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 - JohninSussex

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 37
The Lighter Side / Re: What a judgmental enumerator!
« on: Monday 15 October 18 13:42 BST (UK)  »
The column heading says"completed years the marriage has lasted", so they could have been married 18 years and 11 months, in which case the child would be legitimate?
Then the child would not have been aged 19.

As Familydar said, the householder has written information that is inconsistent.  Some census clerk has noticed the anomaly and made an assumption  as to how to rectify it.

If the marriage had lasted for 18y and 11m, and the child was aged 18 and 9, yes she would have been legitimate.  But it's not usual to round up someone's age.

ADDED, sorry Carom just saw you retracted, but it is another explanation the clerk could have considered.

England / Re: Keren Happuck Mitchell Ching
« on: Monday 08 October 18 20:19 BST (UK)  »
Evening all,

Looking for any help locating the above Keren Ching and her husband Edward. She married Edward May on 2 February 1815 in Surrey. It's a very unusual name!



Keren-happuch is a biblical (Old testament) name, usually hyphenated like so, but could be spelled as a single word if you are searching for her name.

Armed Forces Resources / Re: East or West & North or South
« on: Sunday 07 October 18 22:53 BST (UK)  »
Good, so back to the original question, a full location should contain the N/S and E/W information as you suggest.  I suppose if the ship always worked a particular route, East Indies or West Indies, the navigator or whoever it was had no need to record the obvious.

In this case it looks like West Indies...

Armed Forces Resources / Re: East or West & North or South
« on: Sunday 07 October 18 21:58 BST (UK)  »
Unless you have reversed lat and long, it is somewhere in the Arctic (lat 69N), either off Iceland (16 W) or near Troms°, Norway (16 E) 

Sussex / Re: Nairn coat of arms
« on: Friday 05 October 18 09:44 BST (UK)  »
in a book ''The Poll for Knights of the Shire to Represent The County of Kent'' - 1734 (Does this mean John Nearn was a Knight, ie Esq ?) , we find, John Nearn , his abode is Wingham , & his Freehold is New Church.Also in 1734 we find both William & ''Richard Gibbs'', both their  abode & Freehold  is Willesborough, near Ashford.(Also there were Henry Gibbs,John Gibbs, Thomas & Edward Gibbs) 

A Poll Book is somewhat similar to an electoral register, but published after an election.  As there was no secret voting at that time (and of course only significant male landowners had the vote), the book was published giving not only the names of voters but which candidates they voted for.

A 'Knight of the shire' was a name for a Member of Parliament elected by the voters of the county listed in the poll book.

The Common Room / Re: Street Numbers
« on: Wednesday 03 October 18 15:42 BST (UK)  »

obviously no longer enforced as when I google a location & click on Streetview many houses seem unnumbered following renovation etc

I suspect that it's no longer enforced because there is nobody left in Local Government to enforce it!

The worst case I ever found was along a lane linking two earlier Urban Districts. The boundary between them ran, for a distance, along the middle of the road and the lane was numbered independently from both ends - i.e. X Lane East and X Lane West.

Following the convention of odd numbers on the right hand side of the road (or is it the left - I'm not sure but it doesn't matter!), I found that there were even numbers on both sides of the road which bore no relationship to one another
Assuming "X" is "Ack" I walked along that road the other day and noticed the same phenomenon.

Various generalisations above.  The idea of "clockwise" numbering, or number 1 always being on the left as you face up the road, is not universal.  Another tale I have seen mentioned is that number 1 is at the end of the road nearest the sorting office/post office.   Never seen proof of that one.

The quoted power of local authorities to require numbers to be displayed, is routinely ignored by shops especially nationwide chains.  I was told once that only certain authorities ever took up that power, and if the retail giants have any interest in displaying their number, it is only in those areas (I expect Westminster is a key one) that enforce it.  And   as already said, the councils no longer have the resources to enforce stuff like that. 

Family History Beginners Board / Re: English Parish Records Index
« on: Sunday 30 September 18 18:07 BST (UK)  »
Welcome to the original questioner, and hopefully you will find your way back to to read the answers to your question, and/or be able to clarify what in particular you're seeking.

With regard to the spat between Vancemead, Guy and Stan, about the "IGI", what it is and how "accurate" it is, not very helpful chaps.  It could well be that in 1976 the Mormons regarded the IGI as "an index of LDS ordinances".  The link given by Stan 
If it is of any interest, "What is the International Genealogical Index"
is ten years old and perhaps described the state of the IGI then.  It included transcriptions of parish registers, probably initially done by volunteers, inaccurate and incomplete, but was useful at a time when few other resources were available without visiting the localities concerned.

Effectively the IGI no longer exists - but some Rootschatters use that just as a name for the Mormons' FamilySearch website.   FamilySearch does not seem to use that name any longer, or at least it is not the name they give to the main data found at the site.   It offers "Collections" with names like "England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975" with information sometimes derived from the same filmed parish registers that contributed to the earlier IGI, and FindMyPast uses some of the same transcriptions.  And FamilySearch does not charge for lookups.

A resource for finding parish registers from around the country is Dusty Docs found here
(the link is to Cheshire, just change the county from the top drop-down box).  It may not be completely accurate but I found it a great help when starting out.

Cheshire / Re: 1929 Electoral Register same property two different entries
« on: Thursday 27 September 18 16:22 BST (UK)  »
I was asking about headings for the pages not the whole piece.  But if that doesn't help, if you're able to scroll back from the later page (the three Ow etc) there should be a cover page at the start of that section.  And that section may consist entirely of O and Ow (w being women).

What Ý am thinking of is property owners who are not resident in the relevant area and could vote in council elections but not for Parliament.  One way or another there must be a way to explain why there are two separated entries for the same address.

Cheshire / Re: 1929 Electoral Register same property two different entries
« on: Thursday 27 September 18 13:52 BST (UK)  »
Is the heading at the top of both pages the same?  One may be the main register and the other a supplement giving perhaps late registrations, or perhaps those who qualified for local but not parliamentary elections.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 37