Thank you Caroline will have to have another look at Google I am currently trying to decipher Frances Sanger's will from 1829 but you need a strong light for that cheers Jean Wilby

Jean, If you search Google Books for "Edward Sanger" you will find contemporary law reports for several 1820s cases involving Edward Sanger and the aftermath of his father, John's will. There is a lot of material there, and I have only skimmed it, but it appears from what I read that he was *not* cut out of his father's will. Rather he was given a choice of properties. I also came across some disapproving comments about Edward Sanger from the judges. I suggest you also search the British Newspaper Archive: http://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk. Caroline Gurney www.carolinegurney.com On 3 March 2012 16:05, J F Wilby <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > From: J F Wilby > Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 8:23 PM > To: SOG UK List > Subject: Edward SANGER of Whitechapel in Devon > > > Hi everyone -  I would appreciate any help with this > > Edward SANGER (1758-1834) was disinherited by his father John SANGER early 1800s > because he married without permission There was a later court case (1820s) about one of the estates called Whitechapel > > Who did Edward marry ? and where were his two children Edward Melton SANGER (1791-1843) & Jane SANGER > christened ? > > > I have the wills of Edward SANGER and his brother John SANGER and parents John and Frances SANGER > plus some of his grandchildren > > I suspect the wife is called Jane and she and the daughter Jane are together in the 1841 census in Bampton > with both dying in 1846 4th quarter in Tiverton district > > I have a pdf file of what I know about the family if anyone wants it > > Jean Wilby > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

According to this website: <http://gumbley.net/mact1.htm> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Solemnization of marriage after publication of banns (1) Subject to this Part, where banns have been published, the marriage shall be solemnized in the church or chapel or, as the case may be, one of the churches or chapels in which the banns have been published. (2) Where a marriage is not solemnized within 3 months after the completion of the publication of the banns, that publication shall be void and no clergyman shall solemnize the marriage on the authority thereof. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ However, that's now, I'm not sure that it was ever thus! JK On 3 March 2012 16:36, Irene Marlborough <[email protected]> wrote: > > I asked this question on the Rootsweb Manchester list  but no-one seemed to know any answers. I'm sure that someone on this list must be able to help. > > I'm looking at some Manchester Collegiate church marriages and have noticed that there can be a very long gap between the banns being published and the wedding taking place. Of course, most are just a few days to a week or so but quite a few were up to six months later. Then I came across one where the banns were published more than 2 years previously. That is, in January 1786 for a marriage taking place in March 1788. > > Are there any rules for how long this gap can be? I would have thought that more than 2 years would have been disallowed and that they should have to call the banns again. After all, there's time for another marriage and the births of a couple of children in this period. > > Does anyone know the rules? > > Regards, Irene >

They are clearly struggling - it seems to be taking a good two weeks and more for wills to be delivered by post. Geoff > To: [email protected] > From: [email protected] > Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 15:16:11 +0000 > Subject: [SOG-UK] Probate Registry > > On a resent visit to the Probate Registry in Holbeck I noticed a few changes, which might be on interest. > > Well they've moved up to an area on the 7th floor of the building. The new space seems smaller and quieter than the previous ground floor room. > > I noticed a new computerised finding aid that's linked up to their ordering system. Will finder runs from 1920 to present,a note rather apologetically stated that it wasn't 100% accurate yet. This I bear out as it failed to find my late father who died in 1980. After two searches it crashed and became unusable. So it is keeping up with the tradition in the Probate Registry of having clunky weird and failed computerised finding aids. > > On the positive front the nice clerk whose been behind the counter doing the orders since the somerset house days said that there was a plan to have their will finder database on line within the year. > > An other notice stated that owing to unforeseen circumstances the 1 hour ordering service is no more. I can only wonder what these might be, perhaps the fax machine needs some ink > > Why do they only cover 1920 to present why not 1858? > > The Probate Registry is sitting on a treasure trove of genealogical data and need to get their act together so as the information can be make more widely available. > > Oh and the price has risen to £6 a throw > > Julian Duffus > Sog member 1979 to present > Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2 > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

From: J F Wilby Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 8:23 PM To: SOG UK List Subject: Edward SANGER of Whitechapel in Devon Hi everyone - I would appreciate any help with this Edward SANGER (1758-1834) was disinherited by his father John SANGER early 1800s because he married without permission There was a later court case (1820s) about one of the estates called Whitechapel Who did Edward marry ? and where were his two children Edward Melton SANGER (1791-1843) & Jane SANGER christened ? I have the wills of Edward SANGER and his brother John SANGER and parents John and Frances SANGER plus some of his grandchildren I suspect the wife is called Jane and she and the daughter Jane are together in the 1841 census in Bampton with both dying in 1846 4th quarter in Tiverton district I have a pdf file of what I know about the family if anyone wants it Jean Wilby

I was at First Avenue House (in High Holborn, incidentally, not Holbeck) on the day when the "one-hour" system failed, leaving a small crowd of disgruntled customers, one of whom was rather vociferous. Up to then it had, in my limited experience, taken about an hour and a half. There seems to have been an unspecified problem in Birmingham. There is a notice about a consultation on services which ended in January, but I ascertained from the officer concerned that Else Churchill had been in touch with him! Willfinder is notoriously unreliable, and the cognoscenti use it only if they wish to raise their blood-pressure. Probateman (1996 onwards) is good, but it is a bit irritating to have to type in a precise date (or two precise dates to specify a period), and it could be improved by allowing a search based on the date of the grant as well as one on date of death. For grants since the end of the microfiches it gives all the information that appears on the grant itself, so one can save the six pounds if there is no will. The security staff retain all lighting equipment that visitors bring until their departure: table lamps, light bulbs . . . As with all courts, cameras are not allowed, but there is no objection to mobile phones, and we all know what they can do. Jeremy Wilkes

On a resent visit to the Probate Registry in Holbeck I noticed a few changes, which might be on interest. Well they've moved up to an area on the 7th floor of the building. The new space seems smaller and quieter than the previous ground floor room. I noticed a new computerised finding aid that's linked up to their ordering system. Will finder runs from 1920 to present,a note rather apologetically stated that it wasn't 100% accurate yet. This I bear out as it failed to find my late father who died in 1980. After two searches it crashed and became unusable. So it is keeping up with the tradition in the Probate Registry of having clunky weird and failed computerised finding aids. On the positive front the nice clerk whose been behind the counter doing the orders since the somerset house days said that there was a plan to have their will finder database on line within the year. An other notice stated that owing to unforeseen circumstances the 1 hour ordering service is no more. I can only wonder what these might be, perhaps the fax machine needs some ink Why do they only cover 1920 to present why not 1858? The Probate Registry is sitting on a treasure trove of genealogical data and need to get their act together so as the information can be make more widely available. Oh and the price has risen to £6 a throw Julian Duffus Sog member 1979 to present Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone on O2

Thanks Andrew. That's interesting. I wonder how much abuse it suffered before they tightened up on the rules. Perhaps individual clergy set their own limits. It was such a cattle market at the Collegiate Church that nobody would be likely to notice any number of transgressions of rules. Regards, Irene

Thanks, JK. Three months seems reasonable. Most of the marriages were well within that limit but a surprising number were 3 - 6 months. And I can't believe that the more than 2 year gap would have been legal in 1788 either. Still at least the parties did tie the knot and had their union recorded for posterity. Regards, Irene

> From: diana whistler > Sent: 02 March 2012 21:45 > > Hello All > The SoG online data bases at MySog include an index of PCC wills > for 1750 to 1800. This index was created by the SoG. > > It would be interesting to know how the coverage in > this index compares with the online searching of wills > available at The National Archives Documents Online website. As I understand it the SoG index was compiled from manuscript calendars in series PROB 13, initially onto index cards and then to typescript which was digitised, while the Documents Online digital index has been compiled directly from the registers of copy wills in series PROB 11. There will inevitably be a small number of omissions in both indexes, as well as transcription errors, and it is possible (though I imagine very rare) that a will was omitted from the registers. Best wishes Andrew -- Andrew Millard - [email protected] Bodimeade genealogy:   http://www.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/Bodimeade/ My family history:     http://www.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/ GenUKI Middx + London: http://homepages.gold.ac.uk/genuki/MDX/ + ../LND/

I asked this question on the Rootsweb Manchester list but no-one seemed to know any answers. I'm sure that someone on this list must be able to help. I'm looking at some Manchester Collegiate church marriages and have noticed that there can be a very long gap between the banns being published and the wedding taking place. Of course, most are just a few days to a week or so but quite a few were up to six months later. Then I came across one where the banns were published more than 2 years previously. That is, in January 1786 for a marriage taking place in March 1788. Are there any rules for how long this gap can be? I would have thought that more than 2 years would have been disallowed and that they should have to call the banns again. After all, there's time for another marriage and the births of a couple of children in this period. Does anyone know the rules? Regards, Irene

Many thanks for your helpful reply. There is a page at the National Archives website with a discussion about the PROB 13 series. Since this was an index I am assuming that the documents that the SoG used for compiling the online PCC will index will give no further detail about the testator or content of the will. For example, is a reference to the PROB 11 copy wills available? It would be helpful if the data description of the PCC will index at SoG Data Online gave the information about the use of the PROB 13 series versus PROB 11 series with a note about the services available at The National Archives. Diana ________________________________ From: MILLARD A.R. <[email protected]> To: diana whistler <[email protected]>; [email protected] Sent: Saturday, March 3, 2012 2:39:02 AM Subject: RE: [SOG-UK] PCC wills > From: diana whistler > Sent: 02 March 2012 21:45 > > Hello All > The SoG online data bases at MySog include an index of PCC wills > for 1750 to 1800. This index was created by the SoG. > > It would be interesting to know how the coverage in > this index compares with the online searching of wills > available at The National Archives Documents Online website. As I understand it the SoG index was compiled from manuscript calendars in series PROB 13, initially onto index cards and then to typescript which was digitised, while the Documents Online digital index has been compiled directly from the registers of copy wills in series PROB 11. There will inevitably be a small number of omissions in both indexes, as well as transcription errors, and it is possible (though I imagine very rare) that a will was omitted from the registers. Best wishes Andrew -- Andrew Millard - [email protected] Bodimeade genealogy:   http://www.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/Bodimeade/ My family history:     http://www.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/ GenUKI Middx + London: http://homepages.gold.ac.uk/genuki/MDX/ + ../LND/

----- Original Message ----- From: "diana whistler" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 9:44 PM Subject: [SOG-UK] PCC wills <<The SoG online data bases at MySog include an index of PCC wills for 1750 to 1800. This index was created by the SoG ... It would be interesting to know how the coverage in this index compares with the online searching of wills available at The National Archives Documents Online website ... However, possibly the SoG index offers improved coverage of wills that may be missed in The National Archives Documents Online? ... Does anyone have any comments on the completeness of the coverage of PCC wills offered by the TNA online searching?>> In some local areas (e.g. in Lancashire) one finds that there are effectively two sets of probate indexes. One set is based on the entries within the original probate registers, which indicate the wills which theoretically ought to have survived, but which don't always do so. (These are the indexes published by the Record Society of Lancashire & Cheshire.) The other index or database is compiled directly from the wills themselves, which have been shown in actual practice to have survived. (Further details at http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/LAN/probate.html under Archdeaconry of Chester and Archdeaconry of Richmond.) Has something similar happened with the PCC wills? AJ

Chris, Thank you so much for replying and for explaining the situation so clearly. Now I understand about this 'protection'. Kind regards Angela On 2 Mar 2012, at 1:43 pm, Chris Pitt Lewis wrote: > In message <[email protected]>, > ag.hamilton <[email protected]> writes >> I have a newspaper report (the Hull Packet) from 1861 about an >> Application under the Matrimonial Causes and Divorce Act. >> >> The applicant's husband, a blacksmith, had deserted her a year before, >> apparently with no reasonable cause, and she had no idea of his >> whereabouts. Since then she had supported herself and her children as >> a beerhouse keeper and 'had become possessed of money and other >> property by her own earnings and industry'. She was obviously doing >> quite well as she was able to go to court and was represented by a >> solicitor. >> >> At the court hearing she was granted 'protection'. >> >> Does anyone know what does this 'protection' means? I've wondered if >> it is to protect her assets from her husband should he suddenly >> reappear. Protection from physical violence or to provide what we >> would call maintenance both seem less likely. >> >> Any ideas would be welcome. >> >> Thanks >> >> Angela >> >> > It is about protecting her earnings and assets acquired by her since her > husband left from claims by him. > > Until the passing of the Married Women's Property Acts in 1870 and 1882, > a married woman had no property of her own. A husband and wife were > regarded as one person at law, and that person, in practice, was of > course the husband. Not only the wife's capital and possessions, but > also her income, belonged to her husband. This was true even if they > were not living together. There were some notorious cases, shocking even > to contemporaries, where a husband who had deserted his wife, leaving > her to support herself by her earnings, was then able to claim those > earnings when she did so successfully. > > The main purpose of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1857 was to institute a > limited right to obtain a civil divorce, or alternatively an order for > judicial separation. But s.21 allowed a deserted wife to apply to a > magistrate for an order protecting her earnings and property, acquired > since the desertion, from claims by the husband and his creditors - they > were to belong to her as if she were not married. > -- > Chris Pitt Lewis > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello All The SoG online data bases at MySog include an index of PCC wills for 1750 to 1800. This index was created by the SoG.   It would be interesting to know how the coverage in this index compares with the online searching of wills available at The National Archives Documents Online website. The TNA website is very useful for both the features for searching and online ordering of wills. However, possibly the SoG index offers improved coverage of wills that may be missed in The National Archives Documents Online?   For example, the SoG PCC will index has a reference for William Whistler, Middlesex, 1760. This entry does not show up at TNA Documents Online.   Does anyone have any comments on the completeness of the coverage of PCC wills offered by the TNA online searching? Many thanks Diana Whistler

In message <[email protected]>, ag.hamilton <[email protected]> writes >I have a newspaper report (the Hull Packet) from 1861 about an >Application under the Matrimonial Causes and Divorce Act. > >The applicant's husband, a blacksmith, had deserted her a year before, >apparently with no reasonable cause, and she had no idea of his >whereabouts. Since then she had supported herself and her children as >a beerhouse keeper and 'had become possessed of money and other >property by her own earnings and industry'. She was obviously doing >quite well as she was able to go to court and was represented by a >solicitor. > >At the court hearing she was granted 'protection'. > >Does anyone know what does this 'protection' means? I've wondered if >it is to protect her assets from her husband should he suddenly >reappear. Protection from physical violence or to provide what we >would call maintenance both seem less likely. > >Any ideas would be welcome. > >Thanks > >Angela > > It is about protecting her earnings and assets acquired by her since her husband left from claims by him. Until the passing of the Married Women's Property Acts in 1870 and 1882, a married woman had no property of her own. A husband and wife were regarded as one person at law, and that person, in practice, was of course the husband. Not only the wife's capital and possessions, but also her income, belonged to her husband. This was true even if they were not living together. There were some notorious cases, shocking even to contemporaries, where a husband who had deserted his wife, leaving her to support herself by her earnings, was then able to claim those earnings when she did so successfully. The main purpose of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1857 was to institute a limited right to obtain a civil divorce, or alternatively an order for judicial separation. But s.21 allowed a deserted wife to apply to a magistrate for an order protecting her earnings and property, acquired since the desertion, from claims by the husband and his creditors - they were to belong to her as if she were not married. -- Chris Pitt Lewis

Eddy The sentence would almost certainly have been served in a military prison. The sentence would have indicated if he was also to be discharged as part of the penalty. Best regards Blair

On a resent visit to the Probate Registry I found they had moved to a quietish room on the 7th floor. Still the irksome business of emptying pockets of keys,phones anything metal in fact on entry. Exiting development they had a Willfinder data base that alleged does key word searches 1920 to present. Little notice on screen to say not 100%. I'll say so as no sign of my late father who died 1980! Then the whole set up crashed. The nice old fellow behind the counter whose been doing the orders since the Somerset house days informed me that this Database might be made available to outside use during the next year!! Why pick 1920 as a start date?? Why not 1858? Why is their database clunky and weird rather like their notorious post 1996 search engine?? They have raised the price to £6!! Oh and a notice states that For unforeseen circumstances the 1 hour production service is unavailable till further notice. Would that be their fax machine running out of ink?? Not very user friendly. Can Sog members try to put pressure via MP's for them to get their act together. Julian Duffus Sog member 1979 to present Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone

Thank you for the tips refering to AE Law I was wondering as he was discharged for misconduct on the 12th Dec.1900 after being sentenced for 6 months on the 23rd Nov.1900 would he have served his sentence Military or Civil.? I have to date a further James E Law (fathers Name) and George Law both RN Seaman/stoker Sheerness,Kent 1901 Census UK which I have yet to look into with a small suspicion that he may have needed to get back in uniform... eddy in bavaria ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Dawnay" <[email protected]> To: "SOG mailing list" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 2:57 PM Subject: [SOG-UK] Fw: Re Arthur Edward LAW > Re: Arthur Edward Law and military detention/imprisonment > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Richard Dawnay" <[email protected]> > Date: 29 February 2012 18:49 > To: <so[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] Re Arthur Edward LAW > >> My recollection, as a former soldier, is that, as Eddy says sentences of >> up to 28 days were served in the unit guardroom. The establishment at >> Colchester was the Military Correction and Training Establishment (MCTE) >> where soldiers under sentence received military training whilst there. >> It >> was for relatively short sentence, usually where the soldier would >> subsequently return to normal duty after completing his sentence. In my >> experience, the training there was rigorous but fair and soldiers came >> back to the unit considerably improved and certainly physically very fit >> ! >> Longer sentences were served at the military prison at Shepton Mallet in >> Somerset which was purely a prison. I believe that it was closed down a >> considerable time ago, not long after the war. Not sure whether that >> sheds much light on the issue but hope it may be helpful. >> >> Richard Dawnay >> >> -------------------------------------------------- >> From: "Blair Southerden" <[email protected]> >> Date: 28 February 2012 11:59 >> To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> >> Subject: [SOG-UK] Re Arthur Edward LAW >> >>> Eddy >>> >>> It is surprisingly difficult to identify which detention Barracks or >>> Military prisons existed in 1900, however there was certainly the >>> infamous Glasshouse at Aldershot. As that was where LAW deserted from >>> it is almost certain that is where he would have served his first >>> sentence. >>> >>> Sentences of less than 28 days would probably have been served in the >>> guardroom of his unit, at least that was the normal practice in the >>> second half of the 20th century. >>> >>> Where were the Coldstream Guards stationed when he absconded from them? >>> Aldershot would still be a good starting point for your census search, >>> but if that is unsuccessful I suggest you contact the curators or two >>> museums: that of the Royal Military Police at Fareham and the Adjutant >>> Generals Corps at Winchester. Both include the Military Police Staff >>> Corps within their interests and may be able to give you pointers to >>> other locations. Their email addresses may be found on the general >>> military museum site at http://www.armymuseums.org.uk >>> >>> Good Hunting >>> >>> Blair >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> [email protected] 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 > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message >

Re: Arthur Edward Law and military detention/imprisonment -------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard Dawnay" <[email protected]> Date: 29 February 2012 18:49 To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] Re Arthur Edward LAW > My recollection, as a former soldier, is that, as Eddy says sentences of > up to 28 days were served in the unit guardroom. The establishment at > Colchester was the Military Correction and Training Establishment (MCTE) > where soldiers under sentence received military training whilst there. It > was for relatively short sentence, usually where the soldier would > subsequently return to normal duty after completing his sentence. In my > experience, the training there was rigorous but fair and soldiers came > back to the unit considerably improved and certainly physically very fit ! > Longer sentences were served at the military prison at Shepton Mallet in > Somerset which was purely a prison. I believe that it was closed down a > considerable time ago, not long after the war. Not sure whether that > sheds much light on the issue but hope it may be helpful. > > Richard Dawnay > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Blair Southerden" <[email protected]> > Date: 28 February 2012 11:59 > To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> > Subject: [SOG-UK] Re Arthur Edward LAW > >> Eddy >> >> It is surprisingly difficult to identify which detention Barracks or >> Military prisons existed in 1900, however there was certainly the >> infamous Glasshouse at Aldershot. As that was where LAW deserted from >> it is almost certain that is where he would have served his first >> sentence. >> >> Sentences of less than 28 days would probably have been served in the >> guardroom of his unit, at least that was the normal practice in the >> second half of the 20th century. >> >> Where were the Coldstream Guards stationed when he absconded from them? >> Aldershot would still be a good starting point for your census search, >> but if that is unsuccessful I suggest you contact the curators or two >> museums: that of the Royal Military Police at Fareham and the Adjutant >> Generals Corps at Winchester. Both include the Military Police Staff >> Corps within their interests and may be able to give you pointers to >> other locations. Their email addresses may be found on the general >> military museum site at http://www.armymuseums.org.uk >> >> Good Hunting >> >> Blair >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>