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

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 at Colchester was the Military Correction and Training Establishment (MCTC) 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 >

Hi,I wonder if anyone can help with this.Two brothers married two sisters. The elder brother married the elder sister who was an heiress and changed his surname to hers. Is there a special way of showing this on the family tree?ThanksEna

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

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

Hello, I dont usually ask for help BUT.. Arthur Edward Law b.1881 Northhampton.( I have the census entries) Enlisted RA 29.06.1899 age 18 years Woolwich Posted Gunner 05 Sept 1899 Awaiting trial 23 Oct, 1899 Tried, imprisoned 3rd Nov. 1899 - 28 days Posted Gunner 1st. Dec. 1899 Deserted Aldershot 1st.Feb.1900 Fraudently joined Royal Navy May 1900 No: 3802 2nd. Class Stoker HMS Dowel deserted 20 Sept.1900 Fraudently joined 3rd.Batt.Coldstream Guards 08.10.1900 Nr: 38(1or 4) 3 as Pr.Frank Hodson LAW (his brother) 23rd. Nov 1900 Court Mart.6th.Momths with Hard Labour discharged Misconduct 12th Dec. 1900 The question being : where would he have been sentenced /confined,he should be on the 1901 census some where but seems to have vanished (perhaps another alias) Any advice would be of help thank you eddy in bavaria

Eddy You might want to contact John Law who runs the Law one-name study. You will find his details via the Guild of one-name studies website www.one-name.org Regards John Hanson Sent from my iPhone On 27 Feb 2012, at 09:31, "Edw.j.Tate" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > I dont usually ask for help BUT.. > Arthur Edward Law b.1881 Northhampton.( I have the census entries) > Enlisted RA 29.06.1899 age 18 years Woolwich > Posted Gunner 05 Sept 1899 > Awaiting trial 23 Oct, 1899 > Tried, imprisoned 3rd Nov. 1899 - 28 days > Posted Gunner 1st. Dec. 1899 > > Deserted Aldershot 1st.Feb.1900 > > Fraudently joined Royal Navy May 1900 No: 3802 2nd. Class Stoker HMS Dowel > deserted 20 Sept.1900 > > Fraudently joined 3rd.Batt.Coldstream Guards 08.10.1900 Nr: 38(1or 4) 3 as Pr.Frank Hodson LAW (his brother) > 23rd. Nov 1900 Court Mart.6th.Momths with Hard Labour > discharged Misconduct 12th Dec. 1900 > > The question being : where would he have been sentenced /confined,he should be on the 1901 census some where but seems to have vanished (perhaps another alias) > Any advice would be of help > thank you > eddy in bavaria > > ------------------------------- > 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

<<snipped>> These bilateral agreements all followed the same basic form, requiring men of military age in their own country living within the jurisdiction of the other, either to return to their native country for compulsory conscription to the armed forces or, if they remained in the host country, to be subject to the conscription laws there. <<snipped>> Colin - thanks very much for this. I don't think I'd heard of these agreements before. Your posting is a "keeper"! Adrian B

On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 00:06:51 +0000, [email protected] wrote: >I am also puzzled that Charlie, one of the fittest young men of his day did not get called up for Military >Service in WWI. At the time he was unmarried, in good health and would have made a good trooper. Called up by whom? Cheers, Tom <[email protected]> Tom Perrett

... Does anyone know the procedures for an British Citizen living overseas re military service in WWI? ... was denied for being too small at 5'5" and underweight. ... According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bantam_%28military%29 the standard height qualification for the British Army in WW1 was 5ft 3in. This was relaxed to 5ft for what became known as the "Bantams" providing they had compensatory features - the aim was to pick up people like miners. One issue may be the original question - who was going to pick him up for conscription or registration under the Derby scheme? UK based recruitment would miss him, just as it would miss British citizens in Australia (because, surely that's what Australians were??) Interestingly http://chnm.gmu.edu/episodes/charlie-chaplin-goes-to-war/ puts a different spin on the issue... "When Chaplin signed his contract with Mutual, it included a clause stipulating that he could not leave the United States without the corporation's approval. The British press criticized the provision since it meant that Chaplin, who was only twenty-seven years old, could not join the British Army. Two years later, when he signed a million-dollar contract with First National pictures, he faced similar criticism in the United States, which had recently entered the war. Chaplin apparently tried to enlist in the U.S. army; only when he was rejected as underweight did the criticism abate". Although most of the other references I found in Google repeat the original version, I find this one to be more convincing since it brings in contracts / bureaucracy, those inevitable aspects! Of course, in the absence of evidence about his weight, we might not know the full story. Certainly he was registered in the US "World War I Draft Registration" in 1917 (you can see his card on Ancestry) when he is still an alien. Adrian B

Hi JK: Thanks - I was aware of this site, but I understand that it dates the photographs, not when they were first published. And the Frith Collection papers appear to suggest that it is this latter date that matters. Hence my question concerned the dating of postcards, rather than of the photographs. Tim's comments about copyright ownership duration are very helpful, and I tend to agree with his conclusions, if not his final advice. Quoting from the advice I provide to the users of the main section of GENUKI for which I am responsible (Devon) and its associated mailing list: "... the letter of the law is less important than the spirit of the law - only by being careful not to offend the people who possess information, in the various libraries, archives, churches, societies, etc., can we retain their continued cooperation. So when there is any doubt you should request permission beforehand, rather than rely on a narrow and perhaps arguable interpretation of the letter of the law to justify your posting." Thus I would still be interested in knowing how to date Frith postcards, based on the style and format of their printing. Cheers Brian Randell On 21 Feb 2012, at 12:17, J K gen wrote: > This website might help, the serial numbers appear to correspond with > year-dates: > <http://www.oldpicturepostcard.co.uk/dating-frith-postcards.htm> > JK > > On 21 February 2012 11:58, Tim Powys-Lybbe <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 21 Feb at 10:17, Brian Randell <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi: >>> >>> I have over the years purchased a few old picture postcards (typically >>> ones published by Francis Frith) at antique fairs, and then have asked >>> (and received) advice as to which ones it would be OK to put online, >>> being out of copyright. >>> >>> Several picture postcard dealers have been able to answer me based on >>> the layout and style of the printing on the back of Frith postcards. >>> Unfortunately I do not recall the details, and was wondering whether >>> anyone here knows, or can point me to a source of such information. (I >>> can't find this information in the pages of the Francis Frith Photo >>> Library, despite all they do say about copyright and dating - their >>> apparent preference being to respond to individual copyright queries.) >> >> The question is who own the copyright. If the photo was taken by >> Francis Frith himself, then he would have owned the copyright and it >> would have survived. in Britain, for 50 years (had he lived a tad longer >> it would have been 70 years) after his death in 1898. So these >> photographs expired in 1948. >> >> But many of the photographs were taken under contract by his staff or by >> sub-contractors. By then he had founded a company and undoubtedly that >> company bought the service and held the copyright. This area of >> commercially commissioned and owned copyright is unclear and I think it >> only lasts for 50 years after the date of first publication. >> >> The firm closed in 1968 and presumably the last of the photographs had >> been taken by then. Any taken by contractors in 1968 would have their >> copyright (under the rule suggested above) expire in 2018. We are now >> in 2012. I would suggest that there are very few photographs left with >> any copyright on them at all. >> >> Publish and be damned? >> >> -- >> Tim Powys-Lybbe [email protected] >> for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/ >> >> ------------------------------- >> 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 -- School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK EMAIL = [email protected] PHONE = +44 191 222 7923 FAX = +44 191 222 8232 URL = http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people/brian.randell

This website might help, the serial numbers appear to correspond with year-dates: <http://www.oldpicturepostcard.co.uk/dating-frith-postcards.htm> JK On 21 February 2012 11:58, Tim Powys-Lybbe <[email protected]> wrote: > On 21 Feb at 10:17, Brian Randell <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi: > > > > I have over the years purchased a few old picture postcards (typically > > ones published by Francis Frith) at antique fairs, and then have asked > > (and received) advice as to which ones it would be OK to put online, > > being out of copyright. > > > > Several picture postcard dealers have been able to answer me based on > > the layout and style of the printing on the back of Frith postcards. > > Unfortunately I do not recall the details, and was wondering whether > > anyone here knows, or can point me to a source of such information. (I > > can't find this information in the pages of the Francis Frith Photo > > Library, despite all they do say about copyright and dating - their > > apparent preference being to respond to individual copyright queries.) > > The question is who own the copyright. If the photo was taken by > Francis Frith himself, then he would have owned the copyright and it > would have survived. in Britain, for 50 years (had he lived a tad longer > it would have been 70 years) after his death in 1898. So these > photographs expired in 1948. > > But many of the photographs were taken under contract by his staff or by > sub-contractors. By then he had founded a company and undoubtedly that > company bought the service and held the copyright. This area of > commercially commissioned and owned copyright is unclear and I think it > only lasts for 50 years after the date of first publication. > > The firm closed in 1968 and presumably the last of the photographs had > been taken by then. Any taken by contractors in 1968 would have their > copyright (under the rule suggested above) expire in 2018. We are now > in 2012. I would suggest that there are very few photographs left with > any copyright on them at all. > > Publish and be damned? > > -- > Tim Powys-Lybbe [email protected] > for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/ > > ------------------------------- > 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 >

On 21 Feb at 10:17, Brian Randell <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi: > > I have over the years purchased a few old picture postcards (typically > ones published by Francis Frith) at antique fairs, and then have asked > (and received) advice as to which ones it would be OK to put online, > being out of copyright. > > Several picture postcard dealers have been able to answer me based on > the layout and style of the printing on the back of Frith postcards. > Unfortunately I do not recall the details, and was wondering whether > anyone here knows, or can point me to a source of such information. (I > can't find this information in the pages of the Francis Frith Photo > Library, despite all they do say about copyright and dating - their > apparent preference being to respond to individual copyright queries.) The question is who own the copyright. If the photo was taken by Francis Frith himself, then he would have owned the copyright and it would have survived. in Britain, for 50 years (had he lived a tad longer it would have been 70 years) after his death in 1898. So these photographs expired in 1948. But many of the photographs were taken under contract by his staff or by sub-contractors. By then he had founded a company and undoubtedly that company bought the service and held the copyright. This area of commercially commissioned and owned copyright is unclear and I think it only lasts for 50 years after the date of first publication. The firm closed in 1968 and presumably the last of the photographs had been taken by then. Any taken by contractors in 1968 would have their copyright (under the rule suggested above) expire in 2018. We are now in 2012. I would suggest that there are very few photographs left with any copyright on them at all. Publish and be damned? -- Tim Powys-Lybbe [email protected] for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/

This is from the Wikipedia entry: > During World War I, Chaplin was criticised in the British press for > not joining the Army. He had in fact presented himself for service, > but was denied for being too small at 5'5" and underweight. Chaplin > raised substantial funds for the war effort during war bond > </wiki/War_bond> drives not only with public speaking at rallies but > also by making, at his own expense, /The Bond </wiki/The_Bond>/, a > comedic propaganda film </wiki/Propaganda_film> used in 1918. The > lingering controversy may have prevented Chaplin from receiving a > knighthood in the 1930s. A 1916 propaganda short film /Zepped/ with > Chaplin was discovered in 2009.^[56] <#cite_note-55> This seems an unlikely story to me. I have read quite a few WW1 pension and service records where men significantly shorter than 5'5" and of "slight" build were recruited. I have taken these at random from my files: Date Age Height Weight Chest Occupation Married Oct 1914 34 5'3" 144 lb 38" water bottler yes Dec 1915 33 5'3" 34" engineer yes Jan 1917 34 5'3" 112 lb 33" butcher yes Jun 1917 36 5'1" 34" plasterer yes The "engineer" was invalided out after 3 months service as an RFA driver. He was also missing two thirds of his right thumb. The butcher served his time as a butcher and even received a proficiency certificate from the army. The "plasterer" was my wife's grandfather. He wasn't big but he made up for it in energy, even after his 80th birthday. On 21/02/2012 10:06 AM, [email protected] wrote: > I was interested to read about the mystery surrounding Charlies birth. > > At the other end of his life he was subject of complexity as I believe his will holds the record for taking the longest time to be probated. > > I am also puzzled that Charlie, one of the fittest young men of his day did not get called up for Military Service in WWI. At the time he was unmarried, in good health and would have made a good trooper. > > Does anyone know the procedures for an british Citizen living overseas re military service in WWI? > > > Julian Duffus > SoG member 1979~present > Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device > > > -- > Derrick Porter > > Email: [email protected] > Web: www.pluckrose.org

At the start of World War I the United Kingdom was the sole European country that did not have compulsory military service. By the end of 1915 it was clear to the Government that the loss of men was so great that the voluntary scheme of recruitment then in place was not sufficient to meet the needs of the military so early in 1916 the first conscription act was introduced. This was still not sufficient to meet the army’s requirements and so over the following 15 months further acts were introduced each expanding the range of men liable for military service. The coverage of these acts could not be extended to foreign nationals so, with an increasingly desperate need for men for the trenches, Britain reached agreement with a number of individual allied governments effectively to bring aliens from these friendly nations within the jurisdiction of the Military Service Acts. These bilateral agreements all followed the same basic form, requiring men of military age in their own country living within the jurisdiction of the other, either to return to their native country for compulsory conscription to the armed forces or, if they remained in the host country, to be subject to the conscription laws there. Repatriation was to take place within a specified period from the date of the announcement of the agreement. Papers relating to these Agreements survive at the National Archives at Kew, for example: HO 45/10783/281476 Anglo - Italian Military Service Agreement - Italians of Military age in the United Kingdom. 1916 - 1918 HO 45/10882/344662 WAR: Military Service Agreement between the United Kingdom and the United States of America. 1917 - 1918 HO 45/10886/349367 WAR: Anglo-French Military Service Agreement 1917 - 1919 Note that the acts were quite late coming into effect; the Italian act, for example, was not implemented until January 1918. Colin Moretti On 21 February 2012 00:06, <duffu[email protected]> wrote: > > > I was interested to read about the mystery surrounding Charlies birth. > > At the other end of his life he was subject of complexity as I believe his will holds the record for taking the longest time to be probated. > > I am also puzzled that Charlie, one of the fittest young men of his day did not get called up for Military Service in WWI. At the time he was unmarried, in good health and would have made a good trooper. > > Does anyone know the procedures for an british Citizen living overseas re military service in WWI? > > > Julian Duffus > SoG member 1979~present

Hi: I have over the years purchased a few old picture postcards (typically ones published by Francis Frith) at antique fairs, and then have asked (and received) advice as to which ones it would be OK to put online, being out of copyright. Several picture postcard dealers have been able to answer me based on the layout and style of the printing on the back of Frith postcards. Unfortunately I do not recall the details, and was wondering whether anyone here knows, or can point me to a source of such information. (I can't find this information in the pages of the Francis Frith Photo Library, despite all they do say about copyright and dating - their apparent preference being to respond to individual copyright queries.) Cheers Brian Randell . -- School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK EMAIL = [email protected] PHONE = +44 191 222 7923 FAX = +44 191 222 8232 URL = http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people/brian.randell

I was interested to read about the mystery surrounding Charlies birth. At the other end of his life he was subject of complexity as I believe his will holds the record for taking the longest time to be probated. I am also puzzled that Charlie, one of the fittest young men of his day did not get called up for Military Service in WWI. At the time he was unmarried, in good health and would have made a good trooper. Does anyone know the procedures for an british Citizen living overseas re military service in WWI? Julian Duffus SoG member 1979~present Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

GRO Certificates news-clampdown on unofficial certificates sites and new telephone order number (Else Churchill) It's all hot air. Nothing seems to stop these companies from trading. Just Google 'birth certificate' and you'll see. The people to complain to are BIS (Department of Business, etc) but they've been totally ineffective for 2 years, as has the GRO. Peter Turvey -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: 11 February 2012 19:45 To: [email protected] Subject: SOG-UK Digest, Vol 7, Issue 22 Today's Topics: 1. Joseph BOY (Blair Southerden) 2. GRO Certificates news-clampdown on unofficial certificates sites and new telephone order number (Else Churchill) 3. Re: GRO Certificates news-clampdown on unofficial certificates sites and new telephone order number (Jeanne Bunting) 4. Re: GRO Certificates news-clampdown on unofficial certificates sites (A Jones) 5. Re: GRO Certificates news-clampdown on unofficial certificates sites and new telephone order number (Ann L. Wells) 6. Re: Joseph BOY - drummer & bugler (John Alexander) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 09:41:15 +0000 From: Blair Southerden <[email protected]> Subject: [SOG-UK] Joseph BOY To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Irene A good result. The regimental history repeats the story of the march down the Champs ?lys?es so you an have confidence in that piece of information too. Their marches around England we in aid of the Civil Power, helping to quell unrest and riots, I think the Chartist Riots but haven't checked dates. Then as you know off to Ireland and then Canada. Best regards Blair On 11 Feb 2012, at 08:00, [email protected] wrote: > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Joseph BOY - drummer & bugler (Irene Marlborough) > 2. Re: Joseph BOY - drummer & bugler (Peter Goodey) > 3. Re: Joseph BOY - drummer & bugler (Mike flaherty) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 08:53:08 -0600 > From: "Irene Marlborough" <[email protected]> > Subject: [SOG-UK] Joseph BOY - drummer & bugler > To: <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hello All but especially Chris & Blair: > > My hired researcher has concluded his work at TNA and now I have full details of the military career of Joseph BOY / BYE / BUY. There's nothing that Chris didn't already find but now I have photos of the documents which allows me to glean a few extra details. > > So Joseph was born in Wantage, Berkshire on 16 Oct 1786 and baptised 6 months later. He enlisted at Newbury in 1804. He served in the Peninsula War arriving home (Chatham) in 1814 but leaving almost immediately for Flanders. He fought at the Battle of Waterloo and afterwards was in Paris on the Champs Elysees! At least that's what the muster roll says. > > He stayed in France mostly at Therouanne and a camp near St Omar until late 1818 when the regiment returned to England. Joseph was stationed at Chester which must be where he met his bride Elizabeth ANDREW(S). In early 1819 he is at Weedon Barracks in Northamptonshire. I'm not sure how this works out but he is accounted for at Weedon every day of the quarter ending 24 Jun 1819 even though I know he was in Chester getting married on Jun 21. > > Later that year the regiment moves to Lichfield and by the 2nd quarter of 1820, they are at Hull until leaving for Dublin in the spring of 1821. Here I was delighted to find out that he certainly could be the father of Ann BOY baptised in October 1821. Joseph was noted as being on furlough from 25 Nov 1820 until 5 Jan 1821. That was a relief because I was beginning to think that he'd had no opportunity to father this child. > > The regiment stayed in Ireland until the spring of 1823 and then left for New Brunswick. Joseph died at Miramichi, NB on 20 May 1826. The casualty return just says that he died. Most likely would be of some illness. I'm thinking that even an accidental death would be noted as such and killed in action would definitely be stated. > > The fiche copy of his enlistment details is difficult to read but says that his term was unlimited. I suppose this is a euphemism for a life sentence. Was it possible for such lifetime soldiers to get a discharge? Perhaps for family reasons, sickness, disability etc. > > Anyway, I just thought I'd let you all know how things had gone. I'm busy reading about all the places where the regiment spent time. > > If anyone is interested seeing any of the images, just let me know off-list. > > Thanks to all, > Irene > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 15:18:21 +0000 > From: Peter Goodey <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] Joseph BOY - drummer & bugler > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 08:53 -0600, Irene Marlborough wrote: >> Was it possible for such lifetime soldiers to get a discharge? > > Unfit for further service would be a typical reason. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:57:25 +0100 > From: Mike flaherty <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] Joseph BOY - drummer & bugler > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Great to watch your progress with Joseph who has captured the imagination (& affection) of many on this list. > Thank you for the update - a good romp! > Best regards > > Sent from my iPad >> > > > ------------------------------ > > To contact the SOG-UK list administrator, send an email to > [email protected] > > To post a message to the SOG-UK mailing list, send an email to [email protected] > > __________________________________________________________ > 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 > email with no additional text. > > > End of SOG-UK Digest, Vol 7, Issue 21 > ************************************* ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 14:48:19 -0000 From: "Else Churchill" <[email protected]> Subject: [SOG-UK] GRO Certificates news-clampdown on unofficial certificates sites and new telephone order number To: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" News just in from the Identity and Passport Service, the Government Agency which is responsible for the General Register Office, reports that the Advertising Standards Authority has taken action against third party certificate websites Identity and Passport Service has warned people ordering birth, death and marriage certificates not to be fooled into paying more through unofficial websites. The Advertising Standards Authority has now upheld three separate complaints from the Registrar General about third party websites misleading customers into believing that they were ordering from the government?s own website. The authority warned ?UK Official Services?, ?UK GRO Certificates? and ?Vital Certificates? that they were in breach of the Committee of Advertising Practice code and that they must stop appearing or implying that they are the General Register Office. Customers applying for replacement birth certificates can be charged up to ?74.99 for an unofficial ?express? online service. The same express service is ?23.40 via the official IPS certificate ordering website through Directgov www.direct.gov.uk/gro. The standard certificate service is available for even less - ?9.25. Welcoming the news, IPS Chief Executive and Registrar General Sarah Rapson, said: ?The Advertising Standards Authority has sent a very clear message to customers and those companies that mislead them: there is just one official online certificate ordering service for England and Wales. ?It is always quicker, cheaper and safer to deal directly with the General Register Office for certificate orders. ?While other outlets can be found online, there is no reason to pay over the odds and I would urge customers to look at the official site first before ordering anywhere else.? New number for certificate ordering IPS has adopted a 0300 prefix for its GRO certificates enquiry number. The prefix 0300 replaces the 0845 prefix used in the previous number. >From 5 January 2012 IPS stopped publishing the 0845 603 7788 number for members of the public who wish to make an enquiry about, or place an order for, certificates. Customers who previously contacted IPS via the 0845 number are now being asked to use 0300 123 1837. This is a particularly memorable number as civil registration was introduced in England and Wales in the year 1837. 0300 numbers are exclusively reserved for charities and the public sector and for the majority of customers the cost of calling us will be reduced. Calls made to 0300 numbers from landlines and mobile phones are charged to customers at their network provider's national rate and also form part of the inclusive minutes within the customer's call package in the same way as calls to geographical numbers. Else Churchill Genealogist Society of Genealogists 14 Charterhouse Buildings Goswell Road London EC1M 7BA direct phone 020 7702 5488 visit the Society of Genealogists' Website www.sog.org.uk <http://www.sog.org.uk/> www.Findmypast.co.uk proud to sponsor the Society's centenary year WOULD YOU LIKE ADVICE ON YOUR FAMILY HISTORY? >From beginners onwards: all queries and problems welcomed. Phone our dedicated family history advice line on 020 7490 8911 Thursdays 6pm - 7.45 pm; Saturdays 11 am - 1pm and 2pm - 4 pm The Society also runs regular one-to-one advice half hour advice sessions with experts at the Society?s library on alternate Saturdays from 2pm. Telephone the library direct on 020 7702 5485 to book an advice session or library tour. This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the addressee only. You must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute the contents of this communication unless explicitly permitted to do so. If you have received this in error, please contact the sender and then delete this email from your system without further distribution or use. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do not relate to the official business of The Society of Genealogists are neither given nor endorsed by it. Registered Charity No. 233701. Company limited by guarantee. Registered No. 115703. Registered office as above ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 16:17:41 +0000 From: Jeanne Bunting <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] GRO Certificates news-clampdown on unofficial certificates sites and new telephone order number To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 I am surprised that Ancestry has not been warned about the exorbitant prices they charge for certificates. Jeanne Bunting nee Attersley Sent from my iPhone4 On 11 Feb 2012, at 14:48, "Else Churchill" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > News just in from the Identity and Passport Service, the Government Agency > which is responsible for the General Register Office, reports that the > Advertising Standards Authority has taken action against third party > certificate websites > > Identity and Passport Service has warned people ordering birth, death and > marriage certificates not to be fooled into paying more through unofficial > websites. > > The Advertising Standards Authority has now upheld three separate complaints > from the Registrar General about third party websites misleading customers > into believing that they were ordering from the government?s own website. > > The authority warned ?UK Official Services?, ?UK GRO Certificates? and > ?Vital Certificates? that they were in breach of the Committee of > Advertising Practice code and that they must stop appearing or implying that > they are the General Register Office. > > Customers applying for replacement birth certificates can be charged up to > ?74.99 for an unofficial ?express? online service. > > The same express service is ?23.40 via the official IPS certificate ordering > website through Directgov > > www.direct.gov.uk/gro. The standard certificate service is available for > even less - ?9.25. > > Welcoming the news, IPS Chief Executive and Registrar General Sarah Rapson, > said: > > ?The Advertising Standards Authority has sent a very clear message to > customers and those companies that mislead them: there is just one official > online certificate ordering service for England and Wales. > > ?It is always quicker, cheaper and safer to deal directly with the General > Register Office for certificate orders. > > ?While other outlets can be found online, there is no reason to pay over the > odds and I would urge customers to look at the official site first before > ordering anywhere else.? > > New number for certificate ordering > > IPS has adopted a 0300 prefix for its GRO certificates enquiry number. The > prefix 0300 replaces the 0845 prefix used in the previous number. > >> From 5 January 2012 IPS stopped publishing the 0845 603 7788 number for > members of the public who wish to make an enquiry about, or place an order > for, certificates. Customers who previously contacted IPS via the 0845 > number are now being asked to use 0300 123 1837. This is a particularly > memorable number as civil registration was introduced in England and Wales > in the year 1837. > > 0300 numbers are exclusively reserved for charities and the public sector > and for the majority of customers the cost of calling us will be reduced. > Calls made to 0300 numbers from landlines and mobile phones are charged to > customers at their network provider's national rate and also form part of > the inclusive minutes within the customer's call package in the same way as > calls to geographical numbers. > > > > > > Else Churchill > > Genealogist > > Society of Genealogists > > 14 Charterhouse Buildings > > Goswell Road > > London EC1M 7BA > > direct phone 020 7702 5488 > > visit the Society of Genealogists' Website www.sog.org.uk > <http://www.sog.org.uk/> > > > > www.Findmypast.co.uk proud to sponsor the Society's centenary year > > > > WOULD YOU LIKE ADVICE ON YOUR FAMILY HISTORY? > >> From beginners onwards: all queries and problems welcomed. Phone our > dedicated family history advice line on 020 7490 8911 > > Thursdays 6pm - 7.45 pm; Saturdays 11 am - 1pm and 2pm - 4 pm > > The Society also runs regular one-to-one advice half hour advice sessions > with experts at the Society?s library on alternate Saturdays from 2pm. > Telephone the library direct on 020 7702 5485 to book an advice session or > library tour. > > > > This email and any attachments are confidential and intended for the > addressee only. You must not use, disclose, reproduce, copy or distribute > the contents of this communication unless explicitly permitted to do so. > > If you have received this in error, please contact the sender and then > delete this email from your system without further distribution or use. > Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message and attachments > that do not relate to the official business of The Society of Genealogists > are neither given nor endorsed by it. > > > > Registered Charity No. 233701. Company limited by guarantee. Registered > No. 115703. Registered office as above > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > 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 ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 16:43:23 -0000 From: "A Jones" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] GRO Certificates news-clampdown on unofficial certificates sites To: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original ----- Original Message ----- From: "Else Churchill" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 2:48 PM Subject: [SOG-UK] GRO Certificates news-clampdown on unofficial certificates sites and new telephone order number <<News just in ... Identity and Passport Service has warned people ordering birth, death and marriage certificates not to be fooled into paying more through unofficial websites ... The Advertising Standards Authority has now upheld three separate complaints from the Registrar General about third party websites misleading customers into believing that they were ordering from the government's own website.>> Certainly seems welcome news, although at least two of the instances appear to date right back to last November: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/media-centre/press-releases/unofficial-certific ate-websites ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 11:28:44 -0800 (PST) From: "Ann L. Wells" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] GRO Certificates news-clampdown on unofficial certificates sites and new telephone order number To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Else, I am the current president of the International Society for British Genealogy and Family History (ISBGFH), headquartered in Westminster, Colorado. I would like permission to reprint this e-mail in our quarterly journal. I think the information is very important to share with others who may not be aware there is an "official" source for vital records.? Thank you in advance, Ann L. Wells ISBGFH, President ? Ann L. Wells Wells Research Associates Crystal Lake, IL ? http://wellsresearch.net ? ? ________________________________ From: Else Churchill <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 8:48 AM Subject: [SOG-UK] GRO Certificates news-clampdown on unofficial certificates sites and new telephone order number ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 19:43:04 +0000 From: John Alexander <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] Joseph BOY - drummer & bugler To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 08:53:08 -0600, you wrote: >Hello All but especially Chris & Blair: > >My hired researcher has concluded his work at TNA and now I have full details of the military career of Joseph BOY / BYE / BUY. There's nothing that Chris didn't already find but now I have photos of the documents which allows me to glean a few extra details. Have you come across this book The history of Lord Seaton's regiment (the 52nd light infantry) at the battle of Waterloo; together with various incidents connected with that regiment, not only at Waterloo but also at Paris, in the north of France, and for several years afterwards: to which are added many of the author's reminiscences of his military and clerical careers during a period of more than fifty years. By the Rev. William Leeke. This and several other regimental histories are available from the Internet Archive at www.archive.org Be warned that it I found it too easy to get sidetracked by this amazing collection -- Regards John Alexander ------------------------------ To contact the SOG-UK list administrator, send an email to [email protected] To post a message to the SOG-UK mailing list, send an email to [email protected] __________________________________________________________ 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 email with no additional text. End of SOG-UK Digest, Vol 7, Issue 22 *************************************

<<snipped>> The fiche copy of his enlistment details is difficult to read but says that his term was unlimited. I suppose this is a euphemism for a life sentence. <<snipped>> No, it's just a term for engagement with no specific length. The Army would have no use for soldiers who were unfit by reason of age, disease or wound. And judging by the terms of some people referred to in various record office indices, it was almost as common then to make people redundant as it is now - except there'd be no cash compensation. Adrian B

On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 08:53:08 -0600, you wrote: >Hello All but especially Chris & Blair: > >My hired researcher has concluded his work at TNA and now I have full details of the military career of Joseph BOY / BYE / BUY. There's nothing that Chris didn't already find but now I have photos of the documents which allows me to glean a few extra details. Have you come across this book The history of Lord Seaton's regiment (the 52nd light infantry) at the battle of Waterloo; together with various incidents connected with that regiment, not only at Waterloo but also at Paris, in the north of France, and for several years afterwards: to which are added many of the author's reminiscences of his military and clerical careers during a period of more than fifty years. By the Rev. William Leeke. This and several other regimental histories are available from the Internet Archive at www.archive.org Be warned that it I found it too easy to get sidetracked by this amazing collection -- Regards John Alexander