Hi Ann, The Canadian Government has funded a site called "Home Children" at the following URL. I do know one of the people that is involved with the site if you have problems. http://www.collectionscanada.ca/02/020110_e.html Good Luck. Elaine in Ottawa. Sheffield Indexers Site Admin. http://sheff-indexers.thewholeshebang.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gordon Mccallum" <gordon.mccallum2@ntlworld.com> To: <WEST-RIDING@rootsweb.com> Sent: August 17, 2007 5:11 AM Subject: [Bulk] [WRY] Dr Banardo's/Hunslet children > I've got three missing children between 1891 and 1901 all born in Hunslet, > Leeds, Albert Fryer born 1885, William Fryer born 1888 and Joseph Fryer > born 1882. I've have been informed that two of them were sent to Canada > from a Dr Banardo's home and the other child remains a mystery.In 1891 > their father Joseph was a widow and all his children were living with him > but in 1901 the remaining children were living with the eldest brother and > a daughter aged 10 was living in an orphan house in Bristol. > My query is how can I find which Dr Banardo's home they were sent to and > when were they sent to Canada. Can anyone please point me in the right > direction > Ann > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > WEST-RIDING-request@rootsweb.com 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 Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.11.19/956 - Release Date: 8/16/2007 > 9:48 AM > >

Further to this. Automated Genealogy are transcribing the Canadian Census for 1901, 1906 (Prairie provinces only) and 1911. The transcriptions also give a direct link to the image (although the manipulation of the image is pretty crude you can scroll up and down and enlarge it) In 1906 Albert appears to be a servant with Fred Moore's family Surname Givens Age Province District Subdistrict Number Page Line Fryer Albert 19 MB Marquette District 04 8 39 Use this link to Automated Genealogy http://automatedgenealogy.com/index.html Mel Smith Whitby, Ontario, Canada -----Original Message----- From: west-riding-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:west-riding-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Mel Smith Sent: August 17, 2007 8:33 AM To: west-riding@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [WRY] Dr Banardo's/Hunslet children The National Archives of Canada has a database of Barnardo children coming to Canada. On this side of pond they were called Home Children. The database lists then name, age, ship they came on, year of arrival and their destination in Canada with info on the microfi;m s which may or may not have additional info. I have never had reason to seek these out so don't know exactly what additional details there may be (Click on the icon to the left of the name to bring up the details) This would appear to be the info on Albert: FRYER , Albert Age: 8 Sex: M Year of arrival: 1894 Microfilm reel: C-4516 Ship: SS Sarnia Port of departure: Liverpool Departure Date: 29 Mar 1894 Port of arrival: Portland, Maine Arrival Date: 11 Apr 1894 Party: Dr Barnardo's Destination: Winnipeg, Manitoba Comments: This passenger list is included in the Halifax film, reel C-4516. Use this link to access the database http://www.collectionscanada.ca/archivianet/020110_e.html Mel Smith Whitby, Ontario, Canada -----Original Message----- From: west-riding-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:west-riding-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Gordon Mccallum Sent: August 17, 2007 5:11 AM To: WEST-RIDING@rootsweb.com Subject: [WRY] Dr Banardo's/Hunslet children I've got three missing children between 1891 and 1901 all born in Hunslet, Leeds, Albert Fryer born 1885, William Fryer born 1888 and Joseph Fryer born 1882. I've have been informed that two of them were sent to Canada from a Dr Banardo's home and the other child remains a mystery.In 1891 their father Joseph was a widow and all his children were living with him but in 1901 the remaining children were living with the eldest brother and a daughter aged 10 was living in an orphan house in Bristol. My query is how can I find which Dr Banardo's home they were sent to and when were they sent to Canada. Can anyone please point me in the right direction Ann ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to WEST-RIDING-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to WEST-RIDING-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

The National Archives of Canada has a database of Barnardo children coming to Canada. On this side of pond they were called Home Children. The database lists then name, age, ship they came on, year of arrival and their destination in Canada with info on the microfi;m s which may or may not have additional info. I have never had reason to seek these out so don't know exactly what additional details there may be (Click on the icon to the left of the name to bring up the details) This would appear to be the info on Albert: FRYER , Albert Age: 8 Sex: M Year of arrival: 1894 Microfilm reel: C-4516 Ship: SS Sarnia Port of departure: Liverpool Departure Date: 29 Mar 1894 Port of arrival: Portland, Maine Arrival Date: 11 Apr 1894 Party: Dr Barnardo's Destination: Winnipeg, Manitoba Comments: This passenger list is included in the Halifax film, reel C-4516. Use this link to access the database http://www.collectionscanada.ca/archivianet/020110_e.html Mel Smith Whitby, Ontario, Canada -----Original Message----- From: west-riding-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:west-riding-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Gordon Mccallum Sent: August 17, 2007 5:11 AM To: WEST-RIDING@rootsweb.com Subject: [WRY] Dr Banardo's/Hunslet children I've got three missing children between 1891 and 1901 all born in Hunslet, Leeds, Albert Fryer born 1885, William Fryer born 1888 and Joseph Fryer born 1882. I've have been informed that two of them were sent to Canada from a Dr Banardo's home and the other child remains a mystery.In 1891 their father Joseph was a widow and all his children were living with him but in 1901 the remaining children were living with the eldest brother and a daughter aged 10 was living in an orphan house in Bristol. My query is how can I find which Dr Banardo's home they were sent to and when were they sent to Canada. Can anyone please point me in the right direction Ann ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to WEST-RIDING-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Good morning all , I am searching for the father of John WATSON who was born in Halifax 1831..Married Mary DEARDEN 1852 (in Halifax ) .Mary was born in Northowram around 1832 and had six or seven children to John , one of wich was my Grandfather ..William Andrew WATSON born 1871 Mount Egerton , Victoria ,Australia. I believe John Watson's father's name was William , he appears on the Marriage cert of John and Mary (Parish Church Halifax )January 12th 1852 ,occupation ? Cudwanner or something ,hard to read the entry. John and Mary Watson immigrated to Australia in 1858 on the ship "Young America" and there are no William Watson's on the passenger lists so I assume if William WATSON was still alive in 1858 then he could still be in Halifax or thereabouts , sorry about all the assumptions...of particular interest is William WATSON'S wife. Can any of you fine folks be of assistance ? Cheers..Rodney Watson

From: "Roy Stockdill" <roy.stockdill@btinternet.com> > Firstly, the occupation you say you can't read is obviously > CORDWAINER, an old term for a shoemaker.> Could I suggest that newcomers to family history really ought to know, or find out, what a cordwainer was, since it is a term you will come across very frequently and just about everybody will have one in their ancestry? Pronounced "cordner", a cordwainer was a worker or trader in leather goods. The name derives from Cordova (Cordoba), the Spanish town famous for its fine leather. Generally speaking, in everyday terms a cordwainer was a shoemaker, bootmaker or cobbler. You will run across the term umpteen times in parish registers, etc. -- Roy Stockdill Editor, Journal of One-Name Studies Guild of One-Name Studies website: www.one-name.org Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

From: "Roy Stockdill" <roy.stockdill@btinternet.com> > Next, the 1841 census for Halifax (online at Ancestry and Findmypast) > shows an 11-year-old John Watson living with William Watson, aged 30, > shoemaker, and Ann, also 30, plus three other younger children at > Great Albion Street, Halifax. The 1841 census does not show > relationships but they can often be inferred and I think you can take > it that William and Ann were husband and wife and the children were > theirs. Also in 1841, the ages of all adults over 15 were rounded down > to the nearest lower multiple of five, so the ages of William and Ann > may not be entirely accurate.> I can further tell you that the parents of John Watson remained in Halifax, since in the 1861 census they were still in Great Albion Street where William, now 55, was a bootmaker. His wife Ann was 52 and they had 4 children between 22 and 10 still with them. So clearly they didn't emigrate with John. -- Roy Stockdill Editor, Journal of One-Name Studies Guild of One-Name Studies website: www.one-name.org Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

pilchard@westnet.com.au wrote snip<> I believe John Watson's father's name was William , he appears on the Marriage cert of John and Mary (Parish Church Halifax )January 12th 1852 ,occupation ? Cudwanner or something ,hard to read the entry. Hi Could the occupation be Cordwainer snip<A cordwainer (or cordovan) is somebody who makes shoes and other articles from fine soft leather. if so in 1851 I found this family William is boot / shoe maker 11 Great Albion Street Halifax John is Card setting machine tender 1851 England Census Source Citation: Class: HO107; Piece: 2298; Folio: 281; Page: 6; GSU roll: 87499-87502. Name:John Watson Age:21 Estimated Birth Year:abt 1830 Relation:Son Father's Name:William Mother's Name:Ann Gender:Male Where born:Halifax, Yorkshire, England Civil Parish:Halifax Ecclesiastical parish:St James Town:Halifax County/Island:Yorkshire Country:England Registration district:Halifax Sub-registration district:Halifax ED, institution, or vessel:1m Neighbors:View others on page Household schedule number:26 Household Members:NameAge Ann Watson42 Benjamin Watson8 Edward Watson3 Ellen Watson11 Mo Emma Watson12 John Watson21 William Watson45 William Watson16 ----- Original Message ----- From: "rodney watson" <pilchard@westnet.com.au> To: <west-riding@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 11:11 PM Subject: [WRY] william WATSON > Good morning all , I am searching for the father of John WATSON who was > born in Halifax 1831..Married Mary DEARDEN 1852 (in Halifax ) .Mary was > born in Northowram around 1832 and had six or seven children to John , > one of wich was my Grandfather ..William Andrew WATSON born 1871 Mount > Egerton , Victoria ,Australia. > I believe John Watson's father's name was William , he appears on the > Marriage cert of John and Mary (Parish Church Halifax )January 12th > 1852 ,occupation ? Cudwanner or something ,hard to read the entry. > John and Mary Watson immigrated to Australia in 1858 on the ship "Young > America" and there are no William Watson's on the passenger lists so I > assume if William WATSON was still alive in 1858 then he could still be > in Halifax or thereabouts , sorry about all the assumptions...of > particular interest is William WATSON'S wife. > Can any of you fine folks be of assistance ? > Cheers..Rodney Watson > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > WEST-RIDING-request@rootsweb.com 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 Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.0/957 - Release Date: 16/08/2007 > 13:46 >

From: rodney watson <pilchard@westnet.com.au> > Good morning all , I am searching for the father of John WATSON who > was born in Halifax 1831..Married Mary DEARDEN 1852 (in Halifax ) > .Mary was born in Northowram around 1832 and had six or seven children > to John , one of wich was my Grandfather ..William Andrew WATSON born > 1871 Mount Egerton , Victoria ,Australia. I believe John Watson's > father's name was William , he appears on the Marriage cert of John > and Mary (Parish Church Halifax )January 12th 1852 ,occupation ? > Cudwanner or something ,hard to read the entry. John and Mary Watson > immigrated to Australia in 1858 on the ship "Young America" and there > are no William Watson's on the passenger lists so I assume if William > WATSON was still alive in 1858 then he could still be in Halifax or > thereabouts , sorry about all the assumptions...of particular interest > is William WATSON'S wife. Can any of you fine folks be of assistance?< Firstly, the occupation you say you can't read is obviously CORDWAINER, an old term for a shoemaker. Have you not looked at the IGI at FamilySearch (www.familysearch.org)? That has a John Watson baptised on 10 May 1832 at Halifax, son of William Watson and Ann. He may well have been born a year or so earlier, you never can tell from the baptismal dates. The batch no. is C007492, therefore it's an official extraction from parish records and not a private LDS submission. Clicking on Source Call reveals it to be from the bishop's transcripts for Halifax Parish Church. Next, the 1841 census for Halifax (online at Ancestry and Findmypast) shows an 11-year-old John Watson living with William Watson, aged 30, shoemaker, and Ann, also 30, plus three other younger children at Great Albion Street, Halifax. The 1841 census does not show relationships but they can often be inferred and I think you can take it that William and Ann were husband and wife and the children were theirs. Also in 1841, the ages of all adults over 15 were rounded down to the nearest lower multiple of five, so the ages of William and Ann may not be entirely accurate. However, I think this is your family and it seems to fit with the information from the IGI. What you then do is go back to the IGI and look for a marriage of a William Watson to an Ann at Halifax round about or prior to 1830 (since John was the eldest child, according to the census of 1841). This produces just one entry for the marriage of William WATSON to Ann RATCLIFFE at Halifax on 20 Nov 1828 (batch no. M007492, also from the bishop's transcripts). You would, of course, need to check these entries with the original parish registers but this seems a likely scenario. Elementary, my dear Watson! Sorry, that was a joke but I have hopefully shown you how to proceed and research on the Internet. It took me about 10 minutes. Good luck with taking it further. -- Roy Stockdill Editor, Journal of One-Name Studies Guild of One-Name Studies website: www.one-name.org Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

Richard Parish registers record baptisms/christenings, weddings and deaths, These registers are kept by individual churches/chapels, though older ones are most likely to be archived - say in Halifax,Wakefield, or York. You'll probably be able to get list of parishes by "googling" the above towns and cities - or they advise you where they are stored etc If you are tracing the above records for the period before 1837 - civil registration of births, marriages, and deaths - then consult IGI - though don't rely on 100% accuracy or 100%. Also be warned that some adult baptisms took place, and not all were baptized ! Can't answer question on local recording of death for soldier in WW1 but "google" may have the answer. Local papers did carry obit notices, but it depended on the relatives taking out an ad/space, though some particular action/battle involving local men often meant there was coverage of the men killed etc There is a special website listing all the WW1 dead*, giving name rank number and unit + date and place of death, and usually the cemetery. * Commonwealth War Graves commission If you visit or get someone to visit the cemetery on your behalf, there is a book of remembrance often giving more details about his family, home address and occupation prior to enlistment Finally you may find Clay & Co listed either in the local library archives or on an historic trades directory - www.historicaldirectories.com Hope you find this is helpful Another Richard ps I haven't listed other websites - you'll find them through the search engines like google -----Original Message----- From: west-riding-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:west-riding-bounces@rootsweb.com]On Behalf Of hogrider1989@comcast.net Sent: 13 August 2007 21:18 To: West Subject: [WRY] Deaths and Baptisims General questions. The first, do the local churches record the baptism and weddings they perform. I ask as if a child was born between census and there is a marriage cert which list a church in which the parents were united in matrimony it is highly probable that any children born from this union will be baptized in that church. Learning of children whom were baptized between census years might also identify those children whom died during childhood. When a serviceman is killed in action, does the government issue a death cert? If so, will the serviceman's local Registration District have a record of this death? Also, during WW I, did the local Halifax papers print an obit when a local boy was KIA? Prior to his enlistment in August 1917, a possible twig on my tree worked for a firm by the name of Clay & Co. Anyone know of this firm? Thanks. Richard ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to WEST-RIDING-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Roy, As usual, you have come up with some very helpful information! I have printed this off and will stick it on my wall so it is always handy! Someone else has sent me a link to Hugh Wallis' pages which lets you locate IGI batch numbers - _http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~hughwallis_ (http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~hughwallis) - so the combination is now a fantastic resource which I can actually use!! Thank you so much. Maggie >>1) First you must find out the appropriate batch number for a particular parish. You can do this by doing a place search in the Family History Library Catalogue or by finding an entry that you know to be in that particular parish and calling it up. >>2) Click on the batch number in the screen that gives you the full information. This automatically inserts the batch number into the appropriate box in the IGI search screen with all other fields empty. >>3) Enter the region British Isles AND NOTHING ELSE AT ALL. In other words, leave all the other fields BLANK. Click on Search and you will get the entire register come up, alphabetically! You can then scroll all the way through it in screens of 200 entries at a time - a somewhat cumbersome and tedious process but you may be lucky enough to spot that missing entry you seek "lurking" somewhere in the register in a peculiarly-spelt variant you hadn't even thought of! I have often found "missing" entries with this method that I couldn't find with a conventional search. Mind you, you may have to trawl through several thousand entries. >>Remember - enter the batch number (this is vital) and the region. If you are pretty sure of the date of any event you can enter the year (or with +/- parameters) and get every entry for that particular year or period. However, the important thing is not to enter anything in the first name or last name fields. Try playing about with it - it works!

Can I draw listers' attention to the next meeting of the above Society to be held on Tuesday next, the 21st August? Mr. John Goodchild of the Local History Study Centre, Drury Lane, Wakefield, has kindly agreed to come and talk to us about how to use newspapers in the pursuit of our family history. The meeting will be open to members and non-members alike, entrance free, and will be held at our usual venue, the St. Paul's Church Hall, off Greenfoot Lane, Barnsley (near to the Barnsley District General Hospital), commencing at 7.30 pm (doors open at 7 pm). If you require travel directions, I will be only too pleased to provide them. Why not come along and join us on what should be a very interesting evening. Refreshments will be served at the conclusion of the talk. Joan Speakers organiser, Barnsley FHS

From: MaggieMole@aol.com > Well, everyone is much cleverer than I am at driving the IGI, even > allowing for the fact that I didn't think of spelling variants - I > think (and hope) the search engine does this for me. I can locate > this particular record by typing in George Malinson and the year > 1804, but not by doing a wider search. We're talking about > _www.familysearch.org_ (http://www.familysearch.org) , right? And just > using the dialogue box on the front page? It's doing nothing for me: > I want to find John Mallinson, as that's Selina's father's name on > her marriage certificate which just arrived today. She was born in > Wakefield and married in Mirfield, which gives me no lead to John at > all.> Never, ever assume anything about the IGI or www.familysearch.org!!! It simply doesn't always work in the way you expect it to. Whilst, yes, in theory it should find variants of the name you type in, it does not always find obvious ones or ones we would think are obvious. Let me give you a couple of examples..... 1) I do a one-name study of Stockdale/Stockdill and variants and whilst the IGI at FamilySearch finds a number of variants of the name, it does not find a major one of STOGDALE or any variant with a G in the middle. To find Stogdales I have to enter this as a separate name in the search box. 2) One of my major research interests is in the name YELLOW/YALLOW. Whilst the IGI finds these, it does NOT find YELLOWLEY, YALLOWLEY, YELLOWLAY, YALLOWLAY, YELLOWLOW etc. Again, I have to enter these separately. A further point to consider is that sometimes a name may have got so hopelessly mangled in spelling, possibly by the original incumbent or in transcription, that it appears in some weird variant that no amount of searching by the normal methods will find. Here's what you can do in a case like that..... 1) First you must find out the appropriate batch number for a particular parish. You can do this by doing a place search in the Family History Library Catalogue or by finding an entry that you know to be in that particular parish and calling it up. 2) Click on the batch number in the screen that gives you the full information. This automatically inserts the batch number into the appropriate box in the IGI search screen with all other fields empty. 3) Enter the region British Isles AND NOTHING ELSE AT ALL. In other words, leave all the other fields BLANK. Click on Search and you will get the entire register come up, alphabetically! You can then scroll all the way through it in screens of 200 entries at a time - a somewhat cumbersome and tedious process but you may be lucky enough to spot that missing entry you seek "lurking" somewhere in the register in a peculiarly-spelt variant you hadn't even thought of! I have often found "missing" entries with this method that I couldn't find with a conventional search. Mind you, you may have to trawl through several thousand entries. Remember - enter the batch number (this is vital) and the region. If you are pretty sure of the date of any event you can enter the year (or with +/- parameters) and get every entry for that particular year or period. However, the important thing is not to enter anything in the first name or last name fields. Try playing about with it - it works! -- Roy Stockdill Editor, Journal of One-Name Studies Guild of One-Name Studies website: www.one-name.org Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

Hi Chris (and Linda who contacted me outside the list), >>The IGI has George Malinson marrying Mary Bains at Hooke on 24 July 1804 swiftly followed on 14 October 1804 by the baptism of Jane Malinson, parents George and Mary, also at Hooke. I know that the dates aren't exactly, what you're looking for, but it might be a lead.>> Well, everyone is much cleverer than I am at driving the IGI, even allowing for the fact that I didn't think of spelling variants - I think (and hope) the search engine does this for me. I can locate this particular record by typing in George Malinson and the year 1804, but not by doing a wider search. We're talking about _www.familysearch.org_ (http://www.familysearch.org) , right? And just using the dialogue box on the front page? It's doing nothing for me: I want to find John Mallinson, as that's Selina's father's name on her marriage certificate which just arrived today. She was born in Wakefield and married in Mirfield, which gives me no lead to John at all. I even have the British Isles Vital Records set of CDs, but they tell me there are No Matches for Mallinson/Malinson marriages in Yorkshire for the period around which I'm looking - around 1825 - which is clearly wrong. I think I shall have to go to Doncaster to look at the actual parish christening record. Sigh. Chris, you are a fount of knowledge about Hook, and I'm very grateful for all you've told me about it, including the history of the church names and parish identities. It stops me going down too many blind alleys!! Thank you. Maggie

It's one and the same. Hook was a township in the parish and peculiar of Snaith. The parish church was the Priory church of St. Laurence at Snaith. Snaith was a rather large parish, and as well as the parish church, it had chapels of ease at Airmyn, Carlton (juxta Snaith), Hook, and Rawcliffe. The one at Hook was dedicated to St. John. In the late nineteenth century the parish of Snaith was broken up into a number of smaller parishes, and Hook became a township in the new parish of Hook. The chapel of ease of St. John became the parish church, and was re-dedicated to St. Mary the Virgin. Kushti bok, Chris Westmoreland > -----Original Message----- > From: west-riding-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:west-riding- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of DeLories Vaughn > Sent: 14 August 2007 00:53 > To: WEST-RIDING@rootsweb.com > Subject: [WRY] Hook Yorkshire England > > My family is from Hook. Christened/married/buried in the Hook cemetery at > St. Mary the Virgin Church. We were just there in April (from the US) I > have > pictures of the church and cemetery if it would be of any interest. So, > not > only is there a St. John's but a St. Mary's too. St. Mary's also follows > under Snaith. > So you might want to consider St. Mary's along with St. John's. > DeLories Robinson Vaughn > > No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.17/951 - Release Date: 13/08/2007 10:15

There was but a few days ago a posting from the Leicestershire reposted on this list by yours trully which had the address on it but here it goes http://www.LEICESTERSHIRE-PLUS@rootsweb.com hope of some use regards Terry Norway >From: <sam307@peoplepc.com> >Reply-To: west-riding@rootsweb.com >To: <Yorksgen@rootsweb.com> >CC: west-riding@rootsweb.com >Subject: [WRY] Leicester mailing list >Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:20:45 -0700 > >Hi Listers, > >I know this is not Yorkshire genealogy but I have tried to find one for >Leicester and failed. > >Can anyone help, please. > >Sheila >California > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >WEST-RIDING-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >quotes in the subject and the body of the message _________________________________________________________________ MSN Music http://music.msn.no Finn din favorittmusikk blant nesten 1 million låter

Very interesting Roy. I suspect your theory about bigamy could be correct as I have never found Ann's death, and there are all sorts of 'mysteries' around this family generally. I am almost sure that John STRAFFORD was born in Conisbrough, son of Joshua and Elizabeth STRAFFORD, but the parish register lists his father as Richard. I have not been able to trace John and his new wife after the birth of their children, although one died in the area in 1832, and two of John and Ann's children married in Scrooby in the 1820s. I have over the years found a lot of information about this family, but sometimes the more I find, the more questions arise! Thank you for the information Regards Margaret On 14 Aug 2007, at 10:18, Roy Stockdill wrote: A private Act of Parliament was required to obtain a divorce until 1858, so obviously it was a device only available to the extremely wealthy and well connected. After after 1858, divorce for ordinary people was still virtually impossible because of the expense. It did not really become an option for most people until legal aid became available in the 1920s. Having personally uncovered at least three cases of bigamy in the course of my researches that no-one, as far as I am aware, had ever found before - one involving the great-grandfather of Dame Judi Dench and another my own wife's great-grandmother - I am of the opinion that bigamy was far more common in Victorian times than we imagine. In the case of Judi Dench, her gt-grandfather, a customs officer, left his wife and six kids in Weymouth and lived with another woman, a widow, in Battersea, South London, with whom he had two more children and then underwent a bigamous marriage in 1887, calling himself a widower on the certificate. This was clearly a lie because his legal wife was still very much alive on the census in Weymouth in 1891 and 1901 and, in fact, outlived him by a good many years. In my wife's case her gt-grandmother left her husband and children to live with a younger man and underwent a bigamous marriage in 1898 at Coventry, describing herself as a spinster and giving the name of her legitimate husband - who was still alive in 1901 - as her father! The foregoing cases have been published in magazines, BTW, so I am not revealing anything that's not already known. My point is that people had probably lied to their new partners about being widowed and, being under pressure from the second partner to marry, had no hope of getting a divorce and so went through a bigamous marriage. I am confident that as research becomes easier with all the GRO Indexes and the Victorian censuses now online, more and more cases will turn up. -- Roy Stockdill Editor, Journal of One-Name Studies Guild of One-Name Studies website: www.one-name.org Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to WEST-RIDING- request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

In that case Chris, I'm sure that they could not have gotten divorced, so it seems to me that John's wife must have died for John to have remarried so quickly. She must have died between 1810 and 1813, but I just cannot find a death for her in either Yorkshire or Nottinghamshire. Thanks for the information anyway. Maybe I shall just have to accept that she just 'disappeared' Regards Margaret On 14 Aug 2007, at 00:11, Chris 4Genealogy wrote: I think that at that time it took an Act of Parliament to get _legally_ divorced - very expensive. More likely is separation. Chris On 13/08/07, Margaret Elliott <meelliott@btinternet.com> wrote: > It would have to have been a divorce as they were married, and > husband John Strafford remarried in 1814. But daughter Adelina > married a cow keeper, and John was a miller, so they were hardly > other than 'ordinary'. > > Margaret > > > On 13 Aug 2007, at 21:35, Kim Groothuis wrote: > > Margaret > > A divorce at that time would have been impossible for ordinary > people. People did run off and marry other people, pretending to be > widowed, but as Ann seems to have remained in touch with her children > and stepchildren that seems unlikely. > > Hope this helps > > Kim ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to WEST-RIDING- request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

From: "Chris 4Genealogy" <chris4genealogy@gmail.com> > I think that at that time it took an Act of Parliament to get > _legally_ divorced - very expensive. More likely is separation. > > Chris > > On 13/08/07, Margaret Elliott <meelliott@btinternet.com> wrote: > > It would have to have been a divorce as they were married, and > > husband John Strafford remarried in 1814. But daughter Adelina > > married a cow keeper, and John was a miller, so they were hardly > > other than 'ordinary'. > > > > Margaret<< A private Act of Parliament was required to obtain a divorce until 1858, so obviously it was a device only available to the extremely wealthy and well connected. After after 1858, divorce for ordinary people was still virtually impossible because of the expense. It did not really become an option for most people until legal aid became available in the 1920s. Having personally uncovered at least three cases of bigamy in the course of my researches that no-one, as far as I am aware, had ever found before - one involving the great-grandfather of Dame Judi Dench and another my own wife's great-grandmother - I am of the opinion that bigamy was far more common in Victorian times than we imagine. In the case of Judi Dench, her gt-grandfather, a customs officer, left his wife and six kids in Weymouth and lived with another woman, a widow, in Battersea, South London, with whom he had two more children and then underwent a bigamous marriage in 1887, calling himself a widower on the certificate. This was clearly a lie because his legal wife was still very much alive on the census in Weymouth in 1891 and 1901 and, in fact, outlived him by a good many years. In my wife's case her gt-grandmother left her husband and children to live with a younger man and underwent a bigamous marriage in 1898 at Coventry, describing herself as a spinster and giving the name of her legitimate husband - who was still alive in 1901 - as her father! The foregoing cases have been published in magazines, BTW, so I am not revealing anything that's not already known. My point is that people had probably lied to their new partners about being widowed and, being under pressure from the second partner to marry, had no hope of getting a divorce and so went through a bigamous marriage. I am confident that as research becomes easier with all the GRO Indexes and the Victorian censuses now online, more and more cases will turn up. -- Roy Stockdill Editor, Journal of One-Name Studies Guild of One-Name Studies website: www.one-name.org Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

DeLories, That's splendid! Yes, please, I would enjoy having one or two pictures as it's somewhere I do not know at all. St Mary's also sounds very Anglican - Church of England - and it's interesting there might be two Anglican churches in such a small place. Please send pictures to me at _maggiemole@aol.com_ (mailto:maggiemole@aol.com) . many thanks Maggie >>My family is from Hook. Christened/married/buried in the Hook cemetery at St. Mary the Virgin Church. We were just there in April (from the US) I have pictures of the church and cemetery if it would be of any interest. So, not only is there a St. John's but a St. Mary's too. St. Mary's also follows under Snaith. So you might want to consider St. Mary's along with St. John's. DeLories Robinson Vaughn>>

I think that at that time it took an Act of Parliament to get _legally_ divorced - very expensive. More likely is separation. Chris On 13/08/07, Margaret Elliott <meelliott@btinternet.com> wrote: > It would have to have been a divorce as they were married, and > husband John Strafford remarried in 1814. But daughter Adelina > married a cow keeper, and John was a miller, so they were hardly > other than 'ordinary'. > > Margaret > > > On 13 Aug 2007, at 21:35, Kim Groothuis wrote: > > Margaret > > A divorce at that time would have been impossible for ordinary > people. People did run off and marry other people, pretending to be > widowed, but as Ann seems to have remained in touch with her children > and stepchildren that seems unlikely. > > Hope this helps > > Kim