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 - OZScot

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 ... 15
37
Lanarkshire / Re: Gordon Blair - Mystery? or Not!
« on: Thursday 13 April 17 04:33 BST (UK)  »
Just back.

The 1863 BC of baby Elizabeth Blair whilst it is badly blurred being a copy of a copy
and looks as it has been played around with to enlarge it, would be totally useless for a
signature comparison apart from that, as the piece I have has 3 births on it and they
are well done exactly in the same hand.

The witness was Mr/s?. Hogan & registrar appears to be Mr/s. Hendren

Age of Gordon 31yrs & Julia 25yrs.

I got the BC from a lady's tree on Ancestry and I think earlier I gave her the credit.
It will be there and easily found I suspect if anyone wants to see and if you agree or not.

38
Lanarkshire / Re: Gordon Blair - Mystery? or Not!
« on: Thursday 13 April 17 02:58 BST (UK)  »
I posted at the same time.
This was just a comment on signatures in general before your post.

39
Lanarkshire / Re: Gordon Blair - Mystery? or Not!
« on: Thursday 13 April 17 02:56 BST (UK)  »
Just a comment regarding signatures and their likely comparison.
Experts says that people's signatures change over the years and they sign differently.

I know myself I have and I'm sure everybody's has as well.
I used to put my initials nicely separated followed by surname nice and neat.

Then I jammed them up closer together and not so neat and then I saw a friend of mine
who is was a solicitor who signed his with big bold old fashioned scrolling letters with Esq
and I thought how good that looked so I did similar [without Esq] and now it's something
only I could recognise because it looks like a spider's web.

I would still be able to recognise my old one's however.


40
Lanarkshire / Re: Gordon Blair - Mystery? or Not!
« on: Thursday 13 April 17 01:30 BST (UK)  »
Yes Sue can't wait.
I asked them for everything they had except what the cat had for breakfast.

Don't expect it right away though ... Hmm.. this has been too long already 50 mins ago.   :)

41
Lanarkshire / Re: Gordon Blair - Mystery? or Not!
« on: Thursday 13 April 17 00:43 BST (UK)  »
Second email seeking relevant information sent to Ipswich C of E ... now it's a waiting game.

Every Church I've ever contacted for information have been most helpful and even putting
me in touch with Local Historians etc. They were all Scottish!!!

42
Lanarkshire / Re: Gordon Blair - Mystery? or Not!
« on: Thursday 13 April 17 00:09 BST (UK)  »
Quote from: majm on Wednesday 12 April 17 09:37 BST (UK)
Quote from: isobelw on Wednesday 12 April 17 09:18 BST (UK)
.....  For some reason Australia Gordon fails to marry until 1876 but then obtains a certificate bearing the details as they would have appeared if the marriage had taken place in 1863ish-( one wonders if this certificate was later 'doctored' to show an earlier marriage date thus providing the basis for the death certificate details). Brain working overtime here!
Isobel
    Exactly ....  Many a legal document has been fudged.   I continue to urge that the church records ... both the C of E at Ipswich and the Presbyterian at Ann St in Brisbane should be sought .... they ought to be extant, and they may well have same or similar info to that already found, but, to me, they are primary documents to unwinding the mystery and should have Gordon's signature on them, and perhaps contain 'margin notes' from the clergy.   The wee lass born 1863 who succumbed at about three months - if baptised, there should be an entry for her to seek out too.    Naming Godparents, giving usual abode, occupation of her parents .... It is perhaps showing my age, but in my opinion, family history information is not the exclusive domain of Ancestry or other online commercial websites.   

JM.   

I have just sent an email for a request of information from the Presbyterian Church Ann St., Brisbane from the original marriage document 7 July 1876. Also asking for any attached notes and copies of those signatures and if there is any evidence of an earlier marriage by both to each other and or parties. Hopefully they reply. Next I'll contact Ipswich C of E.


43
Lanarkshire / Re: Gordon Blair - Mystery? or Not!
« on: Wednesday 12 April 17 01:38 BST (UK)  »
Quote from: Rosinish on Wednesday 12 April 17 01:22 BST (UK)
I think it's possibly because we always tend to double check dates/ages etc. so things like that jump out but of course, I wasn't paying enough attention to realise it was a burial date probably because I don't tend to use DOB other than for births & for Burials I use exactly that, Burial, to save any confusion.

Annie

Yes I know Annie and don't apologise ... These people at cemeteries aren't dealing with Birth dates.
Only Death & Burial dates.  :)

Threw me too.
Sometimes they put it all in. I think only in modern era maybe or depended on Council.?
I asked them also could I get a picture of the headstone as it usually has, as you know,
a stack of sometimes missing information. Sir James William Blair has a grand monster
one with a 'lot of information' on it. I thought at least he & children would honour their
parents with a stone. I think they could afford to do that.

I asked for one in Sydney North Shore the other day and these ancestor's were very wealthy.
No Headstone !!!???

Thanks.



44
Lanarkshire / Re: Gordon Blair - Mystery? or Not!
« on: Wednesday 12 April 17 01:11 BST (UK)  »
Not a problem Annie. I had to look twice myself. :)

Then I checked it about 30+ times after you posted in case I got it wrong.

People are pretty sharp and quick off the mark around here.  ;D

Great Information coming in from everyone.
Thanks.

45
Lanarkshire / Re: Gordon Blair - Mystery? or Not!
« on: Wednesday 12 April 17 00:58 BST (UK)  »
DOD = Date Of Death
DOB = Date Of Burial

Their record to me [sic]

It's not alway me. I do get a few things correct.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 ... 15