Hello Dave Like your thinking, for the record I was looking for the Ann Basson below - Extract from Kingston Bagpuize PR - Marriages 1773 25 Oct DEAN William, lodger in parish of Binsey, BASSON Anne If I read you correctly Anne Basson was Anne Morris who could have married as Anne Basson, and why not. While on line thanks to Elizabeth, Kevin and Wendy and a reminder to all those living close to Oxford that the OFHS Baptism Index is freely available at the Oxford Central Library. Richard Headington. Oxford ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Beames" <dave.beames@ntlworld.com> To: <oxfordshire@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 6:13 PM Subject: Re: [OXF] Anne Basson >> I looked again at the OFHS transcription and found the following - >> >> 1750 Apr 22 MORRIS (BASSON) deleted, Anne d John and Elizabeth. >> >> I also looked at the transcription published in 1880 by the Rev >> W.D. Macray, rector of Ducklington. >> >> There was no Anne Basson although the entry for Anne Morris was, >> with the additional children you mentioned. >> >> My best guess is that the Rev W.D. Macray was responsible for the >> deletion. This puts me back to square one, finding a baptism for >> Anne Basson about 1753. > > Sorry, I don't remember how the thread started, or why you're looking for > Anne BASSON, but this seems to me to be too much of a coincidence. > > The marriage of John MORRIS to Elizabeth BASSON was 22 Oct 1749 at > Ducklington. > (So Anne was a month premature :-) > They baptised more children in Sept 1751 (she died) and Oct 1752. > It is possible, of course, that they then moved away and had more children > elsewhere, but Elizabeth wife of John was buried at Ducklington in 1756. > Then a widower named John MORRIS married Mary WAIT at Ducklington 1762. > Might be a different John, but I wouldn't bet on it :-) > All of which suggests that the family had remained in Ducklington. > > How about a little speculation. > Surely it's possible that whoever did the register -- the Parish Clerk, or > possibly the vicar himself -- simply had a Senior Moment and wrote the > wife's maiden name. > Maybe he was a friend of the family, and was thinking "Ar, 'er be young > Liz Basson's choild". > Then, perhaps when the next child was baptised, someone noticed the > mistake and got it corrected. > BUT, suppose they didn't. > When Anne wanted to marry (or for some other reason) she might well need a > Baptismal Certificate from Ducklington. > If she was still at the time recorded as BASSON, she had a problem. > The entry couldn't just be altered -- it would probably have to go to some > Diocesan Court, which would take forever to process it. > Her only viable alternative might be to accept the error, and marry as > BASSON. > And eventually, because of the fuss she kicked up, the error got > corrected, but too late for what she had wanted to do. > > Unless you're absolutely certain that your Anne was born about 1753, > rather than 1750, I reckon that's her. > > DaveB > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > OXFORDSHIRE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hi Richard > If I read you correctly Anne Basson was Anne Morris who could have > married as Anne Basson, and why not. Well, I was suggesting that Anne Basson was Anne Morris, who was forced into marrying as Basson because Kingston Bagpuize demanded a Baptism Cert before they would let her marry there, but Ducklington insisted that she was baptised as Basson, and it would have taken months to get the entry changed. And she was just about to become Anne DEAN, so maybe it didn't matter too much to her. Bureaucracy is always with us :-( But I see Kevin has come up with a couple of other possibilities. DaveB