Hi Dennis! I am sure you will find unanimous agreement for transcribing exactly what you see. One could almost argue that to do otherwise is almost a waste of time since it involves guesswork and subjective interpretation. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis White" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2003 9:04 AM Subject: [WSX] Transcribing Parish Records > Hello Folks, > > For some time now, I have been transcribing some of the old Parish Records, so that I can look up things - for those of you who require such lookups - easier. > > > > Being virtually housebound, I don't get to meet people very often. Hence my asking this question here. > > > > In a file that was sent to me recently, someone had transcribed part of a PR, using modern spelling, even for the persons name and occasionally adding "Spelt such and such in the register." > > > > I have tended to keep strictly to the spelling as it appears in the PRs and leave it to the reader to decide what it represents. Example: In 1561: "John the sonne of Willyam Whighte was baptized the Seventeenth daye of Februarye." [Wellow, Som. PRs 1561-1717, p.1, entry 5.] > > > > I believe that this Willyam Whighte could possibly be one of my ancestors. A quick look through the rest of that particular register shows that about a century later, the surname White is being used. > > > > Could someone please advise me as to which way is best - especially in the light that people may wish to refer to it after I start pushing up the daisies. > > > > Many thanks, > > > > Dennis > Cwmbran, S. Wales > [email protected] > Emails scanned for viruses both incoming and outgoing > by Norton Antivirus 2002. > > > ==== WESSEX-PLUS Mailing List ==== > Looking for a modern UK map site - try these......... > http://uk8.multimap.com/map/places.cgi http://www.streetmap.co.uk/ > http://www.ordsvy.gov.uk/getamap/getamap_index.htm > >

Dennis go for original spelling. Anything else is not transcribing. Let your grateful readers make their own minds up. Harry ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis White" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2003 9:04 AM Subject: [WSX] Transcribing Parish Records > Hello Folks, > > For some time now, I have been transcribing some of the old Parish Records, so that I can look up things - for those of you who require such lookups - easier. > > > > Being virtually housebound, I don't get to meet people very often. Hence my asking this question here. > > > > In a file that was sent to me recently, someone had transcribed part of a PR, using modern spelling, even for the persons name and occasionally adding "Spelt such and such in the register." > > > > I have tended to keep strictly to the spelling as it appears in the PRs and leave it to the reader to decide what it represents. Example: In 1561: "John the sonne of Willyam Whighte was baptized the Seventeenth daye of Februarye." [Wellow, Som. PRs 1561-1717, p.1, entry 5.] > > > > I believe that this Willyam Whighte could possibly be one of my ancestors. A quick look through the rest of that particular register shows that about a century later, the surname White is being used. > > > > Could someone please advise me as to which way is best - especially in the light that people may wish to refer to it after I start pushing up the daisies. > > > > Many thanks, > > > > Dennis > Cwmbran, S. Wales > [email protected] > Emails scanned for viruses both incoming and outgoing > by Norton Antivirus 2002. > > > ==== WESSEX-PLUS Mailing List ==== > Looking for a modern UK map site - try these......... > http://uk8.multimap.com/map/places.cgi http://www.streetmap.co.uk/ > http://www.ordsvy.gov.uk/getamap/getamap_index.htm > >

Hi Dennis I agree with Harry - Do as you have always done and go for the original otherwise you are interpreting not transcribing. regards Heather > From: "Harry Tadd" <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [WSX] Transcribing Parish Records > > Dennis > go for original spelling. Anything else is not transcribing. Let your > grateful readers make their own minds up. > Harry > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dennis White" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2003 9:04 AM > Subject: [WSX] Transcribing Parish Records > > > > Hello Folks, > > > > For some time now, I have been transcribing some of the old Parish > Records, so that I can look up things - for those of you who require such > lookups - easier. > > > > > > > > Being virtually housebound, I don't get to meet people very often. Hence > my asking this question here. > > > > > > > > In a file that was sent to me recently, someone had transcribed part of a > PR, using modern spelling, even for the persons name and occasionally adding > "Spelt such and such in the register." > > > > > > > > I have tended to keep strictly to the spelling as it appears in the PRs > and leave it to the reader to decide what it represents. Example: In 1561: > "John the sonne of Willyam Whighte was baptized the Seventeenth daye of > Februarye." [Wellow, Som. PRs 1561-1717, p.1, entry 5.] > > > > > > > > I believe that this Willyam Whighte could possibly be one of my ancestors. > A quick look through the rest of that particular register shows that about a > century later, the surname White is being used. > > > > > > > > Could someone please advise me as to which way is best - especially in the > light that people may wish to refer to it after I start pushing up the > daisies. > > > > > > > > Many thanks, > > > > > > > > Dennis I transcribe for FreeCen - Interested? - Check Out the Website - http://freecen.rootsweb.com __________________________________________________________________________ Join Freeserve http://www.freeserve.com/time/ Winner of the 2003 Internet Service Providers' Association awards for Best Unmetered ISP and Best Consumer Application.

Hello Folks, For some time now, I have been transcribing some of the old Parish Records, so that I can look up things - for those of you who require such lookups - easier. Being virtually housebound, I don't get to meet people very often. Hence my asking this question here. In a file that was sent to me recently, someone had transcribed part of a PR, using modern spelling, even for the persons name and occasionally adding "Spelt such and such in the register." I have tended to keep strictly to the spelling as it appears in the PRs and leave it to the reader to decide what it represents. Example: In 1561: "John the sonne of Willyam Whighte was baptized the Seventeenth daye of Februarye." [Wellow, Som. PRs 1561-1717, p.1, entry 5.] I believe that this Willyam Whighte could possibly be one of my ancestors. A quick look through the rest of that particular register shows that about a century later, the surname White is being used. Could someone please advise me as to which way is best - especially in the light that people may wish to refer to it after I start pushing up the daisies. Many thanks, Dennis Cwmbran, S. Wales [email protected] Emails scanned for viruses both incoming and outgoing by Norton Antivirus 2002.

Hi Dennis We have transcribed many Hampshire PR's and these are online at www.knightsure.co.uk/knightroots/genealogy We always transcribe as is - otherwise it is not a transcription but an interpretaion. If we can't read something, we put dashes or ??? We came across a site recently www.british-genealogy.com where there is a section on transcribing. Take care Linda & Tony

Hello list, My Wiltshire name interests are Clark, Ellis, and Fishlock - would be interested to hear from anyone researching the same. Best wishes, Jane

I am looking for the DAY family who were born in Weare Somerset. They would have been born between 1805 and 1829. I seem to have lost them. Emanuel, Edwin, Charles, George, William. Hannah, Emma. Their could have been more of them as it was a large family. Any help would be appreciated. Carolyn

Hi there Any information on James BAILEY, perfumer, who married an Isabel c1785? Isabel was born in 1764 may have been an ALEXANDER. James and Isabel had a son William and the family moved to Taunton, Som. in 1800. Cheers Doug Bailey 348 Heretaunga Street West Hastings, New Zealand. Ph: 0064-6-876 8787

Hi, I am new at this but will give it a try. I am looking for the ancestors of Joseph Wood and Hannah Stockwell of Brimpsfield and Caudlegreen, Gloucester, England. Joseph was christened in December of 1815. Hannah's father and mother were Samuel and Sophia (Grimes) Stockwell. Sophia's father's name Samuel and her mother's name was Hannah. That is all I know. Anyone have any information they would share? Thanks, Delores

I have had some response with regard to my plea for info on Spye Park House which stood near Bromham in Wiltshire, and was owned by the Spicer family until destroyed by fire sometime around 1974. I'm finding it hard to get information on how the fire was and would be anxious to know if anybody who had not seen my initial posting had any relevant information on the house. I am also interested in the changing faces of the house from the time it was sold to the Spicers from the Bayntuns, when I believe it was destroyed by fire and rebuilt again to eventually meet the same fate. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks GERRY

I am trying to trace the HOLDING Family of Kingsclere and have found a marriage to a member of the Lutyens family, namely:- LOUISA FRANCES LUTYENS born Pangbourne, Berks about 1828, who married John Carter HOLDING at St. Andrew, Clifton (Bristol) on 15 Oct 1851. John was a member of the Kingsclere Holdings family whose roots go back to the early 1600s in Kingsclere. The Holdings lived at Elm Grove, Kingsclere, Beenham Court, Headly (now Cheam Hawtreys School) and Hide End House, Brimpton, Berks. I know of Sir Edwin Lutyens, a very prominent architect, and there are plenty of websites devoted to his work but I can find very little about his parents or other ancestors. I did find that:- Charles Augustus Henry Lutyens was his father. Charles A. H. was born ca 1829. He served in the Army and rose to rank of Captain before leaving the army to become a painter. Among other accomplishments he helped design the lions in Trafalgar Square. Noted for his portraits of race horses, Charles married Mary GALLWEY and had thirteen children, Edwin being the 10th. It looks as though Charles had a brother (or cousin) Englebert, also a painter. The 1881 census has them both in London and gives birth place of both as Stall, Reading. Where is Stall? I've also found a Captain Englebert Lutyens who was Orderly Officer at Longwood, St. Helena and a collection of his letters from Feb 1820-Nov 1823 have been published. Longwood was Napoleon Bonaparte's home on St Helena until his death. Is there any connection between this Englebert and Charles A. H. & Englebert and possible parents Charles Lutyens and Frances Jane FLUDGER who were married at Pangbourne on 26 May 1824. The place and date suggest these two could be the parents of Louisa, Charles Augustus and Englebert but I have no means of checking. Charles and Frances both died at Southcote House, Reading and are buried in London Road Cemetary, Reading. Did the Lutyens family own Southcote House? There is no mention of this in the brief reference to the house I found on the web. John and Louisa Holding must have left almost immediately after their wedding for The Cape of Good Hope, S.A. as their first child was born there in 1853. 20 years later the family are back in the UK and living in Southampton where the last of their 7 known children was born. John and Louisa are recorded in Portsmouth in the 1901 census, he was of independant means and had five un-married daughters in household aged from 30-49. John & Louisa both died in Southsea in the early 1900s and are buried at St. Paul, Ashford Hill (near Kingsclere) next to John's father, the Rev. John Holding who was Vicar of Ashampstead, Berks until his death in 1870. The Rev John's wife Susannah died at Pangbourne in 1846 and was buried at Holy Trinity, Reading. Lutyens doesn't seem to be a very common surname in England and isn't even listed in the National Genealogical Survey or Rootsweb Surnames listings. Possibly of German origin and I wonder if Captain Englebert Lutyens was a member of the King's German Legion who fought at Waterloo. I shall be trying to get hold of a copy of his letters to see if they throw any light on his family connections. -- John Lewis <jayellatntlworlddotcom> from Bournemouth, Dorset, UK. using Debian GNU/Linux and GeneWeb genealogy software

The link should only be the part in quote marks, ie www.domesdaybook.co.uk Regards Graham ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 7:30 PM Subject: [WSX] Domesday Book online > > Hi , Listers! > > AOL produced this website. I thought it might be of interest..... > > <A HREF="www.domesdaybook.co.uk">domesdaybk</A> > >

Interests - JONES. BOARD - JONES.Somerset. Monmouth. London. EWENS. ARMITAGE. Shorne.Kent. Liss. Hampshire. ( 1800's to 1930 )

Hi , Listers! AOL produced this website. I thought it might be of interest..... <A HREF="www.domesdaybook.co.uk">domesdaybk</A> Just click on tne link. Best regards to all kindred spirits! Pat Oliver ....... who is still researching : OLIVER........Cornwall STATTER/S.......Lancs.,Cheshire LOWCOCK/LAYCOCK....Blacko,Barrowford,Trawden,Burnley,B'pool (all Lancs) RAINSFORD/RAYNSFORD....Berks.,Northants.,Lancs.(14/15C) WALROND....Devon,West Indies CRANSTOUN......N Yorks,Scotland JOSLING....Herts. TREMBEATH....Cornwall (Liskeard & E Looe) LYNE...... " " HAMPSON.....Glossop/Whitfield(Derbys.), Hull(1850/60s), Chadderton (Lancs.) WARHURST.... " /Hayfield " TOBY....Kenton,Starcross,Exeter(St Sidwell),East Stonehouse(all Devon) and Saltash (Cornwall) FOULDS......Blacko,Colne,Burnley (all Lancs)

To: Connie, Clifford, Paul, David, Eddie, Alan, Christine, John, Lillian and Karena - who replied directly And also to: Mike Dahlberg, Stan Mapstone and the Googlin' Guru Himself - Hugh Watkins - who all replied directly to the List Thank you all for your replies to my query. I hope that you don't mind a collective "thank you" note. The consensus of opinion on this question is that, put simply (yes, Clifford, I know that you warned of the risk of oversimplification!) Tenants in Common for a property (or any other thing, for that matter) may bequeath their share in the property to an heir, without reference to the holder(s) of the other share(s). On the other hand, a property held in Joint Tenancy passes automatically and intact on the decease of one of the Tenants to the other Tenant or Tenants. Put another way, from the view point of the property, where the property is held by Joint Tenants, the property remains as an undivided single unit, whereas if held by Tenants in Common, the property is in several parts that are held by the individual shareholders, although the shares are not demarcated in any way. If I have inadvertently misrepresented your views, then I apologise for that. Thank you all again for your help. I have added your names to the list of acknowledgements in the book that I am currently writing on my family history, for which the wills mentioned in my initial email request are most relevant. Regards Richard Richard J. Prankerd, PhD Senior Lecturer Phone: INT + (613) 9903-9517 Victorian College of Pharmacy Fax: INT + (613) 9903-9583 (A Faculty of Monash University) email: [email protected] 381 Royal Parade Parkville VIC 3052 AUSTRALIA Researching: PRANKERD and variants in Dorset, Somerset, Wilts, Bristol, London, Hamps and Berks, not to mention Australia I use Archive CD Books to help with my research http://www.archivecdbooks.org

Hello all I am one of three Tenants in Common. We own our house in different proportions. Each of us can pass our part on to our heirs but we have had safeguards written into the Agreement to protect each other. A will is a must!! Joy

I think it's actually the other way round! Nicola in London -----Original Message----- From: David Ashmore [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 06 April 2003 00:19 To: Subject: Re: [WSX] Tenants in Common Hi Richard I believe you will find this applies to anything which is jointly owned, i.e. Bank Account, Mortgage, Property & etc. 1. Tenants in Common means on the death of either party the survivor automatically becomes the sole owner of the entire asset. Or if more than 2 people then the deceased share is split between the remaining parties. 2. Joint Tenants means that on the death of either party the deceased person's share can be passed on to another person , in a will for example. Hope that makes sense David ==== WESSEX-PLUS Mailing List ==== Somerset genealogy: http://www.genuki.org.uk/indexes/SOMcontents.html http://www.somerset.gov.uk/archives/somhome.htm BBCi at http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system, do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this.

Hi all Just to let you know: 1. Another 810 names have been added (all non IGI!) for baptisms at St Lukes, Forton, Gosport which was in Brockhurst, Gosport and was a mission chapel to St John the Evangelist, Forton. Years covered are 1900 to 1913. 2. We have added some additional church data to the Gosport pages (full name of church and date formed etc)....will be updating other parishes as when we do further updates. 3. Don't forget Knightroots is FULLY searchable with a search engine on the home page. Go to www.knightsure.co.uk/knightroots/genealogy What are you waiting for? Take care Linda & Tony

This question looks simple but is extremely complicated. If you have access to an academic library, I recommend a book called Megarry & Wade, the Law of Real Property, and especially the first chapter which gives a good overview of the law of property before 1925. Sir Robert Megarry's text is easy to read and authoritative : he was until retirement Vice-Chancellor of the Chancery Division of the High Court. The practical difference is this, at the risk of oversimplification: If several people are joint tenants and one dies, the property accrues to the others and none of it to his heir-at-law. If they are tenants-in-common, each person's share (which need not be an equal share) devolves on his heir at death, either by will or on intestacy. Interests of a tenant in common are also referred to as undivided shares but this phrase is hardly helpful. and is better avoided. The complexity of the law was such that in 1922 Parliament enacted the Law of Property Act 1922, replaced by the Law of Property Act 1925 before it came into force, to effect radical changes in England and Wales with effect from 1 1 1926, amongst which was to abolish (by section 1(6)) the tenancy in common subsisting as a legal estate, though it can still exist and often does as a beneficial interest under a trust. However this is to get into very deep waters, and is of little relevance to the question asked. Needless to say the law of Scotland is and always has been totally different. the 1925 reforms did not apply to Ireland nor, I believe, to the states and territories of Australia : it may be that a book on real property in Victoria may help. This is a very short answer but I hope it helps. Clifford Payton > From: Richard Prankerd <[email protected]> > Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 07:57:45 +1000 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [WSX] Tenants in Common > Resent-From: [email protected] > Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 15:00:00 -0700 > > List: > > I am in the process of transcribing a number of 18th century wills > (from the PRO-Online website) and have repeatedly encountered the > following statement: > > "to be divided equally between them share and share alike as Tenants > in Common and not as joint Tenants " > > Can someone please explain to me the difference between "Tenants in > Common" and "joint Tenants". This has been applied in situations > where the number of beneficiaries is anywhere from two to six. > > Many thanks > Richard > Richard J. Prankerd, PhD > Senior Lecturer Phone: INT + (613) 9903-9517 > Victorian College of Pharmacy Fax: INT + (613) 9903-9583 > (A Faculty of Monash University) email: [email protected] > 381 Royal Parade > Parkville VIC 3052 > AUSTRALIA > > Researching: > PRANKERD and variants in Dorset, Somerset, Wilts, Bristol, London, > Hamps and Berks, not to mention Australia > I use Archive CD Books to help with my research > http://www.archivecdbooks.org > > > ==== WESSEX-PLUS Mailing List ==== > To unsubscribe from list send the command "unsubscribe" to: > [email protected] (if in mail mode) or > [email protected] (if in digest mode.) >

List: I am in the process of transcribing a number of 18th century wills (from the PRO-Online website) and have repeatedly encountered the following statement: "to be divided equally between them share and share alike as Tenants in Common and not as joint Tenants " Can someone please explain to me the difference between "Tenants in Common" and "joint Tenants". This has been applied in situations where the number of beneficiaries is anywhere from two to six. Many thanks Richard Richard J. Prankerd, PhD Senior Lecturer Phone: INT + (613) 9903-9517 Victorian College of Pharmacy Fax: INT + (613) 9903-9583 (A Faculty of Monash University) email: [email protected] 381 Royal Parade Parkville VIC 3052 AUSTRALIA Researching: PRANKERD and variants in Dorset, Somerset, Wilts, Bristol, London, Hamps and Berks, not to mention Australia I use Archive CD Books to help with my research http://www.archivecdbooks.org