RootsChat.Com

England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Sussex => Topic started by: Legacy on Monday 20 March 17 18:39 GMT (UK)

Title: Errors & Omissions on SMI
Post by: Legacy on Monday 20 March 17 18:39 GMT (UK)
I posted this 10 yrs ago and have never seen anything corrected by the SFHG, of which I am a member. Lately, I have found quite a few omissions from Ewhurst covering 1774-1799 and earlier.
Hello everybody

Recently I have discovered at least four errors on the SMI. I have notified the SFHG for two of these. Here are the details of the four, as they may help out others.

Salehurst M. 1835-4-25  Edward JONES &  Ann STONESTREET, (B)
wit Samuel JONES & Edwd. HEATHFIELD

I can now confirm that the SMI is in error. Actual original parish record indicates RICHARD as the first name. (LDS #1067300 Item 2 = M.1812-1836 )

Mountfield  M. 1810-6-22 John JEMPSON &  Sarah HARDING

It should read JONAS Jempson. I have extracted the original marriage act from the microfilm of the PRs by the Mormons, #1894273 , filmed in 1993, Item 12 -- Marriages 1807-1812, by banns. James Jempson & John Huntly witnesses.

 Ewhurst Nov 1816  Edward SMITH &  Mary BAYLEY by banns only

This couple did marry, but in Hawkhurst. They did so November 1, 1818, two years after the banns were published in Ewhurst.
# 2354810 Hawkhurst Item #5 p.32, #95 Edward Smith & Maria Bayley 1-11-1818 both of this parish wit. Thomas Weller, by banns.

Sedlescombe  M. 1789-1-16  James SMITH of Bodiam &  Hannah BAKER

From my notes and films for the SMITH family of East Sussex, this is SAMUEL Smith, not James as indicated.
LDS #1894291  Item 2. Marriages 1778-1812
 f.12 Samuel SMITH of Bodiham & Hannah Baker OTP by Lic 16 JAN. 1789   
 Saml. Baker, Philly Ades as witnesses.

I do not know if they plan on publishing an article on the SMI with the corrections so have decided to post them here. I do have digital images of all if needed.
Regards,  Legacy

My Question is, when will an article or something be published encompassing these errors/ omissions???????
Title: Re: Errors & Omissions on SMI
Post by: BumbleB on Tuesday 21 March 17 07:52 GMT (UK)
I'm a little confused as to why you are posing this question to Rootschat - surely you should be asking Sussex FHG, as it is their publication  :-\
Title: Re: Errors & Omissions on SMI
Post by: Legacy on Tuesday 21 March 17 12:51 GMT (UK)
To get the information out there for others, just because it is not on the CD, does not mean it is not there.
I will be contacting the SFHG also.