Hello John There is another Sarah CROFTS registered at Nuneaton in the March qtr of 1844 See FreeBMDS GRO ref 16 401 Possibly the one christened in Chilvers Coton 10 Nov 1844 IGI gives her parents as William Willoughby CROFTS and Elizabeth (Interesting forenames - there is a Willoughby Crofts in Bedworth married to Martha) The child registered in 1846 is Sarah Ann CROFTS. - as it appears on FreeBMDs. Cheers Wendy On a similar topic, only yesterday I received a phone call from the Register office in Nuneaton concerning an 1846 birth certificate I had ordered. I was almost certain that the person was going to be my gggrandmother Sarah CROFTS in Chilvers Coton, and was somewhat disappointed to find that the person on the certificate wasn't the daughter of Sarah's known parents (her father was not named). However, I must compliment the Register office, who not only responded next day to my application, but have also refunded my payment. Of course, had I thought at the time, I might have asked for the certificate to be sent on anyway (and paid the fee), as I would then have found out where in Nuneaton the baby was born (and who her mother was), and perhaps discovered another little branch in my family tree! A little more preparation might have salvaged some results. Sarah and her husband George EVERITT have caused me quite a few headaches, as first they seem to disappear (unmarried) from the 1871 census, then in 1873 they get married miles away in Nottingham. My ggrandmother Elizabeth Alice was born in 1876 in Nuneaton, followed by her brother Thomas George in 1879 somewhere near Stockport, followed by Bertha Kate in 1882 back in Nuneaton. I can't find any record of George after 1881, and the last I see of Sarah is in 1901. A death certificate from 1915 turned out to be another Sarah EVERITT in Nuneaton, and my Sarah could well have lived beyond the end of the War (born mid-1840s), but as yet no positive hits in my searches. Keep up the good work! John Riley Bourne, Lincs ----- Original Message ---- From: Wendy Boland <wendy.boland@bigpond.com> To: JOHN RILEY <john.riley29@btopenworld.com>; warwick@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, 28 August, 2007 11:52:29 PM Subject: Re: [WAR] [EVERITT-UK] Everitts in Warwickshire <<< I have relied heavily on the IGI for most of the pre-1800 ancestry, but am fairly confident of accuracy>>>> Hello Researchers. A word of caution. Always check the original whenever you can! The main problem with using the IGI alone is that you miss any burials. If you have the NBI and it covers the years you need, you may be able to confirm that people did not die as infants- that is if the age at burial was recorded. This is one of the reasons I am concentrating on the Burial records for FreeREG (when I get time) However, nothing beats trawling the PRs films- you get much more insight into the records. For example , you may come across a "dodgy" surname and realise that the person who wrote up the registers at this time period was barely literate and doing his best! ( I have seen marriage records where the couple had signed their names but the clerk had mis-spelt them - He also had atrocious writing). You may note a change of Incumbent - so realise why half a dozen children from one family are suddenly herded into church to be baptised on the same day ! You may note that name of a witness to a marriage that has puzzled you for ages was actually the churchwarden and witnessed a few dozen more marriages and is no relation to your lines at all! I must say that the IGI records from the "controlled extractions" are really very good, but I have found errors in them probably due to difficult handwriting -or faded pages . Any index will contain errors - some due to how the person has interpreted the original , others from typos and human error. ( It is interesting to note how a porrly written census record may be interpreted in several ways by different people- and who is to say at this stage which version is correct?) I rarely look at "Patron Submissions" or LDS member's contributions. on the IGI. Many of these seem to verge on fantasy. One trap for the unwary is to use the IGI as though it is a complete Index. Warwickshire is well covered for certain years but there are many gaps and omissions. You really should not add a name to your tree solely from the records found in the IGI without verification or evidence that Mr X from 40 miles away is your chap, based solely on finding a name and age that look right! Always check the original whenever you can! Good hunting Wendy Warwickshire FreeREG & 1841 & 1861 FreeCEN Coord www.hunimex.com/warwick ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to WARWICK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message