RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Cheshire => Topic started by: History Lives on Wednesday 30 June 21 15:18 BST (UK)
-
I'm trying to build a DNA match's family tree to see what their connection is to me, however, they've barely got any information in their tree.
I believe their grandparents are John H Challoner and Dorothy Davies, who married in 1945 in Wallasey. We know Dorothy Davies was born 5th January 1929 in Chester so she would have been 16 when she married.
However, here is some confusing information on the 1939 register in Hoole, Chester, Dorothy is listed as Davies, but this is then crossed out with "Challoner" put in its place and "Page 17" written next to it. However, page 17 is all censored out on Ancestry and I can't read any of it. What would this most likely mean?
I would prefer to not have to pay for a marriage certificate from GRO if I can avoid it...
Couldn't attached a screenshot as the file size was too big.
-
Hello History Lives,
Just to let you know that this site isn't to be used to trace, or research, people who are living, or could still be alive. I pondered answering your query in view of this.
The 1939 Register was used for the Ration Books. Women who married changed their names and this had to be updated hence the extra surnames. This is why it has been amended to show Dorothy's married name of Challenor. The Register does not give any information on people who could still be alive, or were born less than 100 years ago. This is the reason for the redacted areas in it.
Jo
-
Hello History Lives,
Just to let you know that this site isn't to be used to trace, or research, people who are living, or could still be alive. I pondered answering your query in view of this.
The 1939 Register was used for the Ration Books. Women who married changed their names and this had to be updated hence the extra surnames. This is why it has been amended to show Dorothy's married name of Challenor. The Register does not give any information on people who could still be alive, or were born less than 100 years ago. This is the reason for the redacted areas in it.
Jo
Right ok, so Challoner would have been added into the book when she got married in 1945?
-
If you look, the date of amendment should be there which should tie in with the marriage.
-
If you look, the date of amendment should be there which should tie in with the marriage.
Yes it does actually. Thanks, never noticed that.
-
Thanks for that bit of info Heywood - I never knew that - we learn something new every day - cheers