243rose
RootsChat Senior
 Offline
Posts: 283
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
If anyone has the Littleport parish registers on microfiche, could you look for the baptism of a Robert PORTER for me. According to the census he was born about 1773.
Ta very much.
iain.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Keith Sherwood
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 3136
To be young is to be as one of the immortals
|
Iain,
Will look this one up for you when I visit the CCRO next Tuesday...
keith
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
243rose
RootsChat Senior
Offline
Posts: 283
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Keith,
That's very decent of you.
He says he was born in Littleport in the 1851 census but you can never trust what these dead people say.
Thanks
Iain
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Keith Sherwood
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 3136
To be young is to be as one of the immortals
|
Iain,
Can't be certain of anything in life - or death for that matter, but I'll have a jolly good look for him! Watch this space from about late next Tuesday afternoon...
keith
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
243rose
RootsChat Senior
Offline
Posts: 283
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Will Do...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Keith Sherwood
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 3136
To be young is to be as one of the immortals
|
Iain,
A bit of a frustrating leaf through those Littleport registers for your Robert. However, this was the only PORTER family of that time that I was able to turn up:
A marriage on 06-01-1756 between William PORTER of St. Mary's Ely and Elizabeth SMITH otp (consent of guardian ), followed by these children baptised to the couple:
Elizabeth: 25-01-1756
Joshua: 12-06-1757
William: 13-08-1760
Mary: 18-10-1762
Mary: 26-03-1764
Joshua: 06-01-1767
Elizabeth: 25-12-1769
Richard: 10-01-1774
Presumably the firstborn Elizabeth, Mary and Joshua must have died young, but I didn't have time to check the burials for the parish.
Looks like Richard is the nearest I can manage to Robert, but hope these might be of some use to you,
Regards, keith
N.B. I wonder how young Elizabeth SMITH was when she married in 1756...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
243rose
RootsChat Senior
Offline
Posts: 283
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Keith.
Thanks very much for do that on my behalf.
I appreciate the effort that you did.
I suppose there is a gap between the last two children for Robert to have been born......... unless he was born elsewhere of course.
Thanks again.
I have spent a while wondering, at least i can get on with wondering about something else now.
Iain.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Keith Sherwood
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 3136
To be young is to be as one of the immortals
|
Iain,
Do you know whether your Robert PORTER might have been part of that family, or not? And yes, with family history there's ALWAYS somewhere else to be looking next!
Best wishes,
keith
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
243rose
RootsChat Senior
Offline
Posts: 283
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
keith.
i just had a look at my records again and robert PORTERS dob wasn't from the census.
the Littleport society gave me the info presumably counting back from age at death on his burial entry in 1826.
whether he's from that family......... well it would be conjecture i suppose, his amongst his kids were an elizabeth and a mary and a william so that may add some weight.
how to be certain though  ?
iain
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Keith Sherwood
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 3136
To be young is to be as one of the immortals
|
Iain,
For what it's worth, the only Robert PORTER baptism that the IGI throws up for the years 1770-1780 in the whole of Cambridgeshire is in Ely St Mary's (about 6 miles from Littleport). The parents are a Joshua and Elizabeth PORTER.
But you've probably already dismissed this individual as not your man...
keith
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
243rose
RootsChat Senior
Offline
Posts: 283
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Keith.
It's difficult to know how to bridge the gap between the truth and a maybe,
that's the frustrating part of this hobbey of ours.
When you looked at the Littleport rgisters, were they the originals or transcriptions ?
cheers
iain.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Keith Sherwood
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 3136
To be young is to be as one of the immortals
|
Iain,
They were transcriptions, though they do have microfilms of some, plus the actual original registers to leaf through for the most recent records in some cases. Not sure if they have the room for both originals and transcriptions of the very same records,
keith
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
243rose
RootsChat Senior
Offline
Posts: 283
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Keith,
Thanks.
That's what i thought.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
bedfordshire boy
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 3763
|
Can we go back to basics here?
Which Robert Porter was he in 1851, as I can't see one born 1773? Just one aged 55 born Littleport. Equally if you have located him in 1851 he can't be the one buried in 1826! The Burial Index on the Cambs FHS site at http://www.cfhs.org.uk/BurialIndex/index.html
gives the age of the Robert Porter buried in 1826 as 63. Which would make his birth c1763, not 1773. But burial ages are even more unreliable than census ages!
Are you mixing and matching two Robert Porters?
1. age 55 in 1851 born Littleport
2. Buried 1826 age 63 birthplace unknown
Or is there a third Robert Porter age 78 born Littleport in 1851 who I haven't found?
Can you clarify?
David
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.ukBeds: Cople: Luke/Spencer Everton: Hale Henlow: Cooper/Watts/Sabey Potton: Merrill Southill: Faulkner/Litchfield/Sabey Woburn/Husborne Crawley: Surkitt Hunts: Gt Gransden: Merrill/Chandler/Medlock Toseland: Surkitt/Hedge/Corn Cambs: Bourn: Bowd Eltisley: Medlock Graveley: Ford/Revell |
|
|
Keith Sherwood
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 3136
To be young is to be as one of the immortals
|
David,
Nothing like a third pair of eyes working on this, so perhaps I'll have a different remit next time I go to the CCRO. Except that I'm pretty sure that the only PORTER family I found in Littleport was the one I listed earlier in this thread - and the spread of that generation covers either 1763 or 1773, no sign of Robert still...
keith
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Author
