Peter, I applaud that attitude of yours. My own partner, who obtained her divorce absolute earlier this year was married to an illegitimate man. Because she like me, is well into family history, she is helping her ex to trace back both his blood and adoptive line. She is doing that mainly for the sake of her two sons, aged 18 & 20, who might one day, want to take up this time-consuming hobby of ours. [ In some respects, illegitimate people are lucky! they have two times what legitimate peeps have. They have two sets of parents, 8 grand parents, 16 ggf's etc. Twice the power of two unless, their are cousin marriages, of course! <vbg> ] NOTE WELL, I am not advocating Birth outside Marriage, I am sitting firmly on the fence, and painful it is, too! <LOL> etc. By pure coincidence, one set lived in the London Borough of Bromley, and with my newly earned London Freedom Pass, and visits to Bromley Local Studies Library, I was able to go back to 1955with the Electoral Rolls. That helped a lot. Coincidentally, in the one road, up to last year's Bromley & Orpington Telephone Directory, in that same road, at two different addresses, were the same PINNIGER surnamed person(s) - ving. That, after over 50 years!!!!! Serendipity rules OK, often, for us family historians! <vbg> On the same subject, earlier this year I got an email from a gentleman, out of the blue, who (it turned out) was a (half?) cousin, if one can have a half or step cousin? DISCUSS! My grandfather Charles Edward Warn had gone off to Jersey with a Mrs White, allegedly the wife of a Tetbury publican, and got interned by the Germans. On the Surrey List, was placed, a pointer to the Jersey Archives. I did a search and found both He and She! Over the moon? Yes, but not sick as a parrot although I get sick on the boat to the Channel Islands! Charlie WARN was, I thought, one of 13 siblings. This new contact, was a direct descendant of William Warn, by a serving wench! She is clearly on a TETBURY census in the WARN household. So, I too have illegitimacy in my family too! Well, Whoopee! That makes e very chuffed! How the mighty fall! Phil Orpington, Kent, UK . At 11:40 25/11/2005, PeterGoodey wrote: >I don't believe that the PRO document is relevant. There are other things >that might have led you to the second repository. For example, a friend >might have spotted the name and brought it to your attention. > >I think the extent to which you publish the data you found is simply a >matter of your personal judgement and sense of good taste. Others have >provided some examples. I did a bit of uncharged work for someone which was >only intended to whet his appetite for the hobby. As it happened, I found >evidence that clearly proved my friend's illegitimacy. I didn't report it to >him. I simply claimed that I'd failed to find marriage information. So he >can smile at my incompetence and I haven't caused him any unnecessary pain. >Much better for him to find out for himself if he wants to.