Ah ha! I already thought about that. ;-) Before I got the birth certificate, post 1855 for Elizabeth's sister, the census had it written "LEGROW"; not unlikely I thought. The writing on the birth certificate is very clear. The writing on the marriage certificate to which I referred earlier is also very clear. Dont you just like it when that is so? I've a situation similar to that you refer. Mine were Sheret/Sherret in Scotland and very [without any variation] Sherratt in England. I've got a WEIR too in the family where the gr grandmother's m.s. was in the birth records of a line of children. It does give a clue to searches, if only they would be consistent! <g> Yes, conundrums they are. Janet ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hardy Plants" > Then I would be tempted to suggest its a mis spelling that has been adopted > There is a line of Bowis's in New Zealand which I could not work out how > they fitted with the rest known in the UK. > After some digging and working out of details sent by the family notes from > there it transpires that they became Bowis from Bowes within the birth of 3 > children and the distance of some 500 miles. !!! > Mr Bowes is born in Scotland, marries and has Junior one Bowes > By the time they have Junior 4 they are in England and all are called Bowis > It is with that name that they emigrate and so it sticks > > > As to using the middle name of a grandmother I have that in other Scots > families. > One had me confused for a while as the daughter was named ###### Weir > ######### and it looked very much like her mothers M.S was also Weir. > Eventually I found that mother was Haire and her mother was Weir. !!!! > > Don't you just love these conundrums > Janet said >> As a matter of interest, all of the records you have been able to produce >> are post the births of Elizabeth Vigrow [m.s.Campbell] Rowatt and her >> siblings.