Thank you, David. My surnames in the vicinity include ELLIS, GIRLING(E) and RACKHAM. It will be interesting to see if I can fit these new names in. I appreciate your work. Carol Bradford > Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 15:58:47 +0000 (UTC) > From: David Gobbitt <davidgobbitt@yahoo.co.uk <mailto:davidgobbitt@yahoo.co.uk>> > Subject: [SFK-UK] Brampton and Linstead Magna landlords and tenants in > 1642 > To: "suffolk@rootsweb.com <mailto:suffolk@rootsweb.com>" <suffolk@rootsweb.com <mailto:suffolk@rootsweb.com>> > Message-ID: <174473468.5338290.1565539127043@mail.yahoo.com <mailto:174473468.5338290.1565539127043@mail.yahoo.com>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Transcripts of the 1642 grant assessments from Brampton and Linstead Magna are now available at RootsChat (https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=817073.0 <https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=817073.0>). > > Brampton has 56 landowners or occupiers with the following surnames: > > ABSOLON, ALDRED, BAKER, BARKLY, BARROW, BASSE, BENNIT, BOHUN, BRAME, BULLIANT, BURROW, BUTTOLPH, COCKERHAM, COLEMAN, CONDLER, CRAMPTON, CROWFOOTE, DAVY, DAWSON, DENNY, DEPDEN, DOWNINGE, DUKE, EDWARD(E)S, ELLIOTT, ELLIS, GARDINER, GARNEYES, GILDE, GIRLINGE, GISLINGHAM, GLADDEN, GODBOLD, HALL, LEE, LEMMAN, LYNGE, MAN(N), MEENE, MILLES, NUNN, PAGE, ROUS, SAYER, SMYTH, THOMPSON, THURSTON, TOOKE, VERDEN, WASE, WOOLNOUGH. > > Linstead Magna has 32: > > ALDRED, BALDRY(E), BARBOR, BRIAN, CLOUGHE, COOKE, CURTEIS, DEW, EVERED, HODGKIN, JACOB, MILL(E)S, PEARE, RABBITT, RACKHAM, REVETT, RICHARDSON, SAMPSON, SAPINCK or SAPINGK, SEAMAN, SMYTH, TRADESCANT, VERDON, WARNER, WELTON. > > ------------------------------
Transcripts of the 1642 grant assessments from Brampton and Linstead Magna are now available at RootsChat (https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=817073.0). Brampton has 56 landowners or occupiers with the following surnames: ABSOLON, ALDRED, BAKER, BARKLY, BARROW, BASSE, BENNIT, BOHUN, BRAME, BULLIANT, BURROW, BUTTOLPH, COCKERHAM, COLEMAN, CONDLER, CRAMPTON, CROWFOOTE, DAVY, DAWSON, DENNY, DEPDEN, DOWNINGE, DUKE, EDWARD(E)S, ELLIOTT, ELLIS, GARDINER, GARNEYES, GILDE, GIRLINGE, GISLINGHAM, GLADDEN, GODBOLD, HALL, LEE, LEMMAN, LYNGE, MAN(N), MEENE, MILLES, NUNN, PAGE, ROUS, SAYER, SMYTH, THOMPSON, THURSTON, TOOKE, VERDEN, WASE, WOOLNOUGH. Linstead Magna has 32: ALDRED, BALDRY(E), BARBOR, BRIAN, CLOUGHE, COOKE, CURTEIS, DEW, EVERED, HODGKIN, JACOB, MILL(E)S, PEARE, RABBITT, RACKHAM, REVETT, RICHARDSON, SAMPSON, SAPINCK or SAPINGK, SEAMAN, SMYTH, TRADESCANT, VERDON, WARNER, WELTON.
Hi, I am now using my new email address of iamianroyal@gmail.com The old blueyonder address will cease to be after 8th August 2019. Cheers, Ian Royal
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 13:36:48 +0100 Pauline & Arthur Kennedy <akpak@balmnet.co.uk> wrote: Hello Pauline, >No, the GRO do not make their own copies of the information received >from local register offices. Indeed. I was conflated two things; Making up the register, and creating the indexes. It seems I can edit my messages quickly or well, but not both. -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)rad never immediately apparent"
That is definitely true, my gt. grandmother was listed as SMITH instead of SOUTH, which meant looking for her marriage, was a real hurdle. This was back in 1984/5, so didn't have the facilities that we now have. It wasn't until I could look at the IGI that I finally picked it up, several months later. Happy hunting, Frances On 06/08/2019 14:23, Michael Walsby wrote: > It might be fair to add that there is always a possibility of human > error when the GRO name _indexes _are produced, so it is always worth > checking for likely mistakes when searching them. > > Michael Walsby >
It might be fair to add that there is always a possibility of human error when the GRO name _indexes _are produced, so it is always worth checking for likely mistakes when searching them. Michael Walsby Le 06/08/2019 à 14:36, Pauline & Arthur Kennedy a écrit : > On 06/08/2019 13:00, Brad Rogers wrote: > >> What the GRO usually send you is a facsimile of the entry they have in >> their registers. To get that far, each RO sent copies of their data to >> the GRO. Clerks then entered the received data into the GRO registers. >> So, multiple transcripts and an equal number of opportunities to make >> mistakes copying. Add a poor handwriting style, and there you have >> it..... > > > No, the GRO do not make their own copies of the information received > from local register offices. > > For church marriages, the GRO records are the quarterly returns, which > are copies made in each parish from their original registers. These > returns are sent to superintendent registrars who collate the > quarterly returns from all the parishes in their district and forward > them to the GRO. > > So what you get on a GRO marriage certificate is a copy from these > quarterly returns - originally produced in the parish. > > Pauline > > _______________________________________________ > Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref > Unsubscribe > https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/suffolk@rootsweb.com > Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: > https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 > Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog > RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal > RootsWeb community --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
On 06/08/2019 13:00, Brad Rogers wrote: > What the GRO usually send you is a facsimile of the entry they have in > their registers. To get that far, each RO sent copies of their data to > the GRO. Clerks then entered the received data into the GRO registers. > So, multiple transcripts and an equal number of opportunities to make > mistakes copying. Add a poor handwriting style, and there you have > it..... No, the GRO do not make their own copies of the information received from local register offices. For church marriages, the GRO records are the quarterly returns, which are copies made in each parish from their original registers. These returns are sent to superintendent registrars who collate the quarterly returns from all the parishes in their district and forward them to the GRO. So what you get on a GRO marriage certificate is a copy from these quarterly returns - originally produced in the parish. Pauline
On Sat, 27 Jul 2019 13:59:06 -0400 Mel Smith <melvynsmith@gmail.com> wrote: Hello Mel, >I guess I am curious as to whether what the GRO attaches is the actual >register image?? or something else What the GRO usually send you is a facsimile of the entry they have in their registers. To get that far, each RO sent copies of their data to the GRO. Clerks then entered the received data into the GRO registers. So, multiple transcripts and an equal number of opportunities to make mistakes copying. Add a poor handwriting style, and there you have it..... Occasionally, if a legible copy of the register entry cannot be made, the GRO will send you a hand written transcript. Despite double(?) checking at the GRO, I have received several certificates with errors in them. Usually, it's the year that's wrong, but sometimes the district or sub district is entered incorrectly. To find out what was written in the relevant RO copy, you'll have to order a certificate from them. Bear in mind though, that not all local ROs send a facsimile of their entry, but may send a transcript instead. Also, some ROs seem to think it's okay to refer you to the GRO, although that has become far less common these days. It used to apply to quite a few of the London ROs. -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)rad never immediately apparent"
When someone marries in a church the details are entered in two identical marriage registers and both registers are signed by all the necessary parties. When full, one register is retained by the church - and in due course deposited at the local archives - while the other copy goes to the local superintendent registrar. At the end of each quarter, clergy have to send returns to the superintendent registrar with copies from their registers of all the marriages which took place in the parish in the preceding 3 months. These quarterly returns are then forwarded to the GRO by superintendent registrars, and it is from these copies that GRO certificates are produced. So what you see on a certificate from the GRO is taken from a manual copy (usually a handwritten copy) of the original register. It is not an image of the original church register, so does not show original signatures and may contain copying errors. Pauline On 27/07/2019 18:59, Mel Smith wrote: > I apologize if I wasn't clear on my request. > > In the actual Certificate from the GRO the name that is written (I assume > by the Minister) looks like HAWSTETT. > You have confirmed that it should be HAWSTEAD. > My question is - in the fiche image of the register on that particular > page - What does the spelling of the parish look like as written by the > Minister? > > I guess I am curious as to whether what the GRO attaches is the actual > register image?? or something else > > Regards > Mel Smith
Well done Bev; it is almost complete. kind regards John Seakins On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 8:10 PM <suffolk-request@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Send SUFFOLK mailing list submissions to suffolk@rootsweb.com > > To subscribe via email send a message with subject subscribe and body > subscribe to suffolk-request@rootsweb.com > > To unsubscribe via email send a message with subject unsubscribe and > body unsubscribe to suffolk-request@rootsweb.com > > You can reach the person managing the list at > suffolk-owner@rootsweb.com > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of SUFFOLK digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. 1891 Suffolk FreeCen Project Update (Bev Howlett) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2019 14:37:06 +0100 > From: Bev Howlett <bev.howlett56@gmail.com> > Subject: [SFK-UK] 1891 Suffolk FreeCen Project Update > To: suffolk@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: > < > CA+WDe3TZpBXQ5hphu_Qc81EXdq-TQLp_c+7KdwJ0RXvm2jKXOA@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Hi > I am writing to provide an update on the 1891 Suffolk FreeCen project. > Another 4 pieces have been uploaded to the on line database and are > now searchable for free on the main freecen site at > http://www.freecen.org.uk > These are pieces > RG121472 Ipswich which covers the parishe of St Margaret > > RG121479 Plomesgate which covers the parishes of Brandeston, > Cretingham, Earl Soham, Easton, Framlingham, Hoo, Kenton, Kettleburgh, > Letheringham, Monewden, North Green, Parham > > RG121481 Plomesgate which covers the parishes of Aldeburgh, Benhall, > Bruisyard, Cransford, Farnham, Friston, Great Glemham, Gromford, > Hazelwood, Little Glemham, Rendham, Saxmundham, Snape , Sternfield, > Stratford St Andrew, Swefling > > RG121494 Mutford which covers the parish of Lowestoft > This means that there are now 317,625 (88.9%) 1891 Suffolk census > records available to search free on line. Many thanks to all the > volunteers who have given their time freely to help the project > without their help this information would not be available. > Best wishes Bev > > -- > Bev Howlett > > FreeCen Co-Ordinator > > Norfolk 1861,1871,1891 > > Suffolk 1841, 1871, 1891 > > Cambridge 1861, 1891 > > Surrey 1871,1891 > > Find Out How To Help > > http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/bevsnorfolkinfo/ > > http://www.freecen.org.uk > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > To contact the SUFFOLK list administrator, send an email to > suffolk-owner@rootsweb.com > > To post a message to the SUFFOLK mailing list -- suffolk@rootsweb.com, > send an email to suffolk@rootsweb.com > __________________________________________________________ > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > suffolk-request@rootsweb.com with the word "unsubscribe" without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the email with no additional text. > > ------------------------------ > > End of SUFFOLK Digest, Vol 14, Issue 53 > *************************************** >
Hi I am writing to provide an update on the 1891 Suffolk FreeCen project. Another 4 pieces have been uploaded to the on line database and are now searchable for free on the main freecen site at http://www.freecen.org.uk These are pieces RG121472 Ipswich which covers the parishe of St Margaret RG121479 Plomesgate which covers the parishes of Brandeston, Cretingham, Earl Soham, Easton, Framlingham, Hoo, Kenton, Kettleburgh, Letheringham, Monewden, North Green, Parham RG121481 Plomesgate which covers the parishes of Aldeburgh, Benhall, Bruisyard, Cransford, Farnham, Friston, Great Glemham, Gromford, Hazelwood, Little Glemham, Rendham, Saxmundham, Snape , Sternfield, Stratford St Andrew, Swefling RG121494 Mutford which covers the parish of Lowestoft This means that there are now 317,625 (88.9%) 1891 Suffolk census records available to search free on line. Many thanks to all the volunteers who have given their time freely to help the project without their help this information would not be available. Best wishes Bev -- Bev Howlett FreeCen Co-Ordinator Norfolk 1861,1871,1891 Suffolk 1841, 1871, 1891 Cambridge 1861, 1891 Surrey 1871,1891 Find Out How To Help http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/bevsnorfolkinfo/ http://www.freecen.org.uk
I apologize if I wasn't clear on my request. In the actual Certificate from the GRO the name that is written (I assume by the Minister) looks like HAWSTETT. You have confirmed that it should be HAWSTEAD. My question is - in the fiche image of the register on that particular page - What does the spelling of the parish look like as written by the Minister? I guess I am curious as to whether what the GRO attaches is the actual register image?? or something else Regards Mel Smith On Sat, 27 Jul 2019 at 02:13, S M Young via SUFFOLK <suffolk@rootsweb.com> wrote: > I don’t understand what it is you’re asking, the parish registers were the > registers for Hawstead, and the form filled in at the church was already > the standard form, read about it here:- > > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Register_Office_for_England_and_Wales > > > Sent from my iPad > > > On 24 Jul 2019, at 19:40, Mel Smith <melvynsmith@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > S M Young replied > > > > Thanks very much for that feedback. That confirms my suspicion. > > > > Could I trouble you again to take another look and see if the name of the > > Parish as written looks like Hawstett? > > I am presuming when the GRO creates a historical marriage certificate > they > > copy and paste the particular entry onto their standard forms. > > > > Mel Smith > > > > On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 at 08:27, S M Young via SUFFOLK < > suffolk@rootsweb.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi - I have some Hawstead parish register on microfiche, checked this > >> afternoon and yes, that marriage was at Hawstead. > >> Hope this helps! > >> > >> Sent from my iPad > >> > >>> On 23 Jul 2019, at 19:26, Mel Smith <melvynsmith@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> In the 1851 census (30 March) Henry CARTER & Mary Ann TALBOT are both > >>> servants at the home of Samuel BARRETT at Hardwick (Extra Parochial) > >>> I presume this is In Bury St Edmunds because for the next 59 years they > >>> live and raise a family on Hardwick Rd Bury St E. > >>> > >>> On 28 Apr 1851 (4 weeks after census) they marry. > >>> The Marriage Certificate from the GRO states that the marriage took > place > >>> in the Parish of Hawstett, Suffolk. But I can't find Hawstett in > Suffolk > >>> and I am guessing it should be Hawstead. > >>> > >>> Does any one have access to the Hawstead All Saint's Parish Records and > >> can > >>> do a check for me to determine if in fact the marriage took place > >> there?-- > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> Mel Smith > >>> Whitby, Ontario, Canada > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref > >> Unsubscribe > >> https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/suffolk@rootsweb.com > >> Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: > >> https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 > >> Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog > >> RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb > >> community > >> > > > > > > -- > > Mel Smith > > Whitby, Ontario, Canada > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref > > Unsubscribe > https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/suffolk@rootsweb.com > > Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: > https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 > > Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog > > RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb > community > > _______________________________________________ > Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref > Unsubscribe > https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/suffolk@rootsweb.com > Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: > https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 > Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog > RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb > community > -- Mel Smith Whitby, Ontario, Canada
I don’t understand what it is you’re asking, the parish registers were the registers for Hawstead, and the form filled in at the church was already the standard form, read about it here:- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Register_Office_for_England_and_Wales Sent from my iPad > On 24 Jul 2019, at 19:40, Mel Smith <melvynsmith@gmail.com> wrote: > > S M Young replied > > Thanks very much for that feedback. That confirms my suspicion. > > Could I trouble you again to take another look and see if the name of the > Parish as written looks like Hawstett? > I am presuming when the GRO creates a historical marriage certificate they > copy and paste the particular entry onto their standard forms. > > Mel Smith > > On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 at 08:27, S M Young via SUFFOLK <suffolk@rootsweb.com> > wrote: > >> Hi - I have some Hawstead parish register on microfiche, checked this >> afternoon and yes, that marriage was at Hawstead. >> Hope this helps! >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On 23 Jul 2019, at 19:26, Mel Smith <melvynsmith@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> In the 1851 census (30 March) Henry CARTER & Mary Ann TALBOT are both >>> servants at the home of Samuel BARRETT at Hardwick (Extra Parochial) >>> I presume this is In Bury St Edmunds because for the next 59 years they >>> live and raise a family on Hardwick Rd Bury St E. >>> >>> On 28 Apr 1851 (4 weeks after census) they marry. >>> The Marriage Certificate from the GRO states that the marriage took place >>> in the Parish of Hawstett, Suffolk. But I can't find Hawstett in Suffolk >>> and I am guessing it should be Hawstead. >>> >>> Does any one have access to the Hawstead All Saint's Parish Records and >> can >>> do a check for me to determine if in fact the marriage took place >> there?-- >>> >>> Thanks >>> Mel Smith >>> Whitby, Ontario, Canada >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref >> Unsubscribe >> https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/suffolk@rootsweb.com >> Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: >> https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 >> Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog >> RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb >> community >> > > > -- > Mel Smith > Whitby, Ontario, Canada > > _______________________________________________ > Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref > Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/suffolk@rootsweb.com > Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 > Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog > RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community
S M Young replied Thanks very much for that feedback. That confirms my suspicion. Could I trouble you again to take another look and see if the name of the Parish as written looks like Hawstett? I am presuming when the GRO creates a historical marriage certificate they copy and paste the particular entry onto their standard forms. Mel Smith On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 at 08:27, S M Young via SUFFOLK <suffolk@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Hi - I have some Hawstead parish register on microfiche, checked this > afternoon and yes, that marriage was at Hawstead. > Hope this helps! > > Sent from my iPad > > > On 23 Jul 2019, at 19:26, Mel Smith <melvynsmith@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > In the 1851 census (30 March) Henry CARTER & Mary Ann TALBOT are both > > servants at the home of Samuel BARRETT at Hardwick (Extra Parochial) > > I presume this is In Bury St Edmunds because for the next 59 years they > > live and raise a family on Hardwick Rd Bury St E. > > > > On 28 Apr 1851 (4 weeks after census) they marry. > > The Marriage Certificate from the GRO states that the marriage took place > > in the Parish of Hawstett, Suffolk. But I can't find Hawstett in Suffolk > > and I am guessing it should be Hawstead. > > > > Does any one have access to the Hawstead All Saint's Parish Records and > can > > do a check for me to determine if in fact the marriage took place > there?-- > > > > Thanks > > Mel Smith > > Whitby, Ontario, Canada > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > _______________________________________________ > Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref > Unsubscribe > https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/suffolk@rootsweb.com > Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: > https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 > Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog > RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb > community > -- Mel Smith Whitby, Ontario, Canada
Hi - I have some Hawstead parish register on microfiche, checked this afternoon and yes, that marriage was at Hawstead. Hope this helps! Sent from my iPad > On 23 Jul 2019, at 19:26, Mel Smith <melvynsmith@gmail.com> wrote: > > In the 1851 census (30 March) Henry CARTER & Mary Ann TALBOT are both > servants at the home of Samuel BARRETT at Hardwick (Extra Parochial) > I presume this is In Bury St Edmunds because for the next 59 years they > live and raise a family on Hardwick Rd Bury St E. > > On 28 Apr 1851 (4 weeks after census) they marry. > The Marriage Certificate from the GRO states that the marriage took place > in the Parish of Hawstett, Suffolk. But I can't find Hawstett in Suffolk > and I am guessing it should be Hawstead. > > Does any one have access to the Hawstead All Saint's Parish Records and can > do a check for me to determine if in fact the marriage took place there?-- > > Thanks > Mel Smith > Whitby, Ontario, Canada > > _______________________________________________ >
In the 1851 census (30 March) Henry CARTER & Mary Ann TALBOT are both servants at the home of Samuel BARRETT at Hardwick (Extra Parochial) I presume this is In Bury St Edmunds because for the next 59 years they live and raise a family on Hardwick Rd Bury St E. On 28 Apr 1851 (4 weeks after census) they marry. The Marriage Certificate from the GRO states that the marriage took place in the Parish of Hawstett, Suffolk. But I can't find Hawstett in Suffolk and I am guessing it should be Hawstead. Does any one have access to the Hawstead All Saint's Parish Records and can do a check for me to determine if in fact the marriage took place there?-- Thanks Mel Smith Whitby, Ontario, Canada
Hi I am writing to provide an update on the 1891 Suffolk FreeCen project. Another piece has been uploaded to the on line database and is now searchable for free on the main freecen site at http://www.freecen.org.uk This is piece RG121477 Woodbridge which covers the parishes of Alderton, Bawdsey, Boyton, Bromeswell, Capel St Andrew, Hollesley, Melton, Ramsholt, Shottisham, Sutton, Ufford This means that there are now 290,787 (82.5%) 1891 Suffolk census records available to search free on line. Many thanks to all the volunteers who have given their time freely to help the project without their help this information would not be available. Best wishes Bev -- Bev Howlett FreeCen Co-Ordinator Norfolk 1861,1871,1891 Suffolk 1841, 1871, 1891 Cambridge 1861, 1891 Surrey 1871,1891 Find Out How To Help http://www.freecen.org.uk
Many thanks to all for replies. Got a photo of the Woodward slab in the Church. David Vesey On 2019-06-17 4:03 a.m., suffolk-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > Send SUFFOLK mailing list submissions to suffolk@rootsweb.com > > To subscribe via email send a message with subject subscribe and body > subscribe to suffolk-request@rootsweb.com > > To unsubscribe via email send a message with subject unsubscribe and > body unsubscribe to suffolk-request@rootsweb.com > > You can reach the person managing the list at > suffolk-owner@rootsweb.com > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of SUFFOLK digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Chattisham :WOODWARD (lummis@btinternet.com) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2019 10:22:51 +0100 > From: <lummis@btinternet.com> > Subject: [SFK-UK] Re: Chattisham :WOODWARD > To: <suffolk@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <000601d52425$127efe00$377cfa00$@btinternet.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > David > > I am not near Chattisham but I wondered if you were aware of Thomas Syer Woodward being mentioned on the gravestone of Stephen Kerridge Woodward - see > https://www.gravestonephotos.com/public/namedetails.php?grave=233206&forenames=Thomas%20Syer&surname=Woodward#image > > Brian > > -----Original Message----- > From: David Vesey <veseybrown@sympatico.ca> > Sent: 15 June 2019 22:30 > To: suffolk-l@rootsweb.com > Subject: [SFK-UK] Chattisham :WOODWARD > > Does anyone on the List attend/live near the *Chattisham Church*. > > One of my guys purportedly has a slab there if someone could have a look around inside one day > > and try to get me a photo. > > Lieut Thomas Syer WOODWARD ( 25 Aug 1789- 24 Aug 1814) - 4th ( > King'sOwn) Reg of Foot...s/o Stephen Kerridge WOODWARD and Ann SYER. > > KIA outside Washington at the Battle of Bladensburg having survived the Peninsular Campaigns with Wellington in France and Spain 1811-14. > > Any help most greatly appreciated > > David Vesey -Toronto Canada > > > > > >
David I am not near Chattisham but I wondered if you were aware of Thomas Syer Woodward being mentioned on the gravestone of Stephen Kerridge Woodward - see https://www.gravestonephotos.com/public/namedetails.php?grave=233206&forenames=Thomas%20Syer&surname=Woodward#image Brian -----Original Message----- From: David Vesey <veseybrown@sympatico.ca> Sent: 15 June 2019 22:30 To: suffolk-l@rootsweb.com Subject: [SFK-UK] Chattisham :WOODWARD Does anyone on the List attend/live near the *Chattisham Church*. One of my guys purportedly has a slab there if someone could have a look around inside one day and try to get me a photo. Lieut Thomas Syer WOODWARD ( 25 Aug 1789- 24 Aug 1814) - 4th ( King'sOwn) Reg of Foot...s/o Stephen Kerridge WOODWARD and Ann SYER. KIA outside Washington at the Battle of Bladensburg having survived the Peninsular Campaigns with Wellington in France and Spain 1811-14. Any help most greatly appreciated David Vesey -Toronto Canada _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/suffolk@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community
Does anyone on the List attend/live near the *Chattisham Church*. One of my guys purportedly has a slab there if someone could have a look around inside one day and try to get me a photo. Lieut Thomas Syer WOODWARD ( 25 Aug 1789- 24 Aug 1814) - 4th ( King'sOwn) Reg of Foot...s/o Stephen Kerridge WOODWARD and Ann SYER. KIA outside Washington at the Battle of Bladensburg having survived the Peninsular Campaigns with Wellington in France and Spain 1811-14. Any help most greatly appreciated David Vesey -Toronto Canada