Thanks for your help Caroline. I've printed them all out and am trying to work something out. I'm not convinced that the 1942 one is him, it's way out of his league and the age is different, I think a bit too old. Still, it will keep me entertained for a while! Lin -----Original Message----- From: sog-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:sog-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Caroline Gurney Sent: 26 June 2014 21:30 To: sog-uk@rootsweb.com Cc: prwalker51@gmail.com Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] A Brick Wall to rival Hadrian! Lin, I think newspapers may help breach your brick wall. The Nottingham Evening Post has reports of a number of court cases from the right time period involving a Robert Lees, hawker, who sold fruit from a market stall. He lived in Montfort Street, Radford. Do you have access to the British Newspaper Archive, either directly or via FindMyPast? Contact me offlist at research@carolinegurney.com and I'll let you have details of the newspapers in which the reports appear. Caroline Gurney http://www.carolinegurney.com On 26 June 2014 16:43, Linda <lin.taylor@talktalk.net> wrote: > Hi > > > > I wonder if anyone could help me with some research I'm doing for a friend. > His father was illegitimate and I'm having problems finding anything! > > > > He was Frederick Lees Walker born in Nottingham on 30th March 1913 to > Amelia Walker (nee Harwood) and Robert Lees. Amelia had left her > husband by the > 1911 census and the family story is that 'Uncle Bob' (Robert Lees) visited. > He was thought to be a greengrocer as he always brought fruit for the > children when they were sent out to play while he 'chatted' to Amelia. > I do realise that he could just have stopped off for a pound of apples > on his way! There is also supposed to be a London connection but nobody knows what. > > > > Amelia died in 1916 when Frederick was 3 years old and he went to live > with his older sister. It is known that Robert Lees kept in touch > with him during this time and Frederick went to live with Robert when > he was about 15 years old (about 1928). West Bridgford has been > mentioned and I assume this may be where Frederick lived with Robert as it's not where he was born. > > > > Frederick did spend some time as a jockey in Newmarket although we > don't know when. I have contacted the Horseracing Museum to see if > they hold any record of apprentices but they don't. > > > > After that Frederick became a painter & decorator and married in Much > Wenlock in 1939. This was his first marriage - his son was born from > his second marriage which was in Germany. I sent for a copy of this > marriage certificate and it gives his father as Robert Lees Walker > (which we know is > incorrect) and a hawker. It doesn't say he was deceased. Mind you, > the ages of both bride and groom are also incorrect so I don't know > how useful this is! > > > > We don't know where Robert Lees was born so birth records aren't of > any help. I'm assuming him to be about the same age as Amelia (b > 1872) If Frederick was born in March 1913, he was conceived in June > 1912 and assuming that Amelia had known him for a while, I expected to > find him on the 1911 census in or around Nottingham. The only Robert > Lees listed are all accounted for with wives and families. I know he > could have forgotten to mention them when he visited but I'm sure they > would have been mentioned when Frederick lived with his father. > > > > Assuming he WAS alive in 1939 and was about the same age as Amelia, > I've looked for death records in Nottingham for 20 years or so after > that but nothing promising. > > > > I've also searched the Nottingham directories (residential and > commercial) for 1910/11 and 1913/14 (when Robert Lees should have been > in Nottingham) and 1925 and 1928 when Frederick was living with him. > I know these only list householders and there's no-one obvious and > I've checked any other Lees in case he was living with family. > > > > I've thought about school records for Frederick (which are in > Nottingham Records office and I'm in Essex) but think they will only > give me the address of his sister if he was living with her when he > was registered at school. I've also asked about electoral records, > but these are listed by address and I don't know that. > > > > I've looked at what army records are left for the 1914/18 war just in > case but again, the only Robert Lees don't fit. > > > > I've thought about the 1939 register for identity cards but they ask > for all the details I don't have! > > > > Frederick joined the army in 1941, moved to Germany, divorced his > first wife and married a German lady. Ironically he did try to trace > his father in > 1951 but of course the GRO wasn't computerised in those days and > couldn't help him. > > > > If anyone could come up with any suggestions of where I could look > next I would be extremely grateful! > > > > Many thanks > > > > Lin > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com 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 SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Thank you for your suggestion Merryl. I have done quite a bit of research on Amelia's family. The children all went to live with the eldest daughter, Nellie, when Amelia died. Nellie then married and had children of her own but unfortunately died young as well. The children were put in orphanages and they all lost touch. We only know what we know from Nellie's daughter who has now sadly passed away. Caroline has come up with some newspaper articles which look useful. Looks like Robert Lees was a bit of a 'Jack The Lad' so I don't think he would have been paying any school fees! Many thanks for your help though Lin -----Original Message----- From: sog-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:sog-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Merryl Wells Sent: 26 June 2014 23:05 To: sog-uk@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] A Brick Wall to rival Hadrian! Could suggest concentrating more on Amelia's family, if she had siblings and they had children they may know more family stories about 'poor' Auntie Amelia, what happened to her son and who his father really was. It may be worth checking school records, especially if it was a fee-paying school, where the person who paid the fees would be included as 'guardian' rather than who the child was living with. My 'half' uncle was born during WW1 when his mother was legally married but husband away fighting so he was given his surname, but his natural father saw to his education after his mother died and during WW2 he stayed with his real aunts whilst on leave as it was more convenient than his half-sister's in London which was his 'home' address. From Merryl Wells of Luton, Beds. E-Mail: merryl.wells@one-name.org GOONS Mem. No. 1757 Reg. ONS: Bawtree; Gullick/ock, Moist/Moyst. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Linda" <lin.taylor@talktalk.net> To: <SOG-UK@rootsweb.com> Cc: <prwalker51@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 4:43 PM Subject: [SOG-UK] A Brick Wall to rival Hadrian! > Hi > > > > I wonder if anyone could help me with some research I'm doing for a > friend. > His father was illegitimate and I'm having problems finding anything! > > > > He was Frederick Lees Walker born in Nottingham on 30th March 1913 to > Amelia > Walker (nee Harwood) and Robert Lees. Amelia had left her husband by the > 1911 census and the family story is that 'Uncle Bob' (Robert Lees) > visited. > He was thought to be a greengrocer as he always brought fruit for the > children when they were sent out to play while he 'chatted' to Amelia. I > do > realise that he could just have stopped off for a pound of apples on his > way! There is also supposed to be a London connection but nobody knows > what. > > > > Amelia died in 1916 when Frederick was 3 years old and he went to live > with > his older sister. It is known that Robert Lees kept in touch with him > during this time and Frederick went to live with Robert when he was about > 15 > years old (about 1928). West Bridgford has been mentioned and I assume > this > may be where Frederick lived with Robert as it's not where he was born. > > > > Frederick did spend some time as a jockey in Newmarket although we don't > know when. I have contacted the Horseracing Museum to see if they hold > any > record of apprentices but they don't. > > > > After that Frederick became a painter & decorator and married in Much > Wenlock in 1939. This was his first marriage - his son was born from his > second marriage which was in Germany. I sent for a copy of this marriage > certificate and it gives his father as Robert Lees Walker (which we know > is > incorrect) and a hawker. It doesn't say he was deceased. Mind you, the > ages of both bride and groom are also incorrect so I don't know how useful > this is! > > > > We don't know where Robert Lees was born so birth records aren't of any > help. I'm assuming him to be about the same age as Amelia (b 1872) If > Frederick was born in March 1913, he was conceived in June 1912 and > assuming > that Amelia had known him for a while, I expected to find him on the 1911 > census in or around Nottingham. The only Robert Lees listed are all > accounted for with wives and families. I know he could have forgotten to > mention them when he visited but I'm sure they would have been mentioned > when Frederick lived with his father. > > > > Assuming he WAS alive in 1939 and was about the same age as Amelia, I've > looked for death records in Nottingham for 20 years or so after that but > nothing promising. > > > > I've also searched the Nottingham directories (residential and commercial) > for 1910/11 and 1913/14 (when Robert Lees should have been in Nottingham) > and 1925 and 1928 when Frederick was living with him. I know these only > list householders and there's no-one obvious and I've checked any other > Lees > in case he was living with family. > > > > I've thought about school records for Frederick (which are in Nottingham > Records office and I'm in Essex) but think they will only give me the > address of his sister if he was living with her when he was registered at > school. I've also asked about electoral records, but these are listed by > address and I don't know that. > > > > I've looked at what army records are left for the 1914/18 war just in case > but again, the only Robert Lees don't fit. > > > > I've thought about the 1939 register for identity cards but they ask for > all > the details I don't have! > > > > Frederick joined the army in 1941, moved to Germany, divorced his first > wife > and married a German lady. Ironically he did try to trace his father in > 1951 but of course the GRO wasn't computerised in those days and couldn't > help him. > > > > If anyone could come up with any suggestions of where I could look next I > would be extremely grateful! > > > > Many thanks > > > > Lin > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com 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 SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

The Measuring Worth website has tools for comparing the value of historic artifacts and economic contexts. http://www.measuringworth.com/ Sue Adams Family Folk Blog: http://familyfolklore.wordpress.com/ On 27/06/2014 14:47, MILLARD A.R. wrote: > I'm sure many here have seen mourning rings mentioned in wills, with varying values attached to them. A colleague of mine has excavated one dated 1775, which you can see pictured here: > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-27810231 > and for real in his exhibition: > http://www.divingintodurham.com/ > > We are trying to track down information about the lady commemorated, and I'm hoping that if I can work out the price of this type of mourning ring it might give a clue as to the family's social status. Does anyone have any ideas where to look to establish its value in 1775? > > Best wishes > > Andrew > -- > Andrew Millard - A.R.Millard@durham.ac.uk > Chair, Trustees of Genuki: www.genuki.org.uk > Maintainer, Genuki Middx + London: homepages.gold.ac.uk/genuki/MDX/ + ../LND/ > Academic Co-ordinator, Guild of One-Name Studies: www.one-name.org > Bodimeade one-name study: community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/Bodimeade/ > My genealogy: community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/ > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I'm sure many here have seen mourning rings mentioned in wills, with varying values attached to them. A colleague of mine has excavated one dated 1775, which you can see pictured here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-27810231 and for real in his exhibition: http://www.divingintodurham.com/ We are trying to track down information about the lady commemorated, and I'm hoping that if I can work out the price of this type of mourning ring it might give a clue as to the family's social status. Does anyone have any ideas where to look to establish its value in 1775? Best wishes Andrew -- Andrew Millard - A.R.Millard@durham.ac.uk Chair, Trustees of Genuki: www.genuki.org.uk Maintainer, Genuki Middx + London: homepages.gold.ac.uk/genuki/MDX/ + ../LND/ Academic Co-ordinator, Guild of One-Name Studies: www.one-name.org Bodimeade one-name study: community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/Bodimeade/ My genealogy: community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/

My talktalk email server won't send at the moment so hope this alternative email address will let this get to SOG Digest Original Message: From: Tricia Adam <adcotri@talktalk.net> To: SOG-UK@rootsweb.com <SOG-UK@rootsweb.com> Sent: 14 June 2014 16:33:58 Subject: Military abbreviations I have been lucky enough to find the World War 1 record of a great uncle in the 'Burnt Documents' on Ancestry. Please can anyone tell me what the initials C.R.W.C. stand for? I have looked at the list of abbreviations on the Long, Long Trail website but those above do not appear. The word before C.R.W.C appears to be Authorize and it is when he was promoted to Lance Corporal and transferred to another battalion. When he was taken prisoner of war the column which lists 'Regiment 'has ' C2 Cas (?Gas) PM' . Any ideas on this anyone? Tricia --- New Outlook Express and Windows Live Mail replacement - get it here: http://www.oeclassic.com/ --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com

As the new(ish) CEO of findmypast was formerly Director of Digital Media at News International, and Director of New Media for Times Online, I would imagine she's simply making use of her connections to reach a wider market. These sorts of deals can be very profitable, so I wouldn't read it as a sign of desperation. I also notice that as part of a subscription offer The Times are giving away iPads - should we infer that Apple is in trouble? Peter > > They must be pretty desperate. All people with subscriptions to The > > Times online are being offered a free full year subscription to > > FindMyPast! > > >Ah, but which of them is desperate - the newspaper in a declining > >market or > > >the genealogy company in a growing market? > > >Peter > > The simple answer to that one is the question "Who's bearing the cost > of the free subscriptions ?" > > I don't think it's likely to be the 'Thunderer'. The genealogy market > may be growing, but FMP is a continuing disaster and must be losing > share pretty rapidly. > > John B

Its interesting to see continuing comments about the FMP. On 17 April I sent the following email to the Chief Executive of the SOG using the address 'ceo@sog.org.uk'. and received no reply. Whilst I do not expect the SOG to share my views about FMP, or the need to express concern, I was disappointed at the apparent lack of interest in members views. I am sure Ms Perrin is a very busy individual but the courtesy of a brief acknowledgement would have been nice! Lin ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------ Dear Ms Perrin I have for years been a keen user of Find My Past and pleased that the SoG has been associated with the company. However, as you may be aware many members have expressed their disquiet and disappointment following the launch of Find My Past's new system. I doubt you have the time to routinely monitor the SOG members forum but their messages do provide an eloquent description of the problems encountered. The new system is slow, difficult to use, poorly designed and lacks many of the search facilities of the previous version. It is so bad that I cannot believe it was tested with the help of genealogists. A high volume of complaints can be seen on its own website and on Facebook. The SoG is described as one of the FMP's partners. I feel the SoG's reputation will be damaged by its continuing association with an organisation which appears to have behaved with a lack of professionalism, with little concern for its users or for the ease of access to information provided by its partners. I am writing to ask whether the SoG has, or will be, making an official representation to the company to express its concern. Regards Lin Howard (Member No. 011443)

> They must be pretty desperate. All people with subscriptions to The > Times online are being offered a free full year subscription to > FindMyPast! >Ah, but which of them is desperate - the newspaper in a declining market or > >the genealogy company in a growing market? >Peter The simple answer to that one is the question "Who's bearing the cost of the free subscriptions ?" I don't think it's likely to be the 'Thunderer'. The genealogy market may be growing, but FMP is a continuing disaster and must be losing share pretty rapidly. John B

> They must be pretty desperate. All people with subscriptions to The > Times online are being offered a free full year subscription to > FindMyPast! Ah, but which of them is desperate - the newspaper in a declining market or the genealogy company in a growing market? Peter

I was given a free month (thankfully I'd not taken out an annual subscription) and have since managed to get a further 2 months for £1 each. This fiasco must be costing FMP a fortune - I can't see many people renewing at the moment - there are still so many errors on the site. On 25 June 2014 19:23, David Martin <dmart7@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > They must be pretty desperate. All people with subscriptions to The Times > online are being offered a free full year subscription to FindMyPast! > > David M > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Could suggest concentrating more on Amelia's family, if she had siblings and they had children they may know more family stories about 'poor' Auntie Amelia, what happened to her son and who his father really was. It may be worth checking school records, especially if it was a fee-paying school, where the person who paid the fees would be included as 'guardian' rather than who the child was living with. My 'half' uncle was born during WW1 when his mother was legally married but husband away fighting so he was given his surname, but his natural father saw to his education after his mother died and during WW2 he stayed with his real aunts whilst on leave as it was more convenient than his half-sister's in London which was his 'home' address. From Merryl Wells of Luton, Beds. E-Mail: merryl.wells@one-name.org GOONS Mem. No. 1757 Reg. ONS: Bawtree; Gullick/ock, Moist/Moyst. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Linda" <lin.taylor@talktalk.net> To: <SOG-UK@rootsweb.com> Cc: <prwalker51@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 4:43 PM Subject: [SOG-UK] A Brick Wall to rival Hadrian! > Hi > > > > I wonder if anyone could help me with some research I'm doing for a > friend. > His father was illegitimate and I'm having problems finding anything! > > > > He was Frederick Lees Walker born in Nottingham on 30th March 1913 to > Amelia > Walker (nee Harwood) and Robert Lees. Amelia had left her husband by the > 1911 census and the family story is that 'Uncle Bob' (Robert Lees) > visited. > He was thought to be a greengrocer as he always brought fruit for the > children when they were sent out to play while he 'chatted' to Amelia. I > do > realise that he could just have stopped off for a pound of apples on his > way! There is also supposed to be a London connection but nobody knows > what. > > > > Amelia died in 1916 when Frederick was 3 years old and he went to live > with > his older sister. It is known that Robert Lees kept in touch with him > during this time and Frederick went to live with Robert when he was about > 15 > years old (about 1928). West Bridgford has been mentioned and I assume > this > may be where Frederick lived with Robert as it's not where he was born. > > > > Frederick did spend some time as a jockey in Newmarket although we don't > know when. I have contacted the Horseracing Museum to see if they hold > any > record of apprentices but they don't. > > > > After that Frederick became a painter & decorator and married in Much > Wenlock in 1939. This was his first marriage - his son was born from his > second marriage which was in Germany. I sent for a copy of this marriage > certificate and it gives his father as Robert Lees Walker (which we know > is > incorrect) and a hawker. It doesn't say he was deceased. Mind you, the > ages of both bride and groom are also incorrect so I don't know how useful > this is! > > > > We don't know where Robert Lees was born so birth records aren't of any > help. I'm assuming him to be about the same age as Amelia (b 1872) If > Frederick was born in March 1913, he was conceived in June 1912 and > assuming > that Amelia had known him for a while, I expected to find him on the 1911 > census in or around Nottingham. The only Robert Lees listed are all > accounted for with wives and families. I know he could have forgotten to > mention them when he visited but I'm sure they would have been mentioned > when Frederick lived with his father. > > > > Assuming he WAS alive in 1939 and was about the same age as Amelia, I've > looked for death records in Nottingham for 20 years or so after that but > nothing promising. > > > > I've also searched the Nottingham directories (residential and commercial) > for 1910/11 and 1913/14 (when Robert Lees should have been in Nottingham) > and 1925 and 1928 when Frederick was living with him. I know these only > list householders and there's no-one obvious and I've checked any other > Lees > in case he was living with family. > > > > I've thought about school records for Frederick (which are in Nottingham > Records office and I'm in Essex) but think they will only give me the > address of his sister if he was living with her when he was registered at > school. I've also asked about electoral records, but these are listed by > address and I don't know that. > > > > I've looked at what army records are left for the 1914/18 war just in case > but again, the only Robert Lees don't fit. > > > > I've thought about the 1939 register for identity cards but they ask for > all > the details I don't have! > > > > Frederick joined the army in 1941, moved to Germany, divorced his first > wife > and married a German lady. Ironically he did try to trace his father in > 1951 but of course the GRO wasn't computerised in those days and couldn't > help him. > > > > If anyone could come up with any suggestions of where I could look next I > would be extremely grateful! > > > > Many thanks > > > > Lin > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message

Lin, I think newspapers may help breach your brick wall. The Nottingham Evening Post has reports of a number of court cases from the right time period involving a Robert Lees, hawker, who sold fruit from a market stall. He lived in Montfort Street, Radford. Do you have access to the British Newspaper Archive, either directly or via FindMyPast? Contact me offlist at research@carolinegurney.com and I'll let you have details of the newspapers in which the reports appear. Caroline Gurney http://www.carolinegurney.com On 26 June 2014 16:43, Linda <lin.taylor@talktalk.net> wrote: > Hi > > > > I wonder if anyone could help me with some research I'm doing for a friend. > His father was illegitimate and I'm having problems finding anything! > > > > He was Frederick Lees Walker born in Nottingham on 30th March 1913 to Amelia > Walker (nee Harwood) and Robert Lees. Amelia had left her husband by the > 1911 census and the family story is that 'Uncle Bob' (Robert Lees) visited. > He was thought to be a greengrocer as he always brought fruit for the > children when they were sent out to play while he 'chatted' to Amelia. I do > realise that he could just have stopped off for a pound of apples on his > way! There is also supposed to be a London connection but nobody knows what. > > > > Amelia died in 1916 when Frederick was 3 years old and he went to live with > his older sister. It is known that Robert Lees kept in touch with him > during this time and Frederick went to live with Robert when he was about 15 > years old (about 1928). West Bridgford has been mentioned and I assume this > may be where Frederick lived with Robert as it's not where he was born. > > > > Frederick did spend some time as a jockey in Newmarket although we don't > know when. I have contacted the Horseracing Museum to see if they hold any > record of apprentices but they don't. > > > > After that Frederick became a painter & decorator and married in Much > Wenlock in 1939. This was his first marriage - his son was born from his > second marriage which was in Germany. I sent for a copy of this marriage > certificate and it gives his father as Robert Lees Walker (which we know is > incorrect) and a hawker. It doesn't say he was deceased. Mind you, the > ages of both bride and groom are also incorrect so I don't know how useful > this is! > > > > We don't know where Robert Lees was born so birth records aren't of any > help. I'm assuming him to be about the same age as Amelia (b 1872) If > Frederick was born in March 1913, he was conceived in June 1912 and assuming > that Amelia had known him for a while, I expected to find him on the 1911 > census in or around Nottingham. The only Robert Lees listed are all > accounted for with wives and families. I know he could have forgotten to > mention them when he visited but I'm sure they would have been mentioned > when Frederick lived with his father. > > > > Assuming he WAS alive in 1939 and was about the same age as Amelia, I've > looked for death records in Nottingham for 20 years or so after that but > nothing promising. > > > > I've also searched the Nottingham directories (residential and commercial) > for 1910/11 and 1913/14 (when Robert Lees should have been in Nottingham) > and 1925 and 1928 when Frederick was living with him. I know these only > list householders and there's no-one obvious and I've checked any other Lees > in case he was living with family. > > > > I've thought about school records for Frederick (which are in Nottingham > Records office and I'm in Essex) but think they will only give me the > address of his sister if he was living with her when he was registered at > school. I've also asked about electoral records, but these are listed by > address and I don't know that. > > > > I've looked at what army records are left for the 1914/18 war just in case > but again, the only Robert Lees don't fit. > > > > I've thought about the 1939 register for identity cards but they ask for all > the details I don't have! > > > > Frederick joined the army in 1941, moved to Germany, divorced his first wife > and married a German lady. Ironically he did try to trace his father in > 1951 but of course the GRO wasn't computerised in those days and couldn't > help him. > > > > If anyone could come up with any suggestions of where I could look next I > would be extremely grateful! > > > > Many thanks > > > > Lin > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi I wonder if anyone could help me with some research I'm doing for a friend. His father was illegitimate and I'm having problems finding anything! He was Frederick Lees Walker born in Nottingham on 30th March 1913 to Amelia Walker (nee Harwood) and Robert Lees. Amelia had left her husband by the 1911 census and the family story is that 'Uncle Bob' (Robert Lees) visited. He was thought to be a greengrocer as he always brought fruit for the children when they were sent out to play while he 'chatted' to Amelia. I do realise that he could just have stopped off for a pound of apples on his way! There is also supposed to be a London connection but nobody knows what. Amelia died in 1916 when Frederick was 3 years old and he went to live with his older sister. It is known that Robert Lees kept in touch with him during this time and Frederick went to live with Robert when he was about 15 years old (about 1928). West Bridgford has been mentioned and I assume this may be where Frederick lived with Robert as it's not where he was born. Frederick did spend some time as a jockey in Newmarket although we don't know when. I have contacted the Horseracing Museum to see if they hold any record of apprentices but they don't. After that Frederick became a painter & decorator and married in Much Wenlock in 1939. This was his first marriage - his son was born from his second marriage which was in Germany. I sent for a copy of this marriage certificate and it gives his father as Robert Lees Walker (which we know is incorrect) and a hawker. It doesn't say he was deceased. Mind you, the ages of both bride and groom are also incorrect so I don't know how useful this is! We don't know where Robert Lees was born so birth records aren't of any help. I'm assuming him to be about the same age as Amelia (b 1872) If Frederick was born in March 1913, he was conceived in June 1912 and assuming that Amelia had known him for a while, I expected to find him on the 1911 census in or around Nottingham. The only Robert Lees listed are all accounted for with wives and families. I know he could have forgotten to mention them when he visited but I'm sure they would have been mentioned when Frederick lived with his father. Assuming he WAS alive in 1939 and was about the same age as Amelia, I've looked for death records in Nottingham for 20 years or so after that but nothing promising. I've also searched the Nottingham directories (residential and commercial) for 1910/11 and 1913/14 (when Robert Lees should have been in Nottingham) and 1925 and 1928 when Frederick was living with him. I know these only list householders and there's no-one obvious and I've checked any other Lees in case he was living with family. I've thought about school records for Frederick (which are in Nottingham Records office and I'm in Essex) but think they will only give me the address of his sister if he was living with her when he was registered at school. I've also asked about electoral records, but these are listed by address and I don't know that. I've looked at what army records are left for the 1914/18 war just in case but again, the only Robert Lees don't fit. I've thought about the 1939 register for identity cards but they ask for all the details I don't have! Frederick joined the army in 1941, moved to Germany, divorced his first wife and married a German lady. Ironically he did try to trace his father in 1951 but of course the GRO wasn't computerised in those days and couldn't help him. If anyone could come up with any suggestions of where I could look next I would be extremely grateful! Many thanks Lin

They must be pretty desperate. All people with subscriptions to The Times online are being offered a free full year subscription to FindMyPast! David M

On 11/06/2014 2:21 PM, Chris Pitt Lewis wrote: > I cannot attend the AGM as I am about to go away for two weeks but I do > not support the resolution as it stands, for two reasons: > > 1. I can see that there is a strong argument for widening the pool of > potential trustees where specialist knowledge or skills are needed, but > I would be uncomfortable with a constitution that potentially allowed > the entire Board of Trustees to be people with no real connection to the > Society. I would support an amendment which ensured that a majority of > the Board consisted of persons who had been members of the Society for > say 3 years before election, and that the rest were members at the time > of their election. (If we allow some trustees to be elected as soon as > they join the Society, then the qualifying period for the majority need > not be as short as one year.) Surely the main specialist knowledge that > at least a majority of our trustees should have is a basic understanding > of genealogical research? > > 2. The present draft does not make sense, from a technical point of > view. If what it means to say is that no-one shall be elected as a > trustee unless they are a member of the Society at the time of their > election, and undertake to remain a member for as long as they remain a > trustee, then it should say precisely that. We would then need to add a > provision that a trustee automatically ceases to be a trustee on ceasing > to be a member of the Society. > > Presumably "throughout the term of his or her election" is intended to > mean "throughout the term for which he or she was elected", though it > really isn't clear. If so, the draft seems to say that no-one can be > elected as a trustee unless it is known that they will be a member > throughout the term of their trusteeship. This involves the impossible > task of predicting the future. > > Chris Pitt Lewis Is there no provision in the Constitution for the Trustees to co-opt to their number member[s] with the required expertise in particular field[s]? [I fear I have no time at the moment to check the small print of the Constitution.] Such a practice, with or without restrictions on such things as numbers/voting powers/terms of office/need for membership of the organisation is, in my experience, by no means uncommon among voluntary organisations. Kind regards, John Henley > > On 11/06/2014 11:40, Alec Tritton wrote: >> Hi Julian >> I shall be at the AGM this year after voting with my feet last year. >> Once again we will have a change to the >> constitution forced upon us by the Trustees (many >> of which are hardly ever there apart from >> meetings of the Trustees) without adequate debate >> by the membership. We can talk about the change >> at the AGM as much as we like but in reality >> there will be more than enough proxy votes to >> "out vote" the meeting, so it won't matter a >> stuff what those who have bothered to attend think. >> This clause will allow the Trustees to go to such >> organisations as http://www.do-it.org.uk/ and >> advertise for Volunteer trustees that they want. >> May be sensible, but surely they should first >> advertise for set skills amongst the membership >> first? We should have considerable safeguards >> built in. After all it is only a small step from >> there for the Trustees to recommend certain >> individuals above genuine volunteers for committee. >> Proxy voting originally prevented our current >> chairman from being re-elected and only by >> intervention at the relevant AGM forced the then committee to co-opt him. >> Actually the only way to object to constitutional >> changes without discussion would be to NOT attend >> the AGM so that it would not be quorate >> >> At 10:51 11/06/2014, jjgduffus@gmail.com wrote: >>> âDear all I have now had a chance to >>> read the special resolution and find that >>> the proposed new wording doesn't make sense, >>> as it should be presumed that you'd be a >>> member of an organisation that you aspire to >>> direct. The present arrangements where by >>> you have to be a member for a year prior to >>> taking responsibility for the society. A >>> familiarity with the society must rank as a >>> useful skill when being a trustee. Looking >>> forward to catching up with folk at the >>> AGM Julian >>> Duffus Jjgduffus@gmail.com Member Sog >>> 1978 to Present

I cannot attend the AGM as I am about to go away for two weeks but I do not support the resolution as it stands, for two reasons: 1. I can see that there is a strong argument for widening the pool of potential trustees where specialist knowledge or skills are needed, but I would be uncomfortable with a constitution that potentially allowed the entire Board of Trustees to be people with no real connection to the Society. I would support an amendment which ensured that a majority of the Board consisted of persons who had been members of the Society for say 3 years before election, and that the rest were members at the time of their election. (If we allow some trustees to be elected as soon as they join the Society, then the qualifying period for the majority need not be as short as one year.) Surely the main specialist knowledge that at least a majority of our trustees should have is a basic understanding of genealogical research? 2. The present draft does not make sense, from a technical point of view. If what it means to say is that no-one shall be elected as a trustee unless they are a member of the Society at the time of their election, and undertake to remain a member for as long as they remain a trustee, then it should say precisely that. We would then need to add a provision that a trustee automatically ceases to be a trustee on ceasing to be a member of the Society. Presumably "throughout the term of his or her election" is intended to mean "throughout the term for which he or she was elected", though it really isn't clear. If so, the draft seems to say that no-one can be elected as a trustee unless it is known that they will be a member throughout the term of their trusteeship. This involves the impossible task of predicting the future. Chris Pitt Lewis On 11/06/2014 11:40, Alec Tritton wrote: > Hi Julian > I shall be at the AGM this year after voting with my feet last year. > Once again we will have a change to the > constitution forced upon us by the Trustees (many > of which are hardly ever there apart from > meetings of the Trustees) without adequate debate > by the membership. We can talk about the change > at the AGM as much as we like but in reality > there will be more than enough proxy votes to > "out vote" the meeting, so it won't matter a > stuff what those who have bothered to attend think. > This clause will allow the Trustees to go to such > organisations as http://www.do-it.org.uk/ and > advertise for Volunteer trustees that they want. > May be sensible, but surely they should first > advertise for set skills amongst the membership > first? We should have considerable safeguards > built in. After all it is only a small step from > there for the Trustees to recommend certain > individuals above genuine volunteers for committee. > Proxy voting originally prevented our current > chairman from being re-elected and only by > intervention at the relevant AGM forced the then committee to co-opt him. > Actually the only way to object to constitutional > changes without discussion would be to NOT attend > the AGM so that it would not be quorate > > At 10:51 11/06/2014, jjgduffus@gmail.com wrote: >> âDear all I have now had a chance to >> read the special resolution and find that >> the proposed new wording doesn't make sense, >> as it should be presumed that you'd be a >> member of an organisation that you aspire to >> direct. The present arrangements where by >> you have to be a member for a year prior to >> taking responsibility for the society. A >> familiarity with the society must rank as a >> useful skill when being a trustee. Looking >> forward to catching up with folk at the >> AGM Julian >> Duffus Jjgduffus@gmail.com Member Sog >> 1978 to Present Sent from my BlackBerry 10 >> smartphone. ------------------------------- To >> unsubscribe from the list, please send an email >> to SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word >> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> ----- >> No virus found in this message. >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3955/7660 - Release Date: 06/11/14 > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com

On 11 Jun at 11:40, Alec Tritton <alec.tritton@tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > Hi Julian I shall be at the AGM this year after voting with my feet > last year. Once again we will have a change to the constitution forced > upon us by the Trustees (many of which are hardly ever there apart > from meetings of the Trustees) without adequate debate by the > membership. We can talk about the change at the AGM as much as we like > but in reality there will be more than enough proxy votes to "out > vote" the meeting, so it won't matter a stuff what those who have > bothered to attend think. This clause will allow the Trustees to go to > such organisations as http://www.do-it.org.uk/ and advertise for > Volunteer trustees that they want. May be sensible, but surely they > should first advertise for set skills amongst the membership first? We > should have considerable safeguards built in. After all it is only a > small step from there for the Trustees to recommend certain > individuals above genuine volunteers for committee. Proxy voting > originally prevented our current chairman from being re-elected and > only by intervention at the relevant AGM forced the then committee to > co-opt him. Actually the only way to object to constitutional changes > without discussion would be to NOT attend the AGM so that it would not > be quorate What is the purpose of the Trustees? Some people think they are super-volunteers and should be expert at all matters of the details of the Society's activities. Others think that the Trustees are primarily responsible for the financial management of the Society. One of the continual problems of the Society for perhaps the last ten years is shortage of finance. So what we need is a sprinkling of people with access to large funds; they do not have to be volunteers, they do not have to be expert at the details of the Society's activities, though they do have to support the Society's aims of serving Genealogy. Some people with access to finance may not have been a member for a long time; I do not see the harm in this if they can (begin to) achieve what is needed. We would be foolish to throw out the opportunity to gain this sort of expertise. The proposed change is to being "a Member of the Society throughout the term of his or her election". With rolling membership I am not sure what "Term" means. If it means January to January, then I would support this proposal as it would give them five months of membership. If "Term" means "from the start of their rolling membership" then they might only be a member for a week before Election and I would not support this proposal. -- Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/

Hi Julian I shall be at the AGM this year after voting with my feet last year. Once again we will have a change to the constitution forced upon us by the Trustees (many of which are hardly ever there apart from meetings of the Trustees) without adequate debate by the membership. We can talk about the change at the AGM as much as we like but in reality there will be more than enough proxy votes to "out vote" the meeting, so it won't matter a stuff what those who have bothered to attend think. This clause will allow the Trustees to go to such organisations as http://www.do-it.org.uk/ and advertise for Volunteer trustees that they want. May be sensible, but surely they should first advertise for set skills amongst the membership first? We should have considerable safeguards built in. After all it is only a small step from there for the Trustees to recommend certain individuals above genuine volunteers for committee. Proxy voting originally prevented our current chairman from being re-elected and only by intervention at the relevant AGM forced the then committee to co-opt him. Actually the only way to object to constitutional changes without discussion would be to NOT attend the AGM so that it would not be quorate At 10:51 11/06/2014, jjgduffus@gmail.com wrote: > âDear all I have now had a chance to > read the special resolution and find that > the proposed new wording doesn't make sense, > as it should be presumed that you'd be a > member of an organisation that you aspire to > direct. The present arrangements where by > you have to be a member for a year prior to > taking responsibility for the society. A > familiarity with the society must rank as a > useful skill when being a trustee. Looking > forward to catching up with folk at the > AGM Julian > Duffus Jjgduffus@gmail.com Member Sog > 1978 to Present Sent from my BlackBerry 10 > smartphone. ------------------------------- To > unsubscribe from the list, please send an email > to SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >----- >No virus found in this message. >Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3955/7660 - Release Date: 06/11/14

âDear all I have now had a chance to read the special resolution and find that the proposed new wording doesn't make sense, as it should be presumed that you'd be a member of an organisation that you aspire to direct. The present arrangements where by you have to be a member for a year prior to taking responsibility for the society. A familiarity with the society must rank as a useful skill when being a trustee. Looking forward to catching up with folk at the AGM Julian Duffus Jjgduffus@gmail.com Member Sog 1978 to Present Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.

This is exactly why I cancelled my membership of the SOG. Egos, politics and not enough history. Glynice Smith -----Original Message----- From: Alec Tritton <alec.tritton@tiscali.co.uk> To: sog-uk <sog-uk@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 11:41 Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] Special Resolution at AGM Hi Julian I shall be at the AGM this year after voting with my feet last year. Once again we will have a change to the constitution forced upon us by the Trustees (many of which are hardly ever there apart from meetings of the Trustees) without adequate debate by the membership. We can talk about the change at the AGM as much as we like but in reality there will be more than enough proxy votes to "out vote" the meeting, so it won't matter a stuff what those who have bothered to attend think. This clause will allow the Trustees to go to such organisations as http://www.do-it.org.uk/ and advertise for Volunteer trustees that they want. May be sensible, but surely they should first advertise for set skills amongst the membership first? We should have considerable safeguards built in. After all it is only a small step from there for the Trustees to recommend certain individuals above genuine volunteers for committee. Proxy voting originally prevented our current chairman from being re-elected and only by intervention at the relevant AGM forced the then committee to co-opt him. Actually the only way to object to constitutional changes without discussion would be to NOT attend the AGM so that it would not be quorate At 10:51 11/06/2014, jjgduffus@gmail.com wrote: > âDear all I have now had a chance to > read the special resolution and find that > the proposed new wording doesn't make sense, > as it should be presumed that you'd be a > member of an organisation that you aspire to > direct. The present arrangements where by > you have to be a member for a year prior to > taking responsibility for the society. A > familiarity with the society must rank as a > useful skill when being a trustee. Looking > forward to catching up with folk at the > AGM Julian > Duffus Jjgduffus@gmail.com Member Sog > 1978 to Present Sent from my BlackBerry 10 > smartphone. ------------------------------- To > unsubscribe from the list, please send an email > to SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >----- >No virus found in this message. >Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3955/7660 - Release Date: 06/11/14 ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message