On 10/07/2014 11:06, Lawrence Pearse wrote: > No, Charani, there was no will that I have been able to find > through the normal searches, but the death of William Bloxam was > briefly recorded in newspapers - irratingly given that the births > of the 4 children were not. I have been able to trace the 4 > children into later life, including marriages and descendants, and > indeed have been in contact with living descendants of a couple of > those children, who are equally baffled and who (unfortunately) > have no relevant family documents apart from a wonderful old photo > of William Bloxam taken in the 1860s. William clearly didn't hide > any of the 4 children from the family that he had by the wife who > died in 1836 - indeed a couple of the 4 children lived for a while > with one of their half brothers (is that what the children by the > earlier wife would have been?) and/or had them as witnesses to > their marriage. The only secrets were from officialdom. Yes, the children from the first relationship would have been half siblings to those from the second. The photo is indeed a wonderful thing to have. > I agree with your redacted (!) comments about Westminster Register > Office. Islington is another bad one. > I am also awaiting the results of an enquiry with the GRO. > I must also see if the LMA has any relevant records relating to St > Georges Hospital and the death there of Elizabeth Watkins. Please let the list know your progress. It may help someone else, perhaps one of the many people who don't post for one reason or another. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, Greinton and Clutton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

On 10/07/2014 07:56, Rodney Whale wrote: > However I have copies of their death certificates because I enquired at the > local Register Office and obtained the documents from there. > I can only speculate about why the main index is devoid of the details. It's primarily because the GRO indices are copies of copies. As anyone who has done any transcribing will tell you: it's very easy to miss lines or parts thereof. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, Greinton and Clutton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

On 10/07/2014 08:02, Lawrence Pearse wrote: > Thanks, Charani, for your very full answer which has cleared up a > few issues. YW :) > In terms of searching, both for this death record and the four > birth records, I have searched under both surnames (Watkins and > Bloxam, and variants) and under just the forenames (looking for > likely errors/misspellings of the surname). But I suspect that it > is no coincidence that in all 5 cases there appears to be no > registered record. Nor have I found any death/birth notices in on > line newspapers. William Bloxam (the partner/father) was a man of > substance (an ex-banker and later JP). He was also 45 years older > than Elizabeth Watkins, and indeed in his early 70s when he > fathered the last of the 4 children. Perhaps he had his own > reasons for not having the births/death registered other than > through baptism/burial - though as you say the burial ought to have > required the production of a death certificate. Did William leave a will? If he did, he /may/ have mentioned the children in that. Did he have any older children from a previous relationship? > I must pay a visit to the Westminster Register Office to see what I > can find in their local indices. Westminster is one of those that /can/ be awkward. You would need to make an appointment to see their registers but I understand they cannot legally refuse. They can just be <blankety blank> difficult. Do try the GRO as well. They can be a lot more helpful. > Thanks again for your help. No problem :) -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, Greinton and Clutton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

No, Charani, there was no will that I have been able to find through the normal searches, but the death of William Bloxam was briefly recorded in newspapers - irratingly given that the births of the 4 children were not. I have been able to trace the 4 children into later life, including marriages and descendants, and indeed have been in contact with living descendants of a couple of those children, who are equally baffled and who (unfortunately) have no relevant family documents apart from a wonderful old photo of William Bloxam taken in the 1860s. William clearly didn't hide any of the 4 children from the family that he had by the wife who died in 1836 - indeed a couple of the 4 children lived for a while with one of their half brothers (is that what the children by the earlier wife would have been?) and/or had them as witnesses to their marriage. I agree with your redacted (!) comments about Westminster Register Office. I am also awaiting the results of an enquiry with the GRO. I must also see if the LMA has any relevant records relating to St Georges Hospital and the death there of Elizabeth Watkins. Lawrence ---------------------------------------- > Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:39:49 +0100 > From: charani.b@gmail.com > To: middlesex_county_uk@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [MDX] Registration of deaths > > On 10/07/2014 08:02, Lawrence Pearse wrote: >> Thanks, Charani, for your very full answer which has cleared up a >> few issues. > > YW :) > >> In terms of searching, both for this death record and the four >> birth records, I have searched under both surnames (Watkins and >> Bloxam, and variants) and under just the forenames (looking for >> likely errors/misspellings of the surname). But I suspect that it >> is no coincidence that in all 5 cases there appears to be no >> registered record. Nor have I found any death/birth notices in on >> line newspapers. William Bloxam (the partner/father) was a man of >> substance (an ex-banker and later JP). He was also 45 years older >> than Elizabeth Watkins, and indeed in his early 70s when he >> fathered the last of the 4 children. Perhaps he had his own >> reasons for not having the births/death registered other than >> through baptism/burial - though as you say the burial ought to have >> required the production of a death certificate. > > Did William leave a will? If he did, he /may/ have mentioned the > children in that. > Did he have any older children from a previous relationship? > >> I must pay a visit to the Westminster Register Office to see what I >> can find in their local indices. > > Westminster is one of those that /can/ be awkward. You would need to > make an appointment to see their registers but I understand they > cannot legally refuse. > They can just be <blankety blank> difficult. Do try the GRO as well. > They can > be a lot more helpful. > >> Thanks again for your help. > > No problem :) > > -- > Charani (UK) > OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, > Greinton and Clutton, SOM > http://wsom-opc.org.uk > > . > ************************************** > Send your List messages using *PLAIN TEXT* and always *DELETE* superfluous old messages in replies. Only include the one to which you are replying. > > *MEANINGFUL Subject Lines* ie who, what, where, when, with SURNAMES in CAPITAL letters. > > List Admin can be contacted at: Middlesex_County_UK-admin@rootsweb.com > > The archives can be found at: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index?list=middlesex_county_uk > > . > ------------------------------- > 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 Everybody, Can I add a little to this discussion? I had a set of two times great grandparents who died in 1840's in the parish of Netheravon, Wiltshire, in Pewsey Registration District. I have details of their burials but there was and still is no record of their deaths on GRO index. However I have copies of their death certificates because I enquired at the local Register Office and obtained the documents from there. I can only speculate about why the main index is devoid of the details. Regards, Rod. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com

Thanks, Charani, for your very full answer which has cleared up a few issues. In terms of searching, both for this death record and the four birth records, I have searched under both surnames (Watkins and Bloxam, and variants) and under just the forenames (looking for likely errors/misspellings of the surname). But I suspect that it is no coincidence that in all 5 cases there appears to be no registered record. Nor have I found any death/birth notices in on line newspapers. William Bloxam (the partner/father) was a man of substance (an ex-banker and later JP). He was also 45 years older than Elizabeth Watkins, and indeed in his early 70s when he fathered the last of the 4 children. Perhaps he had his own reasons for not having the births/death registered other than through baptism/burial - though as you say the burial ought to have required the production of a death certificate. I must pay a visit to the Westminster Register Office to see what I can find in their local indices. Thanks again for your help. Lawrence ---------------------------------------- > Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 01:36:21 +0100 > From: charani.b@gmail.com > To: middlesex_county_uk@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [MDX] Registration of deaths > > On 09/07/2014 23:22, Lawrence Pearse wrote: > >> Am I right in thinking that until the passing of the Births and >> Deaths Registration Act in 1874 it was the responsibility of the >> local registrar rather than an individual to register the fact of a >> death, as it was for births? > > IIRC, a burial wasn't supposed to take place without the production of > a death certificate. > > What was supposed to happen and what did (for whatever reason) weren't > necessarily the same thing. > >> I have the record of a burial on 1 December 1853 in St George >> Hanover Square, but can find no trace of the record of the death, >> no matter what search criteria I have used in FreeBMD and >> elsewhere. > > Although the death was supposed to have been recorded by the registrar > and past on quarterly to the GRO, a percentage did get missed/lost > either between the register office and the GRO or the GRO and the > indices. The GRO indices are copies of copies so plenty of room for > errors to creep in. > >> All the relevant scans appear to have been transcribed, >> too. It puzzles me why the church itself would not have passed the >> details of the death to the local registrar, > > It wasn't for the church to pass on the death to the registrar. The > deceased's family should have presented the incumbent with the death > certificate. > >> but unless the record >> has got lost somewhere between the local register (presumably >> Westminster in this case, though not necessarily as the death may >> not have occurred in the Hanover Square area) and the General >> Register, I am stumped. > > You're right in saying the death was should be registered in the area > where it occurred but burials could take place anywhere. > >> Though I am not entirely surprised as the >> couple concerned (the lady in question and her partner (they were >> not married)) did not register the birth of their 4 children >> either, although one of them at least was baptised. > > Presumably you've already checked under the mother's birth name, > rather than her partner's? Again births should have been in the area > where it took place but could have somewhere other than the expected. > If the registrar didn't find the newborn, the parents were supposed > to register the child themselves. There was no penalty for non > registrations so no incentive to do so. Some considered baptism > registration enough and there were clergymen who actively discouraged > their congregation from registering their children with the civil > authorities. They saw it as taking the job away from them. It didn't > of course. > >> If anyone has >> any suggestions of what and where I might look I would be >> grateful. > > It might be worth contacting the local register office to see if they > have an entry for the lady concerned and also the GRO. They have been > known to find events that are not in the indices. If you're > contacting the GRO, remember to put GQ in the subject line. > > Were the couple of the level there'd be a notice in the papers? > > -- > Charani (UK) > OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, > Greinton and Clutton, SOM > http://wsom-opc.org.uk > > . > ************************************** > Send your List messages using *PLAIN TEXT* and always *DELETE* superfluous old messages in replies. Only include the one to which you are replying. > > *MEANINGFUL Subject Lines* ie who, what, where, when, with SURNAMES in CAPITAL letters. > > List Admin can be contacted at: Middlesex_County_UK-admin@rootsweb.com > > The archives can be found at: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index?list=middlesex_county_uk > > . > ------------------------------- > 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 09/07/2014 23:22, Lawrence Pearse wrote: > Am I right in thinking that until the passing of the Births and > Deaths Registration Act in 1874 it was the responsibility of the > local registrar rather than an individual to register the fact of a > death, as it was for births? IIRC, a burial wasn't supposed to take place without the production of a death certificate. What was supposed to happen and what did (for whatever reason) weren't necessarily the same thing. > I have the record of a burial on 1 December 1853 in St George > Hanover Square, but can find no trace of the record of the death, > no matter what search criteria I have used in FreeBMD and > elsewhere. Although the death was supposed to have been recorded by the registrar and past on quarterly to the GRO, a percentage did get missed/lost either between the register office and the GRO or the GRO and the indices. The GRO indices are copies of copies so plenty of room for errors to creep in. > All the relevant scans appear to have been transcribed, > too. It puzzles me why the church itself would not have passed the > details of the death to the local registrar, It wasn't for the church to pass on the death to the registrar. The deceased's family should have presented the incumbent with the death certificate. > but unless the record > has got lost somewhere between the local register (presumably > Westminster in this case, though not necessarily as the death may > not have occurred in the Hanover Square area) and the General > Register, I am stumped. You're right in saying the death was should be registered in the area where it occurred but burials could take place anywhere. > Though I am not entirely surprised as the > couple concerned (the lady in question and her partner (they were > not married)) did not register the birth of their 4 children > either, although one of them at least was baptised. Presumably you've already checked under the mother's birth name, rather than her partner's? Again births should have been in the area where it took place but could have somewhere other than the expected. If the registrar didn't find the newborn, the parents were supposed to register the child themselves. There was no penalty for non registrations so no incentive to do so. Some considered baptism registration enough and there were clergymen who actively discouraged their congregation from registering their children with the civil authorities. They saw it as taking the job away from them. It didn't of course. > If anyone has > any suggestions of what and where I might look I would be > grateful. It might be worth contacting the local register office to see if they have an entry for the lady concerned and also the GRO. They have been known to find events that are not in the indices. If you're contacting the GRO, remember to put GQ in the subject line. Were the couple of the level there'd be a notice in the papers? -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, Greinton and Clutton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

Hello all Am I right in thinking that until the passing of the Births and Deaths Registration Act in 1874 it was the responsibility of the local registrar rather than an individual to register the fact of a death, as it was for births? I have the record of a burial on 1 December 1853 in St George Hanover Square, but can find no trace of the record of the death, no matter what search criteria I have used in FreeBMD and elsewhere. All the relevant scans appear to have been transcribed, too. It puzzles me why the church itself would not have passed the details of the death to the local registrar, but unless the record has got lost somewhere between the local register (presumably Westminster in this case, though not necessarily as the death may not have occurred in the Hanover Square area) and the General Register, I am stumped. Though I am not entirely surprised as the couple concerned (the lady in question and her partner (they were not married)) did not register the birth of their 4 children either, although one of them at least was baptised. If anyone has any suggestions of what and where I might look I would be grateful. The person concerned was Elizabeth Watkins who died aged 29 in St Georges Hospital (unfortunately her date of death is not recorded, but I assume that it was not too long before 1 December and so should have been recorded in 4Q 1853 or 1Q 1854). She is recorded in the 1851 census aged 27, born in Cornwall, and a "visitor" in the house of William Bloxam. I suspect that she died in or soon after childbirth. Lawrence Pearse

Tks Nivard, it's a computer at home, but none of the fixes are working so I'm shutting down for the night and will have another go in the morning. Ta Graham

At 08:01 PM 6/07/2014, you wrote: >Hi Graham > >Looks the same to me OK Nivard, sending off-list. If it's the same to you then must be something up this end. G.

At 05:30 PM 6/07/2014, Patti wrote: >You're not alone, FMP has gone to the dogs, I can find nothing on it >any more, even all those ancestors I found there 3 months ago have >disappeared. I suggest you join the Feedback Forum to let them know >your annoyance at their changes.Patti Thanks Patti, looks like I'll have to do that, or complain direct. Ta Graham

At 07:31 PM 6/07/2014, JK wrote: >Try re-sizing the window. Their preferred display is for small tablet >format, one has to keep on re-sizing because FMP cannot multi-think or >multi-task! Hmmm, ta, but no they've done something weird. This morning all was fine, you could get the index hits on the one page, i.e. 20 or so, so that you could pick and choose, but now it is only one index on the one page (screen view) in a completely different format. Dumb! Cheers Graham

Hi list This is rather difficult to describe, but I'll do my best. MDX orientated. I'm doing some checking on FMP at the moment, re. births and what was so many hits per page an hour or so ago (on screen) i.e. about 20, has suddenly changed to one hit per page (on screen) so that now I'm having to scroll down one by one (page by page) for about 250! Drive you nutty! Would anyone know how I can get back to having the grouping of say 20 or so? I've signed out, re-booted etc. but nothing helps. Cheers Graham

Further to my last You get the same screen on a computer by enlarging it Try Ctrl - (ie hold Ctrl key down and press the - key once or more) Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 06/07/2014 11:48, Nivard Ovington wrote: > Hi Graham > > Try as I might I can't replicate your screen or number of hits > > I assume you must be using some other search parameters that I don't know > > Are you using a computer or tablet or smartphone? > > Ah yes, I tried the same search on a tablet > > It gives exactly the same result and screen as you have > > It may sound daft but are you looking in portrait? > > Try turning the device on its side to get landscape, you then get the > list view you required

Hi Graham Try as I might I can't replicate your screen or number of hits I assume you must be using some other search parameters that I don't know Are you using a computer or tablet or smartphone? Ah yes, I tried the same search on a tablet It gives exactly the same result and screen as you have It may sound daft but are you looking in portrait? Try turning the device on its side to get landscape, you then get the list view you required Why the tablet gets 1,875 hits when a computer search get a tenth of that is another matter of course :-( Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 06/07/2014 11:25, Graham Price wrote: > At 08:01 PM 6/07/2014, you wrote: >> Hi Graham >> >> Looks the same to me > > OK Nivard, sending off-list. If it's the same to you then must be > something up this end. > G.

Hi Graham Looks the same to me Could you send me offlist a screen capture of your problem screen It may explain what you are seeing that I am not Include the problem name if you have one Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > Hmmm, ta, but no they've done something weird. This morning all was > fine, you could get the index hits on the one page, i.e. 20 or so, so > that you could pick and choose, but now it is only one index on the > one page (screen view) in a completely different format. Dumb! > Cheers > Graham

Try re-sizing the window. Their preferred display is for small tablet format, one has to keep on re-sizing because FMP cannot multi-think or multi-task! JK

You're not alone, FMP has gone to the dogs, I can find nothing on it any more, even all those ancestors I found there 3 months ago have disappeared. I suggest you join the Feedback Forum to let them know your annoyance at their changes.Patti > Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2014 15:38:31 +1000 > To: middlesex_county_uk@rootsweb.com > From: genetree@tpg.com.au > Subject: [MDX] BMDs on Find My Past > > Hi list > > This is rather difficult to describe, but I'll do my best. MDX orientated. > > I'm doing some checking on FMP at the moment, re. births and what was > so many hits per page an hour or so ago (on screen) i.e. about 20, > has suddenly changed to one hit per page (on screen) so that now I'm > having to scroll down one by one (page by page) for about 250! Drive > you nutty! > > Would anyone know how I can get back to having the grouping of say 20 > or so? I've signed out, re-booted etc. but nothing helps. > > Cheers > Graham > > . > ************************************** > Send your List messages using *PLAIN TEXT* and always *DELETE* superfluous old messages in replies. Only include the one to which you are replying. > > *MEANINGFUL Subject Lines* ie who, what, where, when, with SURNAMES in CAPITAL letters. > > List Admin can be contacted at: Middlesex_County_UK-admin@rootsweb.com > > The archives can be found at: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index?list=middlesex_county_uk > > . > ------------------------------- > 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

Vivien, perhaps it is in order to mention that I have a set for sale of books 1 to 20. You may wish to contact me direct. The link is: http://www.johntownsend.demon.co.uk/index_files/Page585.htm With best wishes, John Townsend Antiquarian Bookseller/Genealogist ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vivien Martin" <vivien.martin@gmail.com> To: <Middlesex_County_UK@rootsweb.com>; <genbrit-l@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 11:57 AM Subject: [MDX] Fwd: Book about Upminster > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Vivien Martin <vivien.martin@gmail.com> > Date: 18 June 2014 19:26 > Subject: Book about Upminster > To: Middlesex_County_UK@rootsweb.com > > > Hi listers > I am looking for a book published in the early 1950s about Upminster "The > Story of Upminster" book 5. by H. Priestly. Can't find it in Canada or any > of the online used book sellers I know about. Have also checked my local > libraries and online libraries. This book apparantely has a lot of info > and > some family trees concerning the Branfil family and it's descendants of > which I am one. I presently have the will of a Capt John Redman d. 1763 > (m. Mary Branfill) both buried in St. Dunstan of MEOT, which mentions a > number of relatives I am interested in. Any assistance appreciated. > Vivien Martin

Hi In 1881 Census the family are living in William Street, Kensington with a daughter Elizabeth, aged 10 months and he's registered for Kensington in 1912 in St Katharine's Rd, Kensington. I've sent copies of docs off-line to Peter Marcelle Western Australia -----Original Message----- From: middlesex_county_uk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:middlesex_county_uk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Peter Rimell Sent: Monday, 23 June 2014 12:38 AM To: MIDDLESEX Mailing List Subject: [MDX] 1891 census help Can anyone help me please regarding the family of John (born 1855 in Kensington) and Eliza RIMELL. They had a daughter, Ellen, who was baptised on 18 Apr 1891 and their residence is written as 40 St Catherine's Street in the parish of St James, Norlands - Kensington. Searching on Ancestry for various spellings of RIMELL and I Have not found them. I also tried using just the street name to see if I could see who was living there in 1891 but I have had no success with this. I see from internet searches that the street may also be called St Katherine's Road but this gave no better result. If anyone can find this family or who was living at that address in 1891 I would be very grateful Peter Rimell . ************************************** Send your List messages using *PLAIN TEXT* and always *DELETE* superfluous old messages in replies. Only include the one to which you are replying. *MEANINGFUL Subject Lines* ie who, what, where, when, with SURNAMES in CAPITAL letters. List Admin can be contacted at: Middlesex_County_UK-admin@rootsweb.com The archives can be found at: http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index?list=middlesex_county_uk . ------------------------------- 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