Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - heywood

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 2875
1
Ireland / Re: "Relative" on the census
« on: Today at 00:01 »
And Census links.

Yes please  :)

2
Ireland / Re: "Relative" on the census
« on: Yesterday at 23:59 »
Hello,

I think your theory and explanation here is too complicated because of the lack of names and the timespan.
For example,
BallyaltikilliganG has assumed incest which I didnít see at all in your explanation but now I am wondering  :-\
It might be best to explain with names and places, do you think?

Heywood

3
Lancashire / Re: DeRome of Manchester
« on: Yesterday at 22:10 »
There are several Eastham births, in various places, with mother as Smith and to be sure you would have  to purchase the certificates. They may be unrelated.

4
Lancashire / Re: DeRome of Manchester
« on: Yesterday at 21:54 »
Re the Catholic question.
Lancashire BMD show marriages as Church/Registrar Office. If it is C o E it shows the church otherwise Registrar attended or Reg. office.  Often this one is Catholic.

5
Durham / Re: Mary Cheeseborrow (Cheeseborrow)
« on: Yesterday at 20:37 »
There is a birth   :-\

Mary Ann Cheeseburn mmn Walton December quarter 1859 Newcastle 10b pg 83

Other births though Margaret 1863 and Joseph 1862 - they died as infants.

6
Dublin / Re: John Brady Birth Date: 6 Jun 1881
« on: Yesterday at 16:54 »
All solved - well done  :)

Somehow, I thought the OP was thinking there were two different children because of the discrepancy in the date. If so, I was going to say it is a common occurrence as Baptism was more important than birth registration.  :)

7
Dublin / Re: John Brady Birth Date: 6 Jun 1881
« on: Yesterday at 08:43 »
Thanks very much Sinann.   :)
I looked and looked last night and eventually decided it was in the darkened part and couldnít be seen. They are difficult registers to read.

I was also confused re the information, tmp48, between Conboy/Convoy and Kinsella.

The name seems to be Conboy according to the records but are you saying that these are two different John Bradys - one with mother Bridget Conboy and one with mother Bridget Kinsella?

8
Lancashire / Re: Birtwistle - Tottington
« on: Yesterday at 08:09 »
That was difficult   :)

Here is Ivy in 1911 - surname mistranscribed as Barper. Her parents are Thomas Leck (sometimes Leek maybe?) Barker and Margaret Warwick.

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X724-WJ8

I will leave these with you and please come back if you want further help.

9
Lancashire / Re: Birtwistle - Tottington
« on: Yesterday at 07:43 »
Thatís good news.

There is only one John William Birtwistle showing in birth indexes - 1906.

The GRO site shows him with motherís name Hough.
Ashton under Lyne December quarter vol 8d pg 490

This site http://www.cheshirebmd.org.uk/index.php covers Ashton as Tameside and confirms the name Hough.

https://www.familysearch.org  You need to register but a free to use site

Here is John William in 1911

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XW1L-S8T

With names, places of birth and motherís names you can start going back and looking for marriages and siblings etc.

I donít think I found Ivy so will take a look.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 2875