missing vessel. Not sure whether this was the case in 1863 though. I'm also not sure whether records for individual cases would have survived; I did look through some consular records for 1906 and there were all sorts of letters there - but obviously only for the cases where it was necessary for the consul to write a letter. If the chap went to hospital, got better, was discharged and got another job I wouldn't expect him to show up. If he had to be repatriated, though, there might be something on it. You might be able to work out which port/consulate it was by tracking the vessel's route through Lloyd's List. Cheers Piers -----Original Message----- From: mariners-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:mariners-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Mme_N_Carmichael Sent: 27 July 2011 16:56 To: MARINERS@rootsweb.com Subject: [MAR] Records? on English Seamen Hospitalized Ashore in ForeignCountries. Dear all,   Concurrent with my other query about naval courts, I'm wondering where to look for records of injured English seamen left behind in foreign ports. This would have happened in Nov./Dec. of 1863 somewhere in the Eastern Mediterranean. Would it have been reported to the nearest Consul? That supposedly unlucky first mate turned out to be the only survivor of the ship which left him behind.   Regards, Adi ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Except Piers has added to the confusion from his information, he says: From: "Piers Smith-Cresswell" <piers@ps-c.demon.co.uk> To: "'Mariners List'" <mariners@rootsweb.com> Subject: Re: [MAR] Bridget/Colombo Date: Wednesday, 27 July 2011 7:04 AM Looks like she was BUDGET: the 1862 American Lloyds Register of American and Foreign Shipping has a 933 ton Quebec ship of that name in 1862 edition, other details tally: http://tinyurl.com/3z4p63a . If there was a transcription error then it evidently made it onto that as well. BUDGET continues to appear in editions up to 1869, but it should be noted that in 1869 she was recorded as last "seen" in NY in 1863, so it goes to show that such things aren't necessarily all that accurate and shouldn't be absolutely relied upon! So if she was being recorded still in 1869 not our Colombo. Edie -----Original Message----- From: mariners-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:mariners-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Mick Sent: 26 July 2011 18:31 To: Mariners List Subject: Re: [MAR] Bridget/Colombo Pete owns from the Clip Website has sent me a cutting from the Appropriation books this shows her entry in the Book as Budget and subsequently sold to Liverpool under a new name, what you don't see in the clip is that she was first reg,d in Quebec in 1861 but take it from me its there. I have posted it here and sent a copy to Edie http://www.mariners-list.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=6&pid=47#top_dis play_media My link in the last post seems to have an error so try this one. and search by number. http://www.pro.rcip-chin.gc.ca/bd-dl/nav-ship-eng.jsp?emu=en.vessel:/Proxapp /ws/vessel/public/vessel/SearchForm Mick O Rourke Mariners List ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ----- Original Message ----- From: "alex borgogno" <alex442@virgilio.it> To: <mariners-l@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 2:08 PM Subject: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget/Budget > Only a guess of mine, let us suppose that Eileen Marcil was correct with > her data on the BRIDGET, and let us suppose that the very same firm built > two vessels for Liverpool, maybe even both for the same merchants, there > could have been a possible error by part of the Clerk recording the > passage, so that the Bridget was entered as the Colombo, while possibly > the Budget was recorded under another name. Anyone has any idea how to > clear up this situation ? It now may seem that the Colombo was in fact the > Budget, and not the Bridget, by the late documentation offered. The > question would be, what ever happened to the Bridget ? Isn't this an > interesting quest ? > Alex > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello Edie,   Worldcat.org shows three libraries in Australia with copies: http://www.worldcat.org/title/charley-man-a-history-of-wooden-shipbuilding-at-quebec-1763-1893/oclc/28846331&referer=brief_results   Regards, Adi --- On Wed, 7/27/11, Edie McArthur <ediemc@bigpond.com> wrote: From: Edie McArthur <ediemc@bigpond.com> Subject: Re: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget To: jduerkop@cogeco.ca, "alex borgogno" <alex442@virgilio.it>, mariners-l@rootsweb.com Received: Wednesday, July 27, 2011, 7:37 PM Well there will be no doubt a copy will be at the British Library Museum and Bodelian Library at Oxford.  I will enquire as to whether there is a copy in Tasmania or he mainland somewhere.  I may be able to get it on interlibrary loan. Thankyou Edie ----- Original Message ----- From: <jduerkop@cogeco.ca> To: "Edie McArthur" <ediemc@bigpond.com>; "alex borgogno" <alex442@virgilio.it>; <mariners-l@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 10:20 PM Subject: Re: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget > Eileen Reid Marcil's book "The Charley-Man" is subtitled "A History of > Wooden Shipbuilding at Quebec 1763-1893".  The English version of the book > appeared in 1995, I think the French one preceded it by a couple of years. > > It contains what is given as a complete list of all seagoing vessels built > in the area.  There is no BUDGET listed.  I think it possible that the > CHIN reference previously cited is incorrect as to the name.  It has > happened before with that source.  The person  doing the data entry to the > CHIN website probably read "BRIDGET" as "BUDGET", which would be very easy > to do with handwritten entries. > > As far as I am aware the material Marcil collected is not available on > line as such.  I do know that she has donated at least some of her > research materials to various institutions. > > John > > > From: "Edie McArthur" <ediemc@bigpond.com> > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 2:23 AM > To: <jduerkop@cogeco.ca>; "alex borgogno" <alex442@virgilio.it>; > <mariners-l@rootsweb.com> > Subject: Re: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget > >> Isthere anything else in the data you are looking at please and can I go >> to a website and view. >> Thanks >> Edie >> ps Sorry about all f these posts but maybe one day someone else may be >> asking the same questions but it will be there for them. >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: <jduerkop@cogeco.ca> >> To: "alex borgogno" <alex442@virgilio.it>; <mariners-l@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 1:33 PM >> Subject: Re: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget >> >> >>> The translated transcript of the contracts to build the ship at Pointe >>> aux >>> Trembles are quite clear.  Her name was to be BRIDGET.  The translation >>> was >>> done by Parks Canada.  Incidentally, Mr. Angers made a profit of 37 >>> pounds, >>> 14 shillings and 1 pence in building her. That was a profit of less than >>> 2 >>> %. >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------- >>> From: "alex borgogno" <alex442@virgilio.it> >>> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 10:03 PM >>> To: <mariners-l@rootsweb.com> >>> Subject: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget >>> >>>> It is becoming very interesting. I managed to check my early hand >>>> written >>>> transcription from the "Liverpool Ships Register" to see if I made an >>>> error typing this data into my PC, the name I see is Bridget. >>>> The American Lloyd's Register gives correct data on this vessel. I had >>>> not >>>> checked it before for her, probably due to her short life, which did >>>> not >>>> make it much interested to me. >>>> At this point I can only think that, either I made an early error of >>>> transcription, or the Liverpool Ships Register got the wrong name >>>> entered. >>>> Yes the MNL gives the name Budget, I remember I thought that it was an >>>> error, due to my previous findings. >>>> The only think to do now, to clear the issue, is to check the Canadian >>>> Register for the name Budget. >>>> Those vessels name Bridget listed, do not seem to have to correct >>>> tonnage >>>> to qualify. >>>> Alex >>>> >>>> ------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>>> MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> > > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Perhaps that's the answer. BRIDGET's building costs overran badly and the builders, unable to get any more money out of the buyer, "misread" the name on the contract (Dubord and his men were presumably French speakers, and would have been more familiar with the French form of the name, BRIGITTE) and launched her as BUDGET in revenge.... Pure speculation, of course.... ;-) Cheers Piers -----Original Message----- From: mariners-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:mariners-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of jduerkop@cogeco.ca Sent: 27 July 2011 04:33 To: alex borgogno; mariners-l@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget The translated transcript of the contracts to build the ship at Pointe aux Trembles are quite clear. Her name was to be BRIDGET. The translation was done by Parks Canada. Incidentally, Mr. Angers made a profit of 37 pounds, 14 shillings and 1 pence in building her. That was a profit of less than 2 %.

Isthere anything else in the data you are looking at please and can I go to a website and view. Thanks Edie ps Sorry about all f these posts but maybe one day someone else may be asking the same questions but it will be there for them. ----- Original Message ----- From: <jduerkop@cogeco.ca> To: "alex borgogno" <alex442@virgilio.it>; <mariners-l@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 1:33 PM Subject: Re: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget > The translated transcript of the contracts to build the ship at Pointe aux > Trembles are quite clear. Her name was to be BRIDGET. The translation > was > done by Parks Canada. Incidentally, Mr. Angers made a profit of 37 > pounds, > 14 shillings and 1 pence in building her. That was a profit of less than 2 > %. > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "alex borgogno" <alex442@virgilio.it> > Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 10:03 PM > To: <mariners-l@rootsweb.com> > Subject: [MAR] Colombo/Bridget > >> It is becoming very interesting. I managed to check my early hand written >> transcription from the "Liverpool Ships Register" to see if I made an >> error typing this data into my PC, the name I see is Bridget. >> The American Lloyd's Register gives correct data on this vessel. I had >> not >> checked it before for her, probably due to her short life, which did not >> make it much interested to me. >> At this point I can only think that, either I made an early error of >> transcription, or the Liverpool Ships Register got the wrong name >> entered. >> Yes the MNL gives the name Budget, I remember I thought that it was an >> error, due to my previous findings. >> The only think to do now, to clear the issue, is to check the Canadian >> Register for the name Budget. >> Those vessels name Bridget listed, do not seem to have to correct tonnage >> to qualify. >> Alex >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message