Hi Jean, The only thing you could try, that I know of, is to search the GRO indexes of Overseas BMDs on the findmypast website, this is a pay per view site so you would need a subscription of one kind or the other. Go there and look under the Births Marriage and Deaths tab near the top of the page. Click on the link and you will need to scroll down the next page to the section on Deaths and Burials. Follow the links to find the right link for either Service deaths or Army deaths etc., for a suitable span of years. If he died while still in the army then is death should have been registered with the British Consul etc., and eventually the registration sent back to the UK to appear in the GRO index of Oveseas events. I believe that is roughly how it worked. Failing that you might find that his marriage and the birth of his daughter were registered only locally to where they took place and you would need to contact the relevant German BMD/Civil Registration office or it's equvaent if you can find out where these events took place. Perhaps a Rootsweb list covering Germany would help, the common language of all rootsweb lists is supposed to be English, though you may find the odd foreign language message creeping in here and there. It could be well worth a try though, especially if you know whereabouts in Germany the child was born or the couple were married, you may find a list for that particular County/Province or equivalent. in Germany. Maybe someone on such a list could find the family in the German census, if such a thing exists and is in the public domain and maybe on line. The subscribers of such a list should be able to to give you more guidance on this subject, perhaps, than the WRY list subscribers at least. Go to the rootsweb site at Rootsweb.com and look under the heading Mailing Lists, you should then be able to search for a list for Germany, or the place/Province where you believe these events took place. You can then search or browse you chosen list's archives to see the sort of discussions that take place on the list. Regards Jenny DeAngelis Spain. <<One of my uncles (HAROLD FOX b. 1927 Dewsbury) was in the army and married a German national (VAULTRAUT SCHMIDT (SCHMIT?) while serving in Germany. They had one child, a girl named MARVIN. The family lived in Germany and we only met the wife and child once when they came over to stay with us in the 1950 - 60s. Harold died in Borneo in 60s - 70s whilst still serving in the army. We never had any other contact with the family and none of Harold's siblings are still living. Having lost contact with the children of all Harold's siblings, I don't know anyone who would know what happened to the wife and child. Presumably they stayed on living in Germany. How would I find the marriage and death records for Harold since they didn't take place in this country? Does anyone know of a website where such records will be traceable? Thanks.>>

Brenda, how very very kind of you. I live in London so can't take advantage of the free resources back home. It's great to have my conclusions so comprehensively confirmed but I don't suppose we'll ever know why Jane was put down as Boothman rather than Lawson. Does one forget that a member of the family was married only a few months earlier particularly if she is heavily pregnant?! Thank you very much Cheers Sue -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Genlist2 Sent: 20 January 2010 10:05 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! Sue, Lancashire Record Office have the original registers and microfiche copies for St Mary's Gisburn, and the official registers are held at Lancashire Register Office at Preston, not at Harrogate. Post 1974, Gisburn, although in Yorkshire, came under administration by Lancashire. I checked the marriage at Lancashire Record Office yesterday. It is as follows Entry Number 179. Parish Church, Gisburn, 24th December 1850 Joseph LAWSON, full age, Bachelor, Farmer, Huggin Ing, Father = Thomas LAWSON, Farmer Jane BOOTHMAN, full age, Spinster, --- Gisburn Coates, Father = James BOOTHMAN, Farmer Both signed their names. Married by Licence, by R Jones, Vicar. Witnesses Adam LAWSON, and Elizabeth BOOTHMAN You can get a print from the microfiche for only 50p instead of having to pay £7 for a certificate. They also had the microfiche at Colne Library where you could also get a print, but the library has just been "modernized" and only re-opened two weeks ago, so I don't know if they still have the same resources. They certainly have a lot less books now. It seems to be the fashion that libraries are doing away with books and fitting computers everywhere. Regards Brenda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Regan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 3:19 AM Subject: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! >I have been puzzling over an entry in the 1851 census (the actual image) for > the two participants in a marriage, Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson. Until > I saw it, I had so much evidence as to the parentage of both Jane and Joseph > that I had no doubt that I had identified the correct couple. According to > Ancestry, Lancashire BMD and Free BMD the said Jane and Joseph were married > in Gisburne Oct-Dec 1850 but of course the fathers are not given. I have the > Gisburne microfiche for the period but would you believe, although Jane and > Joseph are in the index under the same number, that page of 15 entries is > missing...aargh! > > > > This is the 1851 entry: > > > > 1851 Gisburne Cotes Farm > > > Boothman James Head,Widr, 60 Farmer of 80 acres Waddington > Jane Dau, 26 unmarried Farmer's Daughter Downham > Thomas Son Farmer's Son Downham > Hannah Dau, 14 Farmer's Daughter Downham > William Son, 11 Gisburne > > > Joseph Son, 7 Gisburne > > > Lawson Joseph Visitor, 26 Farmer's Son Gargrave > > > > > > So here we have an unmarried Jane Boothman being visited by Joseph Lawson a > married farmer's son, who I am certain has been her husband since the last > quarter of 1850. It seems an unlikely mistake for any of the family to make > or maybe whoever gave the information was drunk! > > > > As an example of the evidence I have, Jane's mother's maiden name was Hayes > and Jane had a younger brother, Thomas Hayes Boothman, and named one of her > own sons, William Hayes Lawson. Also Jane and Joseph's eldest daughter Mary > Anne Lawson was born at Gisburne Coates in May 1851 (where Jane's widowed > father, was still living). > > > > There are so many certificates I really need to buy and I don't want to have > to spend money on one when I am 99.99% convinced I already have the answers! > > > > > Can anyone explain this strange census entry? Any thoughts or ideas would > be very much appreciated. > > > > Cheers > > > > Sue > > > > > > > Some useful websites - > FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ > FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki > http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > message > Some useful websites - FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2634 - Release Date: 01/20/10 09:12:00

Well, it is true that you learn something new every day! I did think that the enumerator's filled out the forms themselves but as you point out it would have been impossible. I can understand too how the enumerator could have mistaken what was written in the marital status column. But I don't think he could confuse Boothman for Lawson. Maybe whoever filled the schedule in forgot that Jane was now married! And thanks of pointing out that Joseph is down as the grandson. I have in fact found the baptismal entry for Joseph and he is the illegitimate child of Jane. I don't know whether you have seen Brenda's message but it is now official that visited Joseph was indeed Jane's husband. What an amazing list this is: you're also helpful. Many thanks indeed Sue -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jenny De Angelis Sent: 19 January 2010 11:57 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! HI Sue, you wrote:- <<Your theory about younger children filling out the schedule doesn't hold water though! The enumerator always filled in the form and were chosen for their legible handwriting.>> Can you imagine how long it would take an Enumerator to cover some of the EDs in large towns if he had to stop at every house in each one of his EDs., to fill out the schedule of each household? I agree he might help out with households where no one could read or write but it would be impossible to do the same in every single house he visited to collect information. I have cut and pasted this paragraph below from the National Archives pages on the subject of the Census for England & Wales, with regard to the Enumerator and the Schedules. It should explain my thinking. ""Each registrar's sub-district was divided into a number of enumeration districts, each of which was the responsibility of an enumerator. The enumerator delivered a form known as a schedule to each household a few days before census night, and collected the completed schedules the day after. The schedules were then sorted, and the details copied into the census enumerators' books. It is these books which have survived for 1841 to 1901 and which can be seen today online or on microform. The original householders' schedules were later destroyed with the exception of 1911. Special schedules were provided for vessels and institutions. "" The enumerator copied the information from the household schedules onto his own forms, which we know as Folios, and then made up each ED into a book by sewing them together. This is why I said in my message that maybe the handwriting was not clear on the household schedule and so the enumerator put Jane down as unmarried, because he thought that it was it said for her. Or else the person in the household filling out the schedule made the error. You know yourself how difficult some of the writing on the Census folios we view on line can be, and that is the handwriting of the Enumerators, chosen as you say for their legible handwriting! You can imagine how difficult some of the schedules must have been to read when people who didn't normally have to do much reading & writing, who were perhaps barely literate in some cases. This is why I suggested that perhaps one of the children filled out the schedule for their father, because he perhaps could not read and write. I know what you mean about illegitimate grandchildred being passed off as children of the grandparents, I have come across one of those in one of my lines. The mother married a year or two after the birth, I don't know if it was to the father or not. But the child stayed with the grandparents, he is down as grandson in each census, and gave his grandfather's name and occupation as his father on his marriage so probably never found out the truth of the matter. The grandmother was just young enough at the time to have had a late baby. In your Boothman 1851census entry that little boy Joseph aged 7 is shown as Grandson not son as you quoted, the Gran part of Grandson is written slightly to the left of the realtionship column. If Jane and Joseph Lawson did not marry until 1850 then that little boy Joseph, if he is the son of Jane, would be shown as Boothman and not Lawson on his birth certificate. There are 3 Joseph Boothman births between 1842 & 1851 at Clitheroe shown on freeBMD, 2 in March & Sept. Qtrs 1844 and 1 in March Qtr1845. Not one Joseph Lawson born in the same period in Clitheroe turned up. This if little Joseph was born at Gisburn as stated in the 1851. Regards Jenny DeAngelis Spain. Some useful websites - FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.149/2630 - Release Date: 01/19/10 17:49:00

Hi Jean, You may be able to find some information on the Familyrelatives.com website. They have records for overseas bmds, although whether they cover the period of years or geographical area you need, I'm not sure. Some of the records are free to search, however you will have to subscribe to access others. http://www.familyrelatives.com/information/info_detail.php?id=100 Hope it helps! Regards, Sally ---------------------------------------- > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:41:35 +0000 > Subject: [WRY] Advice please on finding overseas (army) BMD records > > Hi everyone > > One of my uncles (HAROLD FOX b. 1927 Dewsbury) was in the army and married a German national (VAULTRAUT SCHMIDT (SCHMIT?) while serving in Germany. They had one child, a girl named MARVIN. The family lived in Germany and we only met the wife and child once when they came over to stay with us in the 1950 - 60s. Harold died in Borneo in 60s - 70s whilst still serving in the army. We never had any other contact with the family and none of Harold's siblings are still living. Having lost contact with the children of all Harold's siblings, I don't know anyone who would know what happened to the wife and child. Presumably they stayed on living in Germany. How would I find the marriage and death records for Harold since they didn't take place in this country? Does anyone know of a website where such records will be traceable? Thanks. > > Jean > > > > Some useful websites - > FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ > FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki > http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi everyone One of my uncles (HAROLD FOX b. 1927 Dewsbury) was in the army and married a German national (VAULTRAUT SCHMIDT (SCHMIT?) while serving in Germany. They had one child, a girl named MARVIN. The family lived in Germany and we only met the wife and child once when they came over to stay with us in the 1950 - 60s. Harold died in Borneo in 60s - 70s whilst still serving in the army. We never had any other contact with the family and none of Harold's siblings are still living. Having lost contact with the children of all Harold's siblings, I don't know anyone who would know what happened to the wife and child. Presumably they stayed on living in Germany. How would I find the marriage and death records for Harold since they didn't take place in this country? Does anyone know of a website where such records will be traceable? Thanks. Jean

Sue, Lancashire Record Office have the original registers and microfiche copies for St Mary's Gisburn, and the official registers are held at Lancashire Register Office at Preston, not at Harrogate. Post 1974, Gisburn, although in Yorkshire, came under administration by Lancashire. I checked the marriage at Lancashire Record Office yesterday. It is as follows Entry Number 179. Parish Church, Gisburn, 24th December 1850 Joseph LAWSON, full age, Bachelor, Farmer, Huggin Ing, Father = Thomas LAWSON, Farmer Jane BOOTHMAN, full age, Spinster, --- Gisburn Coates, Father = James BOOTHMAN, Farmer Both signed their names. Married by Licence, by R Jones, Vicar. Witnesses Adam LAWSON, and Elizabeth BOOTHMAN You can get a print from the microfiche for only 50p instead of having to pay £7 for a certificate. They also had the microfiche at Colne Library where you could also get a print, but the library has just been "modernized" and only re-opened two weeks ago, so I don't know if they still have the same resources. They certainly have a lot less books now. It seems to be the fashion that libraries are doing away with books and fitting computers everywhere. Regards Brenda ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Regan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 3:19 AM Subject: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! >I have been puzzling over an entry in the 1851 census (the actual image) for > the two participants in a marriage, Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson. Until > I saw it, I had so much evidence as to the parentage of both Jane and Joseph > that I had no doubt that I had identified the correct couple. According to > Ancestry, Lancashire BMD and Free BMD the said Jane and Joseph were married > in Gisburne Oct-Dec 1850 but of course the fathers are not given. I have the > Gisburne microfiche for the period but would you believe, although Jane and > Joseph are in the index under the same number, that page of 15 entries is > missing...aargh! > > > > This is the 1851 entry: > > > > 1851 Gisburne Cotes Farm > > > Boothman James Head,Widr, 60 Farmer of 80 acres Waddington > Jane Dau, 26 unmarried Farmer's Daughter Downham > Thomas Son Farmer's Son Downham > Hannah Dau, 14 Farmer's Daughter Downham > William Son, 11 Gisburne > > > Joseph Son, 7 Gisburne > > > Lawson Joseph Visitor, 26 Farmer's Son Gargrave > > > > > > So here we have an unmarried Jane Boothman being visited by Joseph Lawson a > married farmer's son, who I am certain has been her husband since the last > quarter of 1850. It seems an unlikely mistake for any of the family to make > or maybe whoever gave the information was drunk! > > > > As an example of the evidence I have, Jane's mother's maiden name was Hayes > and Jane had a younger brother, Thomas Hayes Boothman, and named one of her > own sons, William Hayes Lawson. Also Jane and Joseph's eldest daughter Mary > Anne Lawson was born at Gisburne Coates in May 1851 (where Jane's widowed > father, was still living). > > > > There are so many certificates I really need to buy and I don't want to have > to spend money on one when I am 99.99% convinced I already have the answers! > > > > > Can anyone explain this strange census entry? Any thoughts or ideas would > be very much appreciated. > > > > Cheers > > > > Sue > > > > > > > Some useful websites - > FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ > FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki > http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the > message >

HI Sue, you wrote:- <<Your theory about younger children filling out the schedule doesn't hold water though! The enumerator always filled in the form and were chosen for their legible handwriting.>> Can you imagine how long it would take an Enumerator to cover some of the EDs in large towns if he had to stop at every house in each one of his EDs., to fill out the schedule of each household? I agree he might help out with households where no one could read or write but it would be impossible to do the same in every single house he visited to collect information. I have cut and pasted this paragraph below from the National Archives pages on the subject of the Census for England & Wales, with regard to the Enumerator and the Schedules. It should explain my thinking. ""Each registrar's sub-district was divided into a number of enumeration districts, each of which was the responsibility of an enumerator. The enumerator delivered a form known as a schedule to each household a few days before census night, and collected the completed schedules the day after. The schedules were then sorted, and the details copied into the census enumerators' books. It is these books which have survived for 1841 to 1901 and which can be seen today online or on microform. The original householders' schedules were later destroyed with the exception of 1911. Special schedules were provided for vessels and institutions. "" The enumerator copied the information from the household schedules onto his own forms, which we know as Folios, and then made up each ED into a book by sewing them together. This is why I said in my message that maybe the handwriting was not clear on the household schedule and so the enumerator put Jane down as unmarried, because he thought that it was it said for her. Or else the person in the household filling out the schedule made the error. You know yourself how difficult some of the writing on the Census folios we view on line can be, and that is the handwriting of the Enumerators, chosen as you say for their legible handwriting! You can imagine how difficult some of the schedules must have been to read when people who didn't normally have to do much reading & writing, who were perhaps barely literate in some cases. This is why I suggested that perhaps one of the children filled out the schedule for their father, because he perhaps could not read and write. I know what you mean about illegitimate grandchildred being passed off as children of the grandparents, I have come across one of those in one of my lines. The mother married a year or two after the birth, I don't know if it was to the father or not. But the child stayed with the grandparents, he is down as grandson in each census, and gave his grandfather's name and occupation as his father on his marriage so probably never found out the truth of the matter. The grandmother was just young enough at the time to have had a late baby. In your Boothman 1851census entry that little boy Joseph aged 7 is shown as Grandson not son as you quoted, the Gran part of Grandson is written slightly to the left of the realtionship column. If Jane and Joseph Lawson did not marry until 1850 then that little boy Joseph, if he is the son of Jane, would be shown as Boothman and not Lawson on his birth certificate. There are 3 Joseph Boothman births between 1842 & 1851 at Clitheroe shown on freeBMD, 2 in March & Sept. Qtrs 1844 and 1 in March Qtr1845. Not one Joseph Lawson born in the same period in Clitheroe turned up. This if little Joseph was born at Gisburn as stated in the 1851. Regards Jenny DeAngelis Spain.

Hi Jenny What a wealth of theories! Some I can answer, some have given me great food for thought. I can't find Joseph in the 1841 census: he wasn't living with his parents who owned the farm next to Jane's family. He could out of necessity have been working and living elsewhere and only able to see Jane, his wife. As you say this would explain why he was written down as a visitor. Jane may not have been able to share Joseph's 'digs' and or maybe have preferred to be with her family for the birth of their first child. The baby, a girl, was born there in May. Your theory about younger children filling out the schedule doesn't hold water though! The enumerator always filled in the form and were chosen for their legible handwriting. I am beginning to think with all the information and ideas presented that the mistake may well have been that of the enumerator. Unmarried pregnant girls and their families went to great lengths to hide the pregnancy and the child was often presented to the outside world as the newest member of the family ie as her actual mother's new sister or brother. It therefore seems highly unlikely that Jane, obviously pregnant, would declare herself unmarried when she wasn't. Maybe the enumerator had had a long day. I don't suppose I'll ever know for sure but it has been fun trying to puzzle it out All the best Sue -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jenny De Angelis Sent: 16 January 2010 15:35 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! Maybe one of James Boothman's younger children was filling out the schedule on behalf of their father, if he could not read and write someone else would have to fill the form out. The information on the schedule could only be as good as the knowledge of the either the writer of it or of the person dictating what should be written down. If someone's knowledge was at fault you get errors, maybe the younger child just put Jane down as the eldest child of James and forgot to add her married surname of Lawson. perhaps too the marital status of Jane was left off or unreadable by the enumerator and as she was showm as a Bootman and the dau. of James the enumerator might have assumed she was unmarried. Maybe the enumerator filled out the schedule for James and only asked the names of James's children. James may not have realised it meant giving daughter Jane's married name. Joseph Lawson being put down as a visitor because he had been visiting on that day The 1851 census was taken on the 30th March, and as you say Jane's daughter Mary Anne was born in May 1851 she would have been expecting the baby soon after the census. Maybe Joseph Lawson was just visiting overnight, the 30th March that year was a Sunday. The census wanted to know who spent midnight on census night at what address, it did not ask who permanently lived there. It could be that Jane too was only there for a day a two and by the time the schedule was being filled out she and Joseph Lawson had gone to their own home, but had passed the night of Sunday 30th March at her father's farm. Maybe Jane went back to stay at her father's farm until the baby Mary Ann was born, Joseph might have visited on a Sunday because that was the one day of the week that he had some time off from his farm work. For all you can tell he may not have even spent the night of the census at the Boothman farm but whoever filled out the schedule put him down as having been at the Boothmn farm on the night there by mistake, simply because Joseph visited every Sunday. Perhaps the person filling out the form may not have realised it meant who slept the night there but just who had been present at that farm on 30th March. What is the fiche that you have? is it a fiche of the PRs or just a transcript or Index of them? If it a transcript of Index then you really do need the copy of the entry from the Register itself as the transcript could contain errors. You say the page you need is missing from the Fiche that you have. Would not the CRO holding the original PRs be able to help either by sending you the missing page as a photo copy or a copy of the marriage itself from the parish register, would it not be worth contactin them to ask? at worst they can only say no they can't do that. Otherwise you will have to order a copy of the marriage certificate from one or other of two places. If you go to the FreeBMD entry of that 1850 marriage and then click on the word Clitheroe you go forward to a page where you can click on the word "Here" in the information shown there, this this then brings up a page giving the areas covered at that time by Clitheroe District. Gisburn is amongst those places and to it's right it says that the Gisburn registers were transferred to Settle on 1st april 1937. You can click on the word Settle to go forward to the next page where at the bottom it tells you that the Settle registers. presumably including those for Gisburn, are now held by North Yorkshire District office. If you click on the words North Yorkshire you will get up a page of District office addresses, showing North Yorks to be at Harrogate. You could email them to ask if they can check the marriage to see that Jane's father was indeed James Boothman occ. Farmer. If they are willing to supply a copy of the entry so much the better, but they probably won't take card payment over the internet, only by letter or by telephone call. Otherwise you will need to order a copy from the GRO via their website. They have a space on their order form where you can add checking information, you could add jane's father's name and occupation to be checked against the entry. If the entry matches they will send you a copy at the usual fee. But if the entry does not agree with your info., they will not send a copy but will charge you a checking feem which I believe is about half the cost of a copy certificate. Getting a copy of the entry from one source or another will save you puzzlig for evermore about the 1851 entry, you can just put it down the an error on the part of the person filling out that household schedule back then. Nothing else you can do about it if you want to do a proper job of researching your roots then copy certificates are an important part of that research as proof that you are on the right line. Anyone coming after you who picks up where you left of can see how you came to your conclusions about the family and where they came from and need not go over ground you have covered already. Not sure if you have found this Christening in the IGI already so am mentioning it just in case. Jane Boothman 7th August 1825 Gisburn Yorkshire father James Boothman mother Jane. Batch number P007662 which shows this to be an extracted entry and not a patron submission. Use that batch number.region British Iles and add the parents names James Boothman and Jane in the appropriate boxes you should get up 4 children of these parents, including Jane in 1825. Taking out the batch number but adding the country as England and county as Lancashire brings up more baptism for children with these parents names but whether they are for the same James and Jane Boothman it is hard to tell. These Lancs bapts. are mostly in the Wesleyan Methodist at Clitheroe Lancs. With some at Liverpool which I would think can't possibly be yours. But the Clitheroe ones might belong to you as Gisburn and Clitheroe are close together.perhaps James and Jane changed to the Methodist persusaion, many people seem to have done so around that time. Something else you could maybe do is to order the LDS film of the PRs for Gisbsurn. Follow the Source Call No. link in the above IGI entry for Jane Boothman it will show you that the film contains Marriages for various year spans including one for marraiges 1813-1900 and Banns 1823-1899. There are also burials 1799-1899 and another film contains the baptisms 1558-1900 as well as Marriages and burials for earlier years. Could be worth hiring such film/s at your nearest LDS centre for the small hire fee they charge. You can find the address of your nearest LDS centre by making a search for centre addresses on the famiysearch home page. you would of course have to go to the centre to view the film but as the film will be kept for a month for you you can go there as many times as possible during that month to view your film. Regards Jenny DeAngelis Spain. <<I have been puzzling over an entry in the 1851 census (the actual image) for the two participants in a marriage, Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson. Until I saw it, I had so much evidence as to the parentage of both Jane and Joseph that I had no doubt that I had identified the correct couple. According to Ancestry, Lancashire BMD and Free BMD the said Jane and Joseph were married in Gisburne Oct-Dec 1850 but of course the fathers are not given. I have the Gisburne microfiche for the period but would you believe, although Jane and Joseph are in the index under the same number, that page of 15 entries is missing...aargh! This is the 1851 entry: 1851 Gisburne Cotes Farm Boothman James Head,Widr, 60 Farmer of 80 acres Waddington Jane Dau, 26 unmarried Farmer's Daughter Downham Joseph Son, 7 Gisburne Lawson Joseph Visitor, 26 Farmer's Son Gargrave>> Some useful websites - FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.145/2626 - Release Date: 01/16/10 07:35:00

Glad you enjoyed it: although it was hard work, it was fun too -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: 16 January 2010 21:32 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Particularly for Jean & Terry, Mary and Andy A great story, Sue, thank you! Maggie -----Original Message----- From: Sue Regan <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sat, Jan 16, 2010 6:08 pm Subject: Re: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Particularly for Jean & Terry, Mary and Andy Thank you all so much for your ideas and suggestions. And I absolutely take the point that many were uncertain as to what information to give in the census but apart from this one entry, both the Lawson and Boothman families were very accurate when giving both ages and places of birth over a period of almost 50 years. And the ages given fit with the baptismal, marriage and burial entries. I have all the BMD records for the two families over two generations and there are no hidden illegitimacies. Even if I buy the certificate and it proves, as I am certain it will, and that this Jane and this Joseph were married before the 1851 census, I still can't think of an explanation for the entry. Bearing in mind the fact that most families of the day would go to great lengths to hide a daughter's unwed status it seems very odd to me that a heavily pregnant but married Jane would give her maiden name to the census taker, particularly in the presence of her husband who is described as a visitor! Whatever lies behind this anomaly, the families prospered. Joseph Lawson was the eldest son of Thomas Lawson of Huggan Ing, the farm next door to Gisburne Coates where Jane grew up. By 1861 Joseph and Jane were farming in Barnoldswick, had a large and healthy family and remained there until their deaths in 1889 and 1890 respectively. Jane's father James Boothman died in 1854 and in 1861 her three brothers, Thomas Hayes, James and William are managing Gisburne Coates farm. My interest is particularly focused on Huggan Ing. My earliest identifiable ancestor on my Yorkshire side of the family is Henry Briggs who was definitely living at at Huggan Ing in 1664 and probably earlier. His descendants continued at Huggan Ing through a Tattersall marriage until it was taken over by Thomas Lawson, father of Joseph, in the late 1840s. Thomas Lawson, Joseph's father remained at Huggan Ing until his death late in 1882 and the farm continued to be run by Joseph's brothers, unmarried James, and William who had married Isabella Rochford in 1879. Isabella died at the end of 1883 not long after giving birth to a second son James. In 1891 William is running a farm in Foulridge with his two young sons, leaving James in sole control at Huggan Ing. In 1885 James, 54, marries 21-year-old Mary Jane Spencer. Mary Jane is a direct descendant of Henry Briggs. Mary Jane presented James with two sons and a daughter before his death in 1896. Mary took over the ownership and management of Huggan Ing. She died at the age of 72 in 1928. The Briggs were back!! The Briggs-Tattersall-Lawson-Spencer story does not end there. Jane's three brothers had left Gisburne Coates farm by 1871 and one of the farms (Gisburne Coates had several farms) was being run by another direct Briggs descendant, Mary née Tattersall Deighton, who was born and brought up at Huggan Ing, and who married 60-year-old William Deighton in 1844, inheriting the farm on his death four years later. By 1871 Mary now 72 is farming 113 acres at Gisburne Coates with the help of only two young farm boys. When she died two years later, the farm was taken over by Edward Spencer and Ann née Tattersall Spencer, Mary's niece. It is their daughter Mary Jane who marries 54-year-old James Lawson of Huggan Ing. The Spencer family continued to own both Gisburne Coates and Huggan Ing until they sold both farms to the present owner in 1957. I've tried to make the story as clear as possible: working it all out has taken a long time as you can imagine, but I think it's a great example of Yorkshire grit and determination! Regards Sue -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of jean and terry Sent: 16 January 2010 03:57 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! Hi, My experience is people didn't fully understand what was required with census data. Back in 1851 many couldn't write and had no way of checking what was written down. I have just queried a 1911 entry because I am certain the Head just wrote down her daughters and son ignoring the fact they were all married and lived elsewhere. She clearly misunderstood the question. The 1881 census was my first nightmare when John HAIGH was listed as being 40 when he was only 29 on his marriage certificate 3 years earlier. his wife never appeared to have a consistent age either and he gives Holmfirth as birthplace then later Huddersfield. She gives Newtown Wales (because I think she found it more convenient than giving the name of a nearby town, every census she had prior had a slight difference in birthplace. Newtown seems near enough but it isn't accurate). I still haven't worked out where John Haigh is prior to 1881 because of the problems. I have another one in 1910 in USA census who gives himself as Single but he was in fact married just preferred to be single I think.) So I would be wary of reading too much into the 1851 census and prefer to go to the marriage details instead. If you like I could check if Ancestry has this page and can confirm your couple. Perhaps they hadn't told her father of their marriage!!!!!!! Jean in S. Australia. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Regan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 1:49 PM Subject: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! >I have been puzzling over an entry in the 1851 census (the actual image) >for > the two participants in a marriage, Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson. > Until > I saw it, I had so much evidence as to the parentage of both Jane and > Joseph > that I had no doubt that I had identified the correct couple. According > to > Ancestry, Lancashire BMD and Free BMD the said Jane and Joseph were > married > in Gisburne Oct-Dec 1850 but of course the fathers are not given. I have > the > Gisburne microfiche for the period but would you believe, although Jane > and > Joseph are in the index under the same number, that page of 15 entries is > missing...aargh! > > > > This is the 1851 entry: > > > > 1851 Gisburne Cotes Farm > > > Boothman James Head,Widr, 60 Farmer of 80 acres Waddington > Jane Dau, 26 unmarried Farmer's Daughter Downham > Thomas Son Farmer's Son Downham > Hannah Dau, 14 Farmer's Daughter Downham > William Son, 11 Gisburne > > > Joseph Son, 7 Gisburne > > > Lawson Joseph Visitor, 26 Farmer's Son Gargrave > > > > > > So here we have an unmarried Jane Boothman being visited by Joseph Lawson > a > married farmer's son, who I am certain has been her husband since the last > quarter of 1850. It seems an unlikely mistake for any of the family to > make > or maybe whoever gave the information was drunk! > > > > As an example of the evidence I have, Jane's mother's maiden name was > Hayes > and Jane had a younger brother, Thomas Hayes Boothman, and named one of > her > own sons, William Hayes Lawson. Also Jane and Joseph's eldest daughter > Mary > Anne Lawson was born at Gisburne Coates in May 1851 (where Jane's widowed > father, was still living). > > > > There are so many certificates I really need to buy and I don't want to > have > to spend money on one when I am 99.99% convinced I already have the > answers! > > > > > Can anyone explain this strange census entry? Any thoughts or ideas would > be very much appreciated. > > > > Cheers > > > > Sue > > > > > > > Some useful websites - > FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ > FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki > http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message Some useful websites - FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.143/2624 - Release Date: 01/15/10 12:47:00 Some useful websites - FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Some useful websites - FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.145/2626 - Release Date: 01/16/10 07:35:00

Hello again, Thanks for that Mary Lou, but it is quite close to his brother Joseph's birth in March Qtr. 1891. I am not ruling it out yet, however! The birth-place is also an issue: all Edmond's other siblings were born in Halifax: again not impossible. I would need the birth certificate to resolve this one. Martin -------------------------------------------------------- Message: 2 Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:45:45 EST From: [email protected] Subject: Re: [WRY] Edmond WILSON of Halifax To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Found this birth on the FreeBMD site: March Qtr. 1892 EDMUND WILSON Registered at Bradford 9b 140 mary lou In a message dated 1/11/2010 9:32:13 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [email protected] writes: -------------------------------------------------------- In a message dated 1/11/2010 9:32:13 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, [email protected] writes: Good afternoon I am trying to ascertain the birth and death dates of a younger brother of my grandfather Edward WILSON (b 1890 in Halifax). I was unsure about this rumoured extra brother but I see that there were 6 'Total Children Born Alive' to W William Henry WILSON (b 1860 Halifax) and Elizabeth JOWETT (b 1859 Clayton, Bradford) but only 5 Children Still Living'. I was told he was called Edmond but possibly spelt Edmund and possibly born between 1892 and 1901, but I cannot find any trace of him: there is no mention of him in the 1901 census. Any ideas - the census page reference is RG14PN26487 RG78PN1528B RD496 SD5 ED36 SN74. Thank you. Incidentally, I have a good history of this Wilson family from Samuel Wilson(born about 1780) and Mary Carter down to William and Elizabeth mentioned above. Elizabeth and all her children emigrated to Canada on various dates from 1913 onwards. I am still looking for children of Edward's siblings (having already found some cousins). Martin Bishop -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: 12 January 2010 08:02 To: [email protected] Subject: Edmond WILSON of Halifax

Thank you all so much for your ideas and suggestions. And I absolutely take the point that many were uncertain as to what information to give in the census but apart from this one entry, both the Lawson and Boothman families were very accurate when giving both ages and places of birth over a period of almost 50 years. And the ages given fit with the baptismal, marriage and burial entries. I have all the BMD records for the two families over two generations and there are no hidden illegitimacies. Even if I buy the certificate and it proves, as I am certain it will, and that this Jane and this Joseph were married before the 1851 census, I still can't think of an explanation for the entry. Bearing in mind the fact that most families of the day would go to great lengths to hide a daughter's unwed status it seems very odd to me that a heavily pregnant but married Jane would give her maiden name to the census taker, particularly in the presence of her husband who is described as a visitor! Whatever lies behind this anomaly, the families prospered. Joseph Lawson was the eldest son of Thomas Lawson of Huggan Ing, the farm next door to Gisburne Coates where Jane grew up. By 1861 Joseph and Jane were farming in Barnoldswick, had a large and healthy family and remained there until their deaths in 1889 and 1890 respectively. Jane's father James Boothman died in 1854 and in 1861 her three brothers, Thomas Hayes, James and William are managing Gisburne Coates farm. My interest is particularly focused on Huggan Ing. My earliest identifiable ancestor on my Yorkshire side of the family is Henry Briggs who was definitely living at at Huggan Ing in 1664 and probably earlier. His descendants continued at Huggan Ing through a Tattersall marriage until it was taken over by Thomas Lawson, father of Joseph, in the late 1840s. Thomas Lawson, Joseph's father remained at Huggan Ing until his death late in 1882 and the farm continued to be run by Joseph's brothers, unmarried James, and William who had married Isabella Rochford in 1879. Isabella died at the end of 1883 not long after giving birth to a second son James. In 1891 William is running a farm in Foulridge with his two young sons, leaving James in sole control at Huggan Ing. In 1885 James, 54, marries 21-year-old Mary Jane Spencer. Mary Jane is a direct descendant of Henry Briggs. Mary Jane presented James with two sons and a daughter before his death in 1896. Mary took over the ownership and management of Huggan Ing. She died at the age of 72 in 1928. The Briggs were back!! The Briggs-Tattersall-Lawson-Spencer story does not end there. Jane's three brothers had left Gisburne Coates farm by 1871 and one of the farms (Gisburne Coates had several farms) was being run by another direct Briggs descendant, Mary née Tattersall Deighton, who was born and brought up at Huggan Ing, and who married 60-year-old William Deighton in 1844, inheriting the farm on his death four years later. By 1871 Mary now 72 is farming 113 acres at Gisburne Coates with the help of only two young farm boys. When she died two years later, the farm was taken over by Edward Spencer and Ann née Tattersall Spencer, Mary's niece. It is their daughter Mary Jane who marries 54-year-old James Lawson of Huggan Ing. The Spencer family continued to own both Gisburne Coates and Huggan Ing until they sold both farms to the present owner in 1957. I've tried to make the story as clear as possible: working it all out has taken a long time as you can imagine, but I think it's a great example of Yorkshire grit and determination! Regards Sue -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of jean and terry Sent: 16 January 2010 03:57 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! Hi, My experience is people didn't fully understand what was required with census data. Back in 1851 many couldn't write and had no way of checking what was written down. I have just queried a 1911 entry because I am certain the Head just wrote down her daughters and son ignoring the fact they were all married and lived elsewhere. She clearly misunderstood the question. The 1881 census was my first nightmare when John HAIGH was listed as being 40 when he was only 29 on his marriage certificate 3 years earlier. his wife never appeared to have a consistent age either and he gives Holmfirth as birthplace then later Huddersfield. She gives Newtown Wales (because I think she found it more convenient than giving the name of a nearby town, every census she had prior had a slight difference in birthplace. Newtown seems near enough but it isn't accurate). I still haven't worked out where John Haigh is prior to 1881 because of the problems. I have another one in 1910 in USA census who gives himself as Single but he was in fact married just preferred to be single I think.) So I would be wary of reading too much into the 1851 census and prefer to go to the marriage details instead. If you like I could check if Ancestry has this page and can confirm your couple. Perhaps they hadn't told her father of their marriage!!!!!!! Jean in S. Australia. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Regan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 1:49 PM Subject: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! >I have been puzzling over an entry in the 1851 census (the actual image) >for > the two participants in a marriage, Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson. > Until > I saw it, I had so much evidence as to the parentage of both Jane and > Joseph > that I had no doubt that I had identified the correct couple. According > to > Ancestry, Lancashire BMD and Free BMD the said Jane and Joseph were > married > in Gisburne Oct-Dec 1850 but of course the fathers are not given. I have > the > Gisburne microfiche for the period but would you believe, although Jane > and > Joseph are in the index under the same number, that page of 15 entries is > missing...aargh! > > > > This is the 1851 entry: > > > > 1851 Gisburne Cotes Farm > > > Boothman James Head,Widr, 60 Farmer of 80 acres Waddington > Jane Dau, 26 unmarried Farmer's Daughter Downham > Thomas Son Farmer's Son Downham > Hannah Dau, 14 Farmer's Daughter Downham > William Son, 11 Gisburne > > > Joseph Son, 7 Gisburne > > > Lawson Joseph Visitor, 26 Farmer's Son Gargrave > > > > > > So here we have an unmarried Jane Boothman being visited by Joseph Lawson > a > married farmer's son, who I am certain has been her husband since the last > quarter of 1850. It seems an unlikely mistake for any of the family to > make > or maybe whoever gave the information was drunk! > > > > As an example of the evidence I have, Jane's mother's maiden name was > Hayes > and Jane had a younger brother, Thomas Hayes Boothman, and named one of > her > own sons, William Hayes Lawson. Also Jane and Joseph's eldest daughter > Mary > Anne Lawson was born at Gisburne Coates in May 1851 (where Jane's widowed > father, was still living). > > > > There are so many certificates I really need to buy and I don't want to > have > to spend money on one when I am 99.99% convinced I already have the > answers! > > > > > Can anyone explain this strange census entry? Any thoughts or ideas would > be very much appreciated. > > > > Cheers > > > > Sue > > > > > > > Some useful websites - > FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ > FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki > http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message Some useful websites - FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.143/2624 - Release Date: 01/15/10 12:47:00

Maybe one of James Boothman's younger children was filling out the schedule on behalf of their father, if he could not read and write someone else would have to fill the form out. The information on the schedule could only be as good as the knowledge of the either the writer of it or of the person dictating what should be written down. If someone's knowledge was at fault you get errors, maybe the younger child just put Jane down as the eldest child of James and forgot to add her married surname of Lawson. perhaps too the marital status of Jane was left off or unreadable by the enumerator and as she was showm as a Bootman and the dau. of James the enumerator might have assumed she was unmarried. Maybe the enumerator filled out the schedule for James and only asked the names of James's children. James may not have realised it meant giving daughter Jane's married name. Joseph Lawson being put down as a visitor because he had been visiting on that day The 1851 census was taken on the 30th March, and as you say Jane's daughter Mary Anne was born in May 1851 she would have been expecting the baby soon after the census. Maybe Joseph Lawson was just visiting overnight, the 30th March that year was a Sunday. The census wanted to know who spent midnight on census night at what address, it did not ask who permanently lived there. It could be that Jane too was only there for a day a two and by the time the schedule was being filled out she and Joseph Lawson had gone to their own home, but had passed the night of Sunday 30th March at her father's farm. Maybe Jane went back to stay at her father's farm until the baby Mary Ann was born, Joseph might have visited on a Sunday because that was the one day of the week that he had some time off from his farm work. For all you can tell he may not have even spent the night of the census at the Boothman farm but whoever filled out the schedule put him down as having been at the Boothmn farm on the night there by mistake, simply because Joseph visited every Sunday. Perhaps the person filling out the form may not have realised it meant who slept the night there but just who had been present at that farm on 30th March. What is the fiche that you have? is it a fiche of the PRs or just a transcript or Index of them? If it a transcript of Index then you really do need the copy of the entry from the Register itself as the transcript could contain errors. You say the page you need is missing from the Fiche that you have. Would not the CRO holding the original PRs be able to help either by sending you the missing page as a photo copy or a copy of the marriage itself from the parish register, would it not be worth contactin them to ask? at worst they can only say no they can't do that. Otherwise you will have to order a copy of the marriage certificate from one or other of two places. If you go to the FreeBMD entry of that 1850 marriage and then click on the word Clitheroe you go forward to a page where you can click on the word "Here" in the information shown there, this this then brings up a page giving the areas covered at that time by Clitheroe District. Gisburn is amongst those places and to it's right it says that the Gisburn registers were transferred to Settle on 1st april 1937. You can click on the word Settle to go forward to the next page where at the bottom it tells you that the Settle registers. presumably including those for Gisburn, are now held by North Yorkshire District office. If you click on the words North Yorkshire you will get up a page of District office addresses, showing North Yorks to be at Harrogate. You could email them to ask if they can check the marriage to see that Jane's father was indeed James Boothman occ. Farmer. If they are willing to supply a copy of the entry so much the better, but they probably won't take card payment over the internet, only by letter or by telephone call. Otherwise you will need to order a copy from the GRO via their website. They have a space on their order form where you can add checking information, you could add jane's father's name and occupation to be checked against the entry. If the entry matches they will send you a copy at the usual fee. But if the entry does not agree with your info., they will not send a copy but will charge you a checking feem which I believe is about half the cost of a copy certificate. Getting a copy of the entry from one source or another will save you puzzlig for evermore about the 1851 entry, you can just put it down the an error on the part of the person filling out that household schedule back then. Nothing else you can do about it if you want to do a proper job of researching your roots then copy certificates are an important part of that research as proof that you are on the right line. Anyone coming after you who picks up where you left of can see how you came to your conclusions about the family and where they came from and need not go over ground you have covered already. Not sure if you have found this Christening in the IGI already so am mentioning it just in case. Jane Boothman 7th August 1825 Gisburn Yorkshire father James Boothman mother Jane. Batch number P007662 which shows this to be an extracted entry and not a patron submission. Use that batch number.region British Iles and add the parents names James Boothman and Jane in the appropriate boxes you should get up 4 children of these parents, including Jane in 1825. Taking out the batch number but adding the country as England and county as Lancashire brings up more baptism for children with these parents names but whether they are for the same James and Jane Boothman it is hard to tell. These Lancs bapts. are mostly in the Wesleyan Methodist at Clitheroe Lancs. With some at Liverpool which I would think can't possibly be yours. But the Clitheroe ones might belong to you as Gisburn and Clitheroe are close together.perhaps James and Jane changed to the Methodist persusaion, many people seem to have done so around that time. Something else you could maybe do is to order the LDS film of the PRs for Gisbsurn. Follow the Source Call No. link in the above IGI entry for Jane Boothman it will show you that the film contains Marriages for various year spans including one for marraiges 1813-1900 and Banns 1823-1899. There are also burials 1799-1899 and another film contains the baptisms 1558-1900 as well as Marriages and burials for earlier years. Could be worth hiring such film/s at your nearest LDS centre for the small hire fee they charge. You can find the address of your nearest LDS centre by making a search for centre addresses on the famiysearch home page. you would of course have to go to the centre to view the film but as the film will be kept for a month for you you can go there as many times as possible during that month to view your film. Regards Jenny DeAngelis Spain. <<I have been puzzling over an entry in the 1851 census (the actual image) for the two participants in a marriage, Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson. Until I saw it, I had so much evidence as to the parentage of both Jane and Joseph that I had no doubt that I had identified the correct couple. According to Ancestry, Lancashire BMD and Free BMD the said Jane and Joseph were married in Gisburne Oct-Dec 1850 but of course the fathers are not given. I have the Gisburne microfiche for the period but would you believe, although Jane and Joseph are in the index under the same number, that page of 15 entries is missing...aargh! This is the 1851 entry: 1851 Gisburne Cotes Farm Boothman James Head,Widr, 60 Farmer of 80 acres Waddington Jane Dau, 26 unmarried Farmer's Daughter Downham Joseph Son, 7 Gisburne Lawson Joseph Visitor, 26 Farmer's Son Gargrave>>

A great story, Sue, thank you! Maggie -----Original Message----- From: Sue Regan <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sat, Jan 16, 2010 6:08 pm Subject: Re: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Particularly for Jean & Terry, Mary and Andy Thank you all so much for your ideas and suggestions. And I absolutely take the point that many were uncertain as to what information to give in the census but apart from this one entry, both the Lawson and Boothman families were very accurate when giving both ages and places of birth over a period of almost 50 years. And the ages given fit with the baptismal, marriage and burial entries. I have all the BMD records for the two families over two generations and there are no hidden illegitimacies. Even if I buy the certificate and it proves, as I am certain it will, and that this Jane and this Joseph were married before the 1851 census, I still can't think of an explanation for the entry. Bearing in mind the fact that most families of the day would go to great lengths to hide a daughter's unwed status it seems very odd to me that a heavily pregnant but married Jane would give her maiden name to the census taker, particularly in the presence of her husband who is described as a visitor! Whatever lies behind this anomaly, the families prospered. Joseph Lawson was the eldest son of Thomas Lawson of Huggan Ing, the farm next door to Gisburne Coates where Jane grew up. By 1861 Joseph and Jane were farming in Barnoldswick, had a large and healthy family and remained there until their deaths in 1889 and 1890 respectively. Jane's father James Boothman died in 1854 and in 1861 her three brothers, Thomas Hayes, James and William are managing Gisburne Coates farm. My interest is particularly focused on Huggan Ing. My earliest identifiable ancestor on my Yorkshire side of the family is Henry Briggs who was definitely living at at Huggan Ing in 1664 and probably earlier. His descendants continued at Huggan Ing through a Tattersall marriage until it was taken over by Thomas Lawson, father of Joseph, in the late 1840s. Thomas Lawson, Joseph's father remained at Huggan Ing until his death late in 1882 and the farm continued to be run by Joseph's brothers, unmarried James, and William who had married Isabella Rochford in 1879. Isabella died at the end of 1883 not long after giving birth to a second son James. In 1891 William is running a farm in Foulridge with his two young sons, leaving James in sole control at Huggan Ing. In 1885 James, 54, marries 21-year-old Mary Jane Spencer. Mary Jane is a direct descendant of Henry Briggs. Mary Jane presented James with two sons and a daughter before his death in 1896. Mary took over the ownership and management of Huggan Ing. She died at the age of 72 in 1928. The Briggs were back!! The Briggs-Tattersall-Lawson-Spencer story does not end there. Jane's three brothers had left Gisburne Coates farm by 1871 and one of the farms (Gisburne Coates had several farms) was being run by another direct Briggs descendant, Mary née Tattersall Deighton, who was born and brought up at Huggan Ing, and who married 60-year-old William Deighton in 1844, inheriting the farm on his death four years later. By 1871 Mary now 72 is farming 113 acres at Gisburne Coates with the help of only two young farm boys. When she died two years later, the farm was taken over by Edward Spencer and Ann née Tattersall Spencer, Mary's niece. It is their daughter Mary Jane who marries 54-year-old James Lawson of Huggan Ing. The Spencer family continued to own both Gisburne Coates and Huggan Ing until they sold both farms to the present owner in 1957. I've tried to make the story as clear as possible: working it all out has taken a long time as you can imagine, but I think it's a great example of Yorkshire grit and determination! Regards Sue -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of jean and terry Sent: 16 January 2010 03:57 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! Hi, My experience is people didn't fully understand what was required with census data. Back in 1851 many couldn't write and had no way of checking what was written down. I have just queried a 1911 entry because I am certain the Head just wrote down her daughters and son ignoring the fact they were all married and lived elsewhere. She clearly misunderstood the question. The 1881 census was my first nightmare when John HAIGH was listed as being 40 when he was only 29 on his marriage certificate 3 years earlier. his wife never appeared to have a consistent age either and he gives Holmfirth as birthplace then later Huddersfield. She gives Newtown Wales (because I think she found it more convenient than giving the name of a nearby town, every census she had prior had a slight difference in birthplace. Newtown seems near enough but it isn't accurate). I still haven't worked out where John Haigh is prior to 1881 because of the problems. I have another one in 1910 in USA census who gives himself as Single but he was in fact married just preferred to be single I think.) So I would be wary of reading too much into the 1851 census and prefer to go to the marriage details instead. If you like I could check if Ancestry has this page and can confirm your couple. Perhaps they hadn't told her father of their marriage!!!!!!! Jean in S. Australia. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Regan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 1:49 PM Subject: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! >I have been puzzling over an entry in the 1851 census (the actual image) >for > the two participants in a marriage, Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson. > Until > I saw it, I had so much evidence as to the parentage of both Jane and > Joseph > that I had no doubt that I had identified the correct couple. According > to > Ancestry, Lancashire BMD and Free BMD the said Jane and Joseph were > married > in Gisburne Oct-Dec 1850 but of course the fathers are not given. I have > the > Gisburne microfiche for the period but would you believe, although Jane > and > Joseph are in the index under the same number, that page of 15 entries is > missing...aargh! > > > > This is the 1851 entry: > > > > 1851 Gisburne Cotes Farm > > > Boothman James Head,Widr, 60 Farmer of 80 acres Waddington > Jane Dau, 26 unmarried Farmer's Daughter Downham > Thomas Son Farmer's Son Downham > Hannah Dau, 14 Farmer's Daughter Downham > William Son, 11 Gisburne > > > Joseph Son, 7 Gisburne > > > Lawson Joseph Visitor, 26 Farmer's Son Gargrave > > > > > > So here we have an unmarried Jane Boothman being visited by Joseph Lawson > a > married farmer's son, who I am certain has been her husband since the last > quarter of 1850. It seems an unlikely mistake for any of the family to > make > or maybe whoever gave the information was drunk! > > > > As an example of the evidence I have, Jane's mother's maiden name was > Hayes > and Jane had a younger brother, Thomas Hayes Boothman, and named one of > her > own sons, William Hayes Lawson. Also Jane and Joseph's eldest daughter > Mary > Anne Lawson was born at Gisburne Coates in May 1851 (where Jane's widowed > father, was still living). > > > > There are so many certificates I really need to buy and I don't want to > have > to spend money on one when I am 99.99% convinced I already have the > answers! > > > > > Can anyone explain this strange census entry? Any thoughts or ideas would > be very much appreciated. > > > > Cheers > > > > Sue > > > > > > > Some useful websites - > FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ > FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki > http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message Some useful websites - FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.432 / Virus Database: 270.14.143/2624 - Release Date: 01/15/10 12:47:00 Some useful websites - FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Sandra I hope your visit to Yorkshire is a pleasant one. As for museums I believe there is one in Ripon that devotes itself to prisons and may well be worth a visit. The railway museum in York is also very interesting and the Castle museum well worth a visit. My wife and I live in Thirsk not far from York and Ripon and would be pleased to offer and assistance to you visiting those sites Stewart

Gosh I am holding a conversation with myself you are probably all in bed. I have looked at the original census and It could be the right one. The father could have given his daughter his surname but it doesn't look like an S after her name it could be M. And I found another Joseph Lawson listed as a married visitor rather than as son-in-law which is another way of describing ones visitor. From your research the marriage is very new less than 3 months duration maybe the father became confused. You might have to buy the certificate to be certain. Another way is for someone to look up Parish records to see if they discover who the father is. I have had a great time accessing marriage, death and birth certificates in Ancestry from someone sharing their family research. Just about paid my subscription (except that I wouldn't have bought them) and I am uploading my certificates so someone else can verify their research. Let us know the outcome now we have become intrigued. Jean ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Regan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 1:49 PM Subject: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! >I have been puzzling over an entry in the 1851 census (the actual image) >for > the two participants in a marriage, Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson. > Until > I saw it, I had so much evidence as to the parentage of both Jane and > Joseph > that I had no doubt that I had identified the correct couple. According > to > Ancestry, Lancashire BMD and Free BMD the said Jane and Joseph were > married > in Gisburne Oct-Dec 1850 but of course the fathers are not given. I have > the > Gisburne microfiche for the period but would you believe, although Jane > and > Joseph are in the index under the same number, that page of 15 entries is > missing...aargh! > > > > This is the 1851 entry: > > > > 1851 Gisburne Cotes Farm > > > Boothman James Head,Widr, 60 Farmer of 80 acres Waddington > Jane Dau, 26 unmarried Farmer's Daughter Downham > Thomas Son Farmer's Son Downham > Hannah Dau, 14 Farmer's Daughter Downham > William Son, 11 Gisburne > > > Joseph Son, 7 Gisburne > > > Lawson Joseph Visitor, 26 Farmer's Son Gargrave > > > > > > So here we have an unmarried Jane Boothman being visited by Joseph Lawson > a > married farmer's son, who I am certain has been her husband since the last > quarter of 1850. It seems an unlikely mistake for any of the family to > make > or maybe whoever gave the information was drunk! > > > > As an example of the evidence I have, Jane's mother's maiden name was > Hayes > and Jane had a younger brother, Thomas Hayes Boothman, and named one of > her > own sons, William Hayes Lawson. Also Jane and Joseph's eldest daughter > Mary > Anne Lawson was born at Gisburne Coates in May 1851 (where Jane's widowed > father, was still living). > > > > There are so many certificates I really need to buy and I don't want to > have > to spend money on one when I am 99.99% convinced I already have the > answers! > > > > > Can anyone explain this strange census entry? Any thoughts or ideas would > be very much appreciated. > > > > Cheers > > > > Sue > > > > > > > Some useful websites - > FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ > FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki > http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

The only combination of Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson which came up on Free BDM was at Clitheroe this is in Lancashire and Gisburne is in WRY. Don't know if this is of any help ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Regan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 1:49 PM Subject: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! >I have been puzzling over an entry in the 1851 census (the actual image) >for > the two participants in a marriage, Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson. > Until > I saw it, I had so much evidence as to the parentage of both Jane and > Joseph > that I had no doubt that I had identified the correct couple. According > to > Ancestry, Lancashire BMD and Free BMD the said Jane and Joseph were > married > in Gisburne Oct-Dec 1850 but of course the fathers are not given. I have > the > Gisburne microfiche for the period but would you believe, although Jane > and > Joseph are in the index under the same number, that page of 15 entries is > missing...aargh! > > > > This is the 1851 entry: > > > > 1851 Gisburne Cotes Farm > > > Boothman James Head,Widr, 60 Farmer of 80 acres Waddington > Jane Dau, 26 unmarried Farmer's Daughter Downham > Thomas Son Farmer's Son Downham > Hannah Dau, 14 Farmer's Daughter Downham > William Son, 11 Gisburne > > > Joseph Son, 7 Gisburne > > > Lawson Joseph Visitor, 26 Farmer's Son Gargrave > > > > > > So here we have an unmarried Jane Boothman being visited by Joseph Lawson > a > married farmer's son, who I am certain has been her husband since the last > quarter of 1850. It seems an unlikely mistake for any of the family to > make > or maybe whoever gave the information was drunk! > > > > As an example of the evidence I have, Jane's mother's maiden name was > Hayes > and Jane had a younger brother, Thomas Hayes Boothman, and named one of > her > own sons, William Hayes Lawson. Also Jane and Joseph's eldest daughter > Mary > Anne Lawson was born at Gisburne Coates in May 1851 (where Jane's widowed > father, was still living). > > > > There are so many certificates I really need to buy and I don't want to > have > to spend money on one when I am 99.99% convinced I already have the > answers! > > > > > Can anyone explain this strange census entry? Any thoughts or ideas would > be very much appreciated. > > > > Cheers > > > > Sue > > > > > > > Some useful websites - > FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ > FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki > http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi, My experience is people didn't fully understand what was required with census data. Back in 1851 many couldn't write and had no way of checking what was written down. I have just queried a 1911 entry because I am certain the Head just wrote down her daughters and son ignoring the fact they were all married and lived elsewhere. She clearly misunderstood the question. The 1881 census was my first nightmare when John HAIGH was listed as being 40 when he was only 29 on his marriage certificate 3 years earlier. his wife never appeared to have a consistent age either and he gives Holmfirth as birthplace then later Huddersfield. She gives Newtown Wales (because I think she found it more convenient than giving the name of a nearby town, every census she had prior had a slight difference in birthplace. Newtown seems near enough but it isn't accurate). I still haven't worked out where John Haigh is prior to 1881 because of the problems. I have another one in 1910 in USA census who gives himself as Single but he was in fact married just preferred to be single I think.) So I would be wary of reading too much into the 1851 census and prefer to go to the marriage details instead. If you like I could check if Ancestry has this page and can confirm your couple. Perhaps they hadn't told her father of their marriage!!!!!!! Jean in S. Australia. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sue Regan" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 1:49 PM Subject: [WRY] Strange or incorrect census entry? Help, please! >I have been puzzling over an entry in the 1851 census (the actual image) >for > the two participants in a marriage, Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson. > Until > I saw it, I had so much evidence as to the parentage of both Jane and > Joseph > that I had no doubt that I had identified the correct couple. According > to > Ancestry, Lancashire BMD and Free BMD the said Jane and Joseph were > married > in Gisburne Oct-Dec 1850 but of course the fathers are not given. I have > the > Gisburne microfiche for the period but would you believe, although Jane > and > Joseph are in the index under the same number, that page of 15 entries is > missing...aargh! > > > > This is the 1851 entry: > > > > 1851 Gisburne Cotes Farm > > > Boothman James Head,Widr, 60 Farmer of 80 acres Waddington > Jane Dau, 26 unmarried Farmer's Daughter Downham > Thomas Son Farmer's Son Downham > Hannah Dau, 14 Farmer's Daughter Downham > William Son, 11 Gisburne > > > Joseph Son, 7 Gisburne > > > Lawson Joseph Visitor, 26 Farmer's Son Gargrave > > > > > > So here we have an unmarried Jane Boothman being visited by Joseph Lawson > a > married farmer's son, who I am certain has been her husband since the last > quarter of 1850. It seems an unlikely mistake for any of the family to > make > or maybe whoever gave the information was drunk! > > > > As an example of the evidence I have, Jane's mother's maiden name was > Hayes > and Jane had a younger brother, Thomas Hayes Boothman, and named one of > her > own sons, William Hayes Lawson. Also Jane and Joseph's eldest daughter > Mary > Anne Lawson was born at Gisburne Coates in May 1851 (where Jane's widowed > father, was still living). > > > > There are so many certificates I really need to buy and I don't want to > have > to spend money on one when I am 99.99% convinced I already have the > answers! > > > > > Can anyone explain this strange census entry? Any thoughts or ideas would > be very much appreciated. > > > > Cheers > > > > Sue > > > > > > > Some useful websites - > FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ > FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki > http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Sue, Found this on IGI: JOSEPH BOOTHMAN Christening: 10 FEB 1844 Gisburn, Yorkshire, England Mother: JANE BOOTHMAN C007662 1813 - 1847 0919139 Film 6909635 Film The other Joseph Boothman born in 1844 on this batch is son of Joseph Boothman and Martha. From this same batch no. William's parents were James and Anne. There are a few Anne/Mary Anne/Nancy Boothman deaths from 1844 - 1849 so any of them could be showing the death of James's wife / Jane's mum. I reckon he was pre-marital son of Jane Boothman and Joseph Lawson and that it was still upsetting Jane's father even after she was married - maybe they couldn't afford to live elsewhere at this point and father kept Jane and little Joseph at his place while Joseph Lawson could still only visit? Or did they keep the marriage secret? A bit difficult to sleuth all this 150 years later but the 1861 may show you more. I hope they all ended up reconciled and happy. Cheers, Mary

Jean She needs the British Passport (now the EU) so she can work in Europe. My granddaughter is working in the UK and as a Australian passport with an Ancestry visa but that wouldn't allow her to work in Europe,but this daughter of a friend of mine wants to work in Europe.Anyway I've advised my friend To get in touch with the British High Commission in Canberra. Bill Avoca Beach Nsw ps I came in 1951 jean and terry wrote: > Annette, We came out in 1966 and the following year a caravan outside a > shopping centre invited anyone to become a citizen if they wished. At that > point Australians were British and so was I. My husband took the attitude > when he left UK that he didn't intend to go back (and so far never has but > he could run out of excuses when I lose my dogs!!) and if we were going to > live here then we should be citizens. It was easy we signed a piece of > paper each and now have certificates saying we and our children are > Australian citizens. > > I am not sure just why but today you are not an Australian citizen unless > you go through some ceremony. It is amazing how many people in the upper > 60s who have lived here and even had children here who are like you and > don't have citizenship. > > The Yorkshire blood in me would balk at paying an entry visa to get back in. > I assumed the original enquirer perhaps wanted an English passport so they > could work in UK. (Have no idea how that works.) Our children came here > aged under 2 and just 4 so they shouldn't have a problem either. > > The point you make of the certificate which gave us entry might be what they > were looking for as an explanation of why the parent doesn't reside in UK. > > Jean in S. Australia. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Annette Watson" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 9:54 AM > Subject: Re: [WRY] PASSPORT > > > >> Hi Bill, I have a British passport, live in Australia but was born in >> England of English parents, we came in 1950 but did not have passports >> to get into Australia - we had an entry permit which fortunatley my >> parents had kept so I was able to use this to prove how I got into >> Australia - I still have a British passport as when we came in 1950 >> we were classed as Australians, but then Gough WHITLAM changed >> the rules and made it retrspective back to 1945 - so I have never been >> naturalised - I was good enough when I arrived etc. Of course I now >> have to have a re entry visa every five years (we go OS a lot) which I >> have to pay for, my sister who came with me has a permanent re >> entry visa which costs her nothing - work that out, no on else can, she >> is told she is very lucky to have it. There are various immigration >> offices around Australia which are listed on their web site, I think I >> would be phoning one of them as she will need a re entry visa, also >> the British High Commission is where you get the UK passports, they >> do have a ph number BUT it does cost a few dollars a minute, don't ask >> why, I suppose it's because they can, just check out their website, >> (check Google). I use the Southport Immigration Office on the Gold >> Coast. >> >> I do hope this helps, >> >> Happy hunting and good luck, >> Annette WATSON >> Lismore 2480 >> At 07:37 PM 15/01/2010 +1100, you wrote: >> >>> Hi listers >>> Anybody able to answer a question for me. >>> A friend of mine is applying for a UK >>> Passport born in Australia to UK citizens >>> the passport people are asking for her mothers full birthcert (thats fine) >>> and the mothers certificateof naturalisation or registration as a >>> citizen of the UK (what's this) >>> Thanks Bill >>> *__* >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Some useful websites - >>> FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ >>> FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ >>> Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki >>> http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >> >> >> Some useful websites - >> FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ >> FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ >> Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki >> http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > > > Some useful websites - > FREECEN - http://www.freecen.org.uk/ > FREEBMD - http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > Want to know where a place in Yorkshire is - Try Genuki > http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/YKS/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 9.0.725 / Virus Database: 270.14.144/2625 - Release Date: 01/16/10 06:35:00 > >

Hi Jean and Sue, I'm listening to your unilateral conversation here in WA! I noted little Joseph aged 7. Is it possible that he isn't James's son but Jane had him before she was married and her dad is still seeing things as they had been for 6 years even though the couple now are married? It may help to know when James's own wife died. Do you have young Joseph's birth Sue? On freebmd there are three Joseph Boothmans born in Clitheroe between 1844 and 1845. What does the 1861 say? Cheers, Mary