That is indeed very good advice, Caroline. Can I ask what software you use to be able to colour code individuals. What a wonderful idea, being able to add bits to your tree, before it has been absolutely proved beyond doubt. Anne Caroline Bradford wrote: > Thanks, Graham, for sharing such a valuable cautionary tale. You are, of > course, by no means alone. How many subscribers to this list, I wonder, can > put their hands on their hearts and say that they haven't had similar > experiences - I certainly did, many years ago, when I claimed a whole clutch > of TAYLORs as mine, just because the names, dates and locations fitted. > > The old rule of thumb always used to be that you needed three separate > pieces of documentary evidence to support each genealogical fact before > adding a member to your tree. I fear few of us stick to this level of > "proof" these days, but corroborating with at least one other reference is > always sensible. My FH software allows me to colour code individuals, and I > find this very useful as a way of distinguishing between (a) working > hypothesis, (b) probable and (c) beyond reasonable doubt. > > Best wishes > > Caroline > > >

Hi Anne It's Roots Magic. I also have Family Tree Maker 2009 and tend to flit between them, as they both have good features but neither is "perfect"! I do so wish someone would devise a programme which allowed one to enter street addresses with the number separate from the name. None of the major programs (so far as I know) do this, and the upshot is that addresses are sorted in order of house number rather than alphabetically by street - a nuisance when an address "rings a bell" and you want to check quickly whether the house is already in your system. I get round this by entering addresses "backwards", but it's a little clumsy. Most software allows you to enter unconnected individuals and families then merge them into your actual tree when you are certain of the connection - saves a lot of time redoing work at a later date! Best wishes Caroline Sent from my iPad On 27 Jul 2010, at 12:14, Anne Chapman <anne@chapman.id.au> wrote: That is indeed very good advice, Caroline. Can I ask what software you use to be able to colour code individuals. What a wonderful idea, being able to add bits to your tree, before it has been absolutely proved beyond doubt. Anne Caroline Bradford wrote: Thanks, Graham, for sharing such a valuable cautionary tale. You are, of course, by no means alone. How many subscribers to this list, I wonder, can put their hands on their hearts and say that they haven't had similar experiences - I certainly did, many years ago, when I claimed a whole clutch of TAYLORs as mine, just because the names, dates and locations fitted. The old rule of thumb always used to be that you needed three separate pieces of documentary evidence to support each genealogical fact before adding a member to your tree. I fear few of us stick to this level of "proof" these days, but corroborating with at least one other reference is always sensible. My FH software allows me to colour code individuals, and I find this very useful as a way of distinguishing between (a) working hypothesis, (b) probable and (c) beyond reasonable doubt. Best wishes Caroline ************************************** Send your List messages using **PLAIN TEXT** and always **TRIM AWAY** superfluous old messages in replies. List Admin can be contacted at: Middlesex_County_UK-admin@rootsweb.com ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MIDDLESEX_COUNTY_UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

My humble apologies for calling a male a widow instead of a widower. Don't really know why they made the difference in those early days - surely it would have suited either sex? But, I suppose when first names can be confusing as to either male or female it does make some sense. Cheers Graham

Some years ago I stumbled upon some very interesting and exciting details in census' re. my Bennett/Hanson relations and thought this was all fine. There was my Robert William Hanson marrying a Marion c.1873 and having three bountiful children up to 1878. All fits. Almost perfect. Except it wasn't. The Robert William Hanson who married this Marion was not the same Robert William Hanson, father Robert dairyman, as I presumed him to be. The surname was limited in MDX, all seemed to fit and I should have learnt my earlier lesson from other counties that there may well have been two of them born in close years and in the same county. So, blissfully I followed 'my' Robert William in his travels in the census as a cement agent and considered I was home and hosed with this family. Disaster loomed in the fact of one marriage certificate of 1919 which showed Robert William Hanson, father Robert dairyman, to be a bachelor. Yes, big drama. A bachelor at the age of 47 of Fulham, fits..... unless there is some skullduggery at work and he was really a widow? Must check to see if a Marion Hanson had died sometime between 1911 and 1919. This could have all the mystery of Midsommer! Anyway, Robert's new wife (or first wife) in 1919 was shown to be Millicent Harriet Denby 39 widow, father John Eves. Hmmn, still of child bearing age no doubt at 39! Could be some little toddlers from that liaison! Anyway, just thought you'd like to see that what you may find on census data is not always the truth of the matte even if you are fairly certain. Cheers Graham Melbourne Oz

In my own relatively small Nixey family, William George Nixey who began the Nixey Black Lead business was always shown to be the son of James and Mary Ann in copies of the family tree I'd been sent both electronically and by snail mail. I had my doubts for many years, until with the help of a certain lister (bless her heart), I was able to pin down his baptism record and prove my gutt feelings to be %100 correct. This was in addition to the fact that on his marriage certificate he stated his father to be John Nixey, a Wheelwright. James was a blacksmith. William George was bapt 1812 and died 1870, William who was the son of James was bapt in 1813 and died 1852. I was so thrilled to be able to put his family records straight, but no doubt even though I've sent corrected info to quite a number of Nixey researchers, I still have had copies stating him to be the son of James. I wholeheartedly Echo the words of Mrs Richards in the best ever sketch in Fawlty Towers: "Why don't people listen!" Regards to all, Jon

Hi Frances, Try asking the Mariners list. They're a really knowledgeable and helpful bunch. To subscribe send an email to: MARINERS-request@rootsweb.com with the usual 'subscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message. John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frances Laird" <frances_laird@yahoo.co.uk> To: <MIDDLESEX_COUNTY_UK@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 3:01 PM Subject: [MDX] Bonhome - Blackwall | Hi List | Can Anyone help? I have a copy of the will made by an ancestor in 1633. He was a quartermaster based, I believe at Blackwall, on the ship 'Mary'. He mentions another ship in his will, the 'Jonah', which I beleive is sometimes the nickname for a ship called 'Jonas'. He died abroad, but I am interested to find out about the ship, or group of ships, he was associated with. Apparently two ships named the 'Mary and John' left London at about this time, one with the East India Company, the other taking pilgrims to the New World. Ca anyone help me out with this? | Many thanks | Frances

I echo Mary's sentiments about poached ancestors they turn up on many other sites too, someone has copied great chunks of my KENDALL tree on Ancestry, the only problem is my KENDALL relative he has linked his tree too, died young never married nor had children. Whilst he has copied her death and burial information into his relatives and then added all my KENDALL ancestors, his managed to give birth after her death and appear on two subsequent census returns!! Another good way of finding living relatives is Facebook. Maria

Hi all: GRO used to have a reference check option, but recently this option disappeared. One just has to try to be as sure as possible that the correct certificate is being sent for. Excellent service though...In Canada receive certificates within two week of request. Margaret On 2010-07-27, at 3:43 PM, Anne Chapman wrote: > Hi Chris, > I have found that by ordering UK Certificates through Transcription > Agents, like Marilyn Rowan or Joy Murrin, on line, there is a section at > the bottom of the order where you can put extra information, ie other > possible index entries or ages, parents, spouse. Then if the details do > not match, there is a reduced fee. This can also apply to NSW > Certificates, although our birth Indexes do have parents names and the > death Indexes have them if known by the informant. Anne > . > Chris & George Jamieson wrote: >> Hi Charani, re your comment below in reply to Janice, about contacting GRO >> first before ordering a cert you're not sure is the correct one, have you >> had success doing it this way? Do you mean you give them the 2 or 3 >> *possible* references and they will help you find the correct one to then >> order? >> >> Cheers >> Chris, Sydney >> >> > > ************************************** > Send your List messages using **PLAIN TEXT** and always **TRIM AWAY** superfluous old messages in replies. > > List Admin can be contacted at: Middlesex_County_UK-admin@rootsweb.com > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MIDDLESEX_COUNTY_UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Dear Listers, I do agree with John. We've all muddled people up at times and hopefully disentangled them when new facts arrive, but many people on genes united either don't reply even when you know you have a match(why do they bother posting?) or have decided that a chunk of your tree will fit in nicely with their inaccurate researches. I always try to point out gently where the errors are(nobody wants to feel a fool) and have even done extra reasearch on their tree to show who the actual parents, siblings are, but frequently there is not even an acknowledgement and the mismatches show up again on hot matches.Seems anyone's relatives will do especially when from a small village with a common surname.None-the-less it is still useful especially for tracing living relatives who would be pretty impossible otherwise. Just the frustarting side of an interesting hobby. Best wishes for good breakthroughs, Mary Looking for Hendersons in the London area descended from Charles John Henderson and Margaret Wallace.

Hi List Can Anyone help? I have a copy of the will made by an ancestor in 1633. He was a quartermaster based, I believe at Blackwall, on the ship 'Mary'. He mentions another ship in his will, the 'Jonah', which I beleive is sometimes the nickname for a ship called 'Jonas'. He died abroad, but I am interested to find out about the ship, or group of ships, he was associated with. Apparently two ships named the 'Mary and John' left London at about this time, one with the East India Company, the other taking pilgrims to the New World. Ca anyone help me out with this? Many thanks Frances

Brad Rogers wrote: > I start to get irate. Which doesn't do me any favours normally. > Although, on one occasion (not genealogy related) I was asked to leave > the govt. dept. I said they'd better telephone the police, as I had no > intention of leaving until they'd satisfied my demands. Miraculously, a > person, and time, became available within minutes. The fact that that proves they *can* do it is what makes me cross. Since they knew they *could* help but were, essentially, being lazy, they should have done so in the first place and prevented a lot of unnecessary ill feeling and antagonism. > Finding somebody with sufficient "clout". It just takes a phone call to the GRO in Southport to explain what's happened and they get the "appropriate person" to make a call to the register office explaining their duties and responsibilities. The GRO call back with the name of the person to ask for at said register office. > I knew you'd had issues with one of the London offices, but couldn't > remember which one. It's in GenBrit - about 4 years ago I think, maybe longer. I've been asleep since then >> I have my suspicions. > > I'm sure you do. :-) They're probably well founded too :) One day I'll make an appt and go through the registers myself, which is possible just to find out. It's just a gut feeling a particular child is NOT a biological member of the family. I've never found her birth registration and Judy Lester very kindly had a search through the parish registers for me and couldn't find her either. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

Janice12 wrote: > I nearly did in that I knew that James Smith was son of James Henry & > Caroline Smith nee Stokes & on the 1881 census there was 2 families both > parents were James & Caroline Smith son James & both father's occupation > were shoemakers only difference apart from different places of birth given > for the father was one also had a younger son Thomas so I took a chance & > ordered the birth of Thomas & it came back the same as my James so this was > his brother & therefore knew which of the 2 on the census it was. > But sometimes with common names like Smith I have had to order a certificate > on gut feeling which is not always the correct one so have had a few > certificates that have been wrong I think the way the GRO does it now it > even worst as before you could say father's name or something & if it didn't > match up you paid just a smaller amount of the fee & got the rest returned > now it just send it out right or wrong The way to check is to mail them first (putting GQ before the subject) or to contact the relevant register office. Adding the details of all your SMITH certificates as Postems to FreeBMD will help others to eliminate some options. I've taken a wrong turn on a very unusual surname where there were two children with the same name and year of birth and the same father's name. It's so much easier to do with the more common names. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

I nearly did in that I knew that James Smith was son of James Henry & Caroline Smith nee Stokes & on the 1881 census there was 2 families both parents were James & Caroline Smith son James & both father's occupation were shoemakers only difference apart from different places of birth given for the father was one also had a younger son Thomas so I took a chance & ordered the birth of Thomas & it came back the same as my James so this was his brother & therefore knew which of the 2 on the census it was. But sometimes with common names like Smith I have had to order a certificate on gut feeling which is not always the correct one so have had a few certificates that have been wrong I think the way the GRO does it now it even worst as before you could say father's name or something & if it didn't match up you paid just a smaller amount of the fee & got the rest returned now it just send it out right or wrong Regards Janice -----Original Message----- > Some years ago I stumbled upon some very interesting and exciting > details in census' re. my Bennett/Hanson relations and thought this > was all fine. There was my Robert William Hanson marrying a Marion > c.1873 and having three bountiful children up to 1878. All fits. > Almost perfect. Except it wasn't. The Robert William Hanson who > married this Marion was not the same Robert William Hanson, father > Robert dairyman, as I presumed him to be. The surname was limited in > MDX, all seemed to fit and I should have learnt my earlier lesson from > other counties that there may well have been two of them born in close > years and in the same county. So, blissfully I followed 'my' > Robert William in his travels in the census as a cement agent and > considered I was home and hosed with this family. Disaster loomed in > the fact of one marriage certificate of 1919 which showed Robert > William Hanson, father Robert dairyman, to be a bachelor. Yes, big > drama. A bachelor at the age of 47 of Fulham, fits..... unless there > is some skullduggery at work and he was really a widow? Must check to > see if a Marion Hanson had died sometime between 1911 and 1919. This > could have all the mystery of Midsommer! Anyway, Robert's new wife (or > first wife) in 1919 was shown to be Millicent Harriet Denby 39 widow, > father John Eves. Hmmn, still of child bearing age no doubt at 39! > Could be some little toddlers from that liaison! > > Anyway, just thought you'd like to see that what you may find on > census data is not always the truth of the matte even if you are > fairly certain. > > Cheers > Graham > Melbourne > Oz

An even bigger danger is when someone else thinks they are part of your family, and because they are so uncritical, and blithely accept whetever they think they've found, that they even refuse to alter the misinformation in the public domain when the correct version is pointed out to them. I had this problem with my Urmson family in Cheshire which was hijacked by someone in America, so if anyone is connected to Cheshire Urmsons, or Lancashire Oldhams, you have been warned. What is out there is incorrect!   Regards   John --- On Tue, 27/7/10, Janice12 <janice.aitkens12@ntlworld.com> wrote: From: Janice12 <janice.aitkens12@ntlworld.com> Subject: Re: [MDX] Warning: Finding that research is incorrect. To: middlesex_county_uk@rootsweb.com Date: Tuesday, 27 July, 2010, 13:14 I nearly did in that I knew that James Smith was son of James Henry & Caroline Smith nee Stokes & on the 1881 census there was 2 families both parents were James & Caroline Smith son James & both father's occupation were shoemakers only difference apart from different places of birth given for the father was one also had a younger son Thomas so I took a chance & ordered the birth of Thomas & it came back the same as my James so this was his brother & therefore knew which of the 2 on the census it was. But sometimes with common names like Smith I have had to order a certificate on gut feeling which is not always the correct one so have had a few certificates that have been wrong I think the way the GRO does it now it even worst as before you could say father's name or something & if it didn't match up you paid just a smaller amount of the fee & got the rest returned now it just send it out right or wrong Regards Janice -----Original Message----- > Some years ago I stumbled upon some very interesting and exciting > details in census' re. my Bennett/Hanson relations and thought this > was all fine. There was my Robert William Hanson marrying a Marion > c.1873 and having three bountiful children up to 1878. All fits. > Almost perfect. Except it wasn't. The Robert William Hanson who > married this Marion was not the same Robert William Hanson, father > Robert dairyman, as I presumed him to be. The surname was limited in > MDX, all seemed to fit and I should have learnt my earlier lesson from > other counties that there may well have been two of them born in close > years and in the same county. So, blissfully I followed 'my' > Robert William in his travels in the census as a cement agent and > considered I was home and hosed with this family. Disaster loomed in > the fact of one marriage certificate of 1919 which showed Robert > William Hanson, father Robert dairyman, to be a bachelor. Yes, big > drama. A bachelor at the age of 47 of Fulham, fits..... unless there > is some skullduggery at work and he was really a widow? Must check to > see if a Marion Hanson had died sometime between 1911 and 1919. This > could have all the mystery of Midsommer! Anyway, Robert's new wife (or > first wife) in 1919 was shown to be Millicent Harriet Denby 39 widow, > father John Eves. Hmmn, still of child bearing age no doubt at 39!  > Could be some little toddlers from that liaison! > > Anyway, just thought you'd like to see that what you may find on > census data is not always the truth of the matte even if you are > fairly certain. > > Cheers > Graham > Melbourne > Oz ************************************** Send your List messages using **PLAIN TEXT** and always **TRIM AWAY** superfluous old messages in replies. List Admin can be contacted at: Middlesex_County_UK-admin@rootsweb.com ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MIDDLESEX_COUNTY_UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 22:45:37 +0100 Charani <charani.b@gmail.com> wrote: Hello Charani, > Brad Rogers wrote: > > won't even accept orders for the purposes of family history. The > > legality of which I personally doubt. > They can be forced to do so, but it requires perseverence and the I start to get irate. Which doesn't do me any favours normally. Although, on one occasion (not genealogy related) I was asked to leave the govt. dept. I said they'd better telephone the police, as I had no intention of leaving until they'd satisfied my demands. Miraculously, a person, and time, became available within minutes. > intervention of the relevant person at the GRO. Finding somebody with sufficient "clout". > Islington is one of the worst offenders for refusing to issue or even I knew you'd had issues with one of the London offices, but couldn't remember which one. > look for an historical event but they were forced to comply. However, > whether their subsequent claim the required birth wasn't there is > another matter, of course. I have my suspicions. I'm sure you do. :-) -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)rad never immediately apparent" It's not your heart, it's your bank I want to break It's Yer Money - Wonder Stuff

Thanks, Graham, for sharing such a valuable cautionary tale. You are, of course, by no means alone. How many subscribers to this list, I wonder, can put their hands on their hearts and say that they haven't had similar experiences - I certainly did, many years ago, when I claimed a whole clutch of TAYLORs as mine, just because the names, dates and locations fitted. The old rule of thumb always used to be that you needed three separate pieces of documentary evidence to support each genealogical fact before adding a member to your tree. I fear few of us stick to this level of "proof" these days, but corroborating with at least one other reference is always sensible. My FH software allows me to colour code individuals, and I find this very useful as a way of distinguishing between (a) working hypothesis, (b) probable and (c) beyond reasonable doubt. Best wishes Caroline > > Some years ago I stumbled upon some very interesting and exciting > details in census' re. my Bennett/Hanson relations and thought this > was all fine. There was my Robert William Hanson marrying a Marion > c.1873 and having three bountiful children up to 1878. All fits. > Almost perfect. Except it wasn't. The Robert William Hanson who > married this Marion was not the same Robert William Hanson, father > Robert dairyman, as I presumed him to be. The surname was limited in > MDX, all seemed to fit and I should have learnt my earlier lesson > from other counties that there may well have been two of them born in > close years and in the same county. So, blissfully I followed 'my' > Robert William in his travels in the census as a cement agent and > considered I was home and hosed with this family. Disaster loomed in > the fact of one marriage certificate of 1919 which showed Robert > William Hanson, father Robert dairyman, to be a bachelor. Yes, big > drama. A bachelor at the age of 47 of Fulham, fits..... unless there > is some skullduggery at work and he was really a widow? Must check to > see if a Marion Hanson had died sometime between 1911 and 1919. This > could have all the mystery of Midsommer! Anyway, Robert's new wife > (or first wife) in 1919 was shown to be Millicent Harriet Denby 39 > widow, father John Eves. Hmmn, still of child bearing age no doubt at > 39! Could be some little toddlers from that liaison! > > Anyway, just thought you'd like to see that what you may find on > census data is not always the truth of the matte even if you are > fairly certain. > > Cheers > Graham > Melbourne > Oz

Hi all I am afraid I took all my info away from Genes reunited for this very reason. Stolen info, inaccurate copies and, most irritating, entries that appear to be me but go unanswered when I enquire. In my humble opinion, its simply not worth the bother I'm afraid. Chris --- On Tue, 27/7/10, Maria Borrill <maria.borrill@ntlworld.com> wrote: > From: Maria Borrill <maria.borrill@ntlworld.com> > Subject: Re: [MDX] mixing trees > To: middlesex_county_uk@rootsweb.com > Date: Tuesday, 27 July, 2010, 16:52 > I echo Mary's sentiments about > poached ancestors they turn up on many other > sites too, someone has copied great chunks of my KENDALL > tree on Ancestry, > the only problem is my KENDALL relative he has linked his > tree too, died > young never married nor had children. Whilst he has copied > her death and > burial information into his relatives and then added all my > KENDALL > ancestors, his managed to give birth after her death and > appear on two > subsequent census returns!! > > Another good way of finding living relatives is Facebook. > > Maria > > ************************************** > Send your List messages using **PLAIN TEXT** and always > **TRIM AWAY** superfluous old messages in replies. > > List Admin can be contacted at: Middlesex_County_UK-admin@rootsweb.com > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MIDDLESEX_COUNTY_UK-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the > subject and the body of the message >

G'day Louise, Genes Reunited has two matches for Gertrude TWEED, born in St Pancras in 1887. Perhaps you could contact them. Jan in sunny Queensland ----- Original Message ----- From: "Louise Bergstrom" <lou-berg@shaw.ca> To: <MIDDLESEX_COUNTY_UK@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 7:22 AM Subject: [MDX] WHITE, Albert Victor 1886 -? Pinner? >I am trying to find living descendants of the above. A. V. White (aka > Bert) married to Gertrude Alice TWEED (1887-1969) in All Saints, St > Pancras, had 2 sons. Stanley V White (1912) was killed 1940 disarming a > bomb, his brother was John R. White b. 1914. John R. was married at the > time of his brother's death, with an infant son. I do not have names for > his wife and son. I was trying to locate a death certificate of > either Bert or Gert White in order to find more info on their son John > aka Jackie White. My grandmother was sister of Gert Tweed. I live in > British Columbia, Canada, and any help or advice is greatly appreciated. > Louise Bergstrom > > > ************************************** > Send your List messages using **PLAIN TEXT** and always **TRIM AWAY** superfluous old messages in replies. > > List Admin can be contacted at: Middlesex_County_UK-admin@rootsweb.com > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MIDDLESEX_COUNTY_UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hello I would like to thank all of you who helped me with my query on the site and how to order an English Death Certificate which I have done. Thank you all I appreciate your help. Regards Hazel

Hi... I find your ability to annotate a "possible" ancestor in your program interesting. I think most of us have had the frustrating experience of following a line, convinced we are on the right track, only to find it couldn't be further from the truth. I would also say that another research tip I have begun to use is to try to disprove my hypothesis. Even if no documentation can be found to prove a link, it is worth attempting to find information that will disprove the theory that an individual might be related to one's family. I have to say, I am still interested to learn information about those "mistakes" in my research. Bev W -----Original Message----- From: Caroline Bradford <caroline.bradford@btinternet.com> To: middlesex_county_uk@rootsweb.com Sent: Tue, Jul 27, 2010 6:22 am Subject: Re: [MDX] Warning: Finding that research is incorrect. Thanks, Graham, for sharing such a valuable cautionary tale. You are, of course, by no means alone. How many subscribers to this list, I wonder, can put their hands on their hearts and say that they haven't had similar experiences - I certainly did, many years ago, when I claimed a whole clutch of TAYLORs as mine, just because the names, dates and locations fitted. The old rule of thumb always used to be that you needed three separate pieces of documentary evidence to support each genealogical fact before adding a member to your tree. I fear few of us stick to this level of "proof" these days, but corroborating with at least one other reference is always sensible. My FH software allows me to colour code individuals, and I find this very useful as a way of distinguishing between (a) working hypothesis, (b) probable and (c) beyond reasonable doubt. Best wishes Caroline > > Some years ago I stumbled upon some very interesting and exciting > details in census' re. my Bennett/Hanson relations and thought this > was all fine. There was my Robert William Hanson marrying a Marion > c.1873 and having three bountiful children up to 1878. All fits. > Almost perfect. Except it wasn't. The Robert William Hanson who > married this Marion was not the same Robert William Hanson, father > Robert dairyman, as I presumed him to be. The surname was limited in > MDX, all seemed to fit and I should have learnt my earlier lesson > from other counties that there may well have been two of them born in > close years and in the same county. So, blissfully I followed 'my' > Robert William in his travels in the census as a cement agent and > considered I was home and hosed with this family. Disaster loomed in > the fact of one marriage certificate of 1919 which showed Robert > William Hanson, father Robert dairyman, to be a bachelor. Yes, big > drama. A bachelor at the age of 47 of Fulham, fits..... unless there > is some skullduggery at work and he was really a widow? Must check to > see if a Marion Hanson had died sometime between 1911 and 1919. This > could have all the mystery of Midsommer! Anyway, Robert's new wife > (or first wife) in 1919 was shown to be Millicent Harriet Denby 39 > widow, father John Eves. Hmmn, still of child bearing age no doubt at > 39! Could be some little toddlers from that liaison! > > Anyway, just thought you'd like to see that what you may find on > census data is not always the truth of the matte even if you are > fairly certain. > > Cheers > Graham > Melbourne > Oz ************************************** Send your List messages using **PLAIN TEXT** and always **TRIM AWAY** superfluous old messages in replies. List Admin can be contacted at: Middlesex_County_UK-admin@rootsweb.com ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to MIDDLESEX_COUNTY_UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message