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 - oldohiohome

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 247
1
I'm guessing.
If it is a marriage register, then the later date will be the date the marriage was registered with the county as having actually taken place.
If it is a record of marriage licenses, then the later date would be the marriage.
The steps in the US are: 1) Get a license, 2) Get married, 3) The minister or official registers the marriage.

Note: Not everyone who got a license went on to be married.

This page
https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/60548/
offers 2 collections for Beaufort Co, NC. 1851-1866 and 1851-1982. If you can find an event that is in both registers and has 2 different dates, you might be able to sort it out. The earlier register was hand written and says "so and so were married by me on this date", with no date of registration.
That said, I couldn't find a record in both registers that had different dates. I think the later register just put down the same date in both columns for the early records.

Another way of possibly sorting it out is to see if you can find the same minister/official registering a few marriages, one right after the other. If the date in one column is the same for all of them then that is probably the date he went to the registry office and wrote them all in the book. -- Even if the couples were married on different days. 
The problem here is that the sections of that database that I am looking at are indexes to the records themselves, and they are indexed by surname of the groom. So it might be difficult/impossible to find the same minister's records. That method works better if you are looking at the registration book itself, where the marriages were recorded chronologically.

(I hope I am clear here, but I doubt it)

Bottom line, since it is a Registration book, the two dates are probably for the marriage and the later date of registration.

2
United States of America / Re: Power Family
« on: Sunday 05 December 21 20:53 GMT (UK)  »
Hi JB -
This is what John has on his tree.

Children of Thomas Power (1904-2001) and Anastasia North
most of their descendants and marriage mates are marked Private-Living

1. A daughter who married a Patrick Power. no children listed for them
2. A daughter who married. They have 2 sons and 2 daughters.
  1. One son is married and has a son and daughter.
  2. One daughter is not married.
  3. One daughter is married and has 2 sons.
  4. One son is married and has a son and daughter.
3. A son who married Noeleen Dunphy. (no birth or death date for her)
      They have 3 sons and 3 daughters.
  1. One son does not have a wife on the tree but has a son and a daughter.
  2. One son is not married on the tree
  3. One son is married and has a son and daughter.
  4, 5, 6. Three daughters are not married on the tree.
4. A daughter who is not married on the tree.
5. A son who married. He has a daughter and a son.
  1. The daughter has two sons.
  2. The son has 3 sons and a daughter.
6. Johanna Power. She is not married on the tree. She is named, so the tree owner thinks she died, but there are no birth or death dates for her.
-------------
Children of Kieran Power (1096-1991) and Margaret Guerin (1914-1973)
1. Margaret Power (1940-2019) - no marriage mate listed
2. Kieran Power (1941-2008) - no marriage mate listed
3. Sean Power (1944-2020) - no marriage mate listed

3
United States of America / Re: Power Family
« on: Saturday 04 December 21 22:49 GMT (UK)  »
Hi JB -
John's tree on ancestry does not have anything about John Power, born 1844, the brother of Thomas (1846). He doesn't have any of Thomas Power (1846)'s brothers or sisters. And that is as far back as his tree goes - to Thomas (1846) and Mary Walsh.

-- Ed H

4
United States of America / Re: Power Family
« on: Friday 03 December 21 22:07 GMT (UK)  »
Hello JB -
No, John's  tree on ancestry  doesn't have any of that family. The only thing he has is that Thomas Power was born 1876, and is the son of Thomas Power (1846) and Mary Walsh (1852). He doesn't have his wife, Alice Scanlon, or any of their children.

-- Ed H (oldohiohome)

5
The Common Room / Re: Advice on finding a photo of relative
« on: Friday 03 December 21 00:58 GMT (UK)  »
trace all his living descendants and see if they have any pictures of him.

7
US Lookup Requests / Re: Edith Janice Craine. 1881- ?
« on: Tuesday 30 November 21 17:56 GMT (UK)  »
A fellow researcher who has been researching Social Security tells me 1937 was it's first year so early errors and omissions could happen.. Could mean she died around the time the service started or sometime earlier. Also she would been under 65, the age to have a SSN, so possible the record referred to her death.

Strange about the ashes. Presume it meant no living relative could be traced ( or wanted to be).

John
You get a SSN when you apply, not when you retire.

8
United States of America / Re: Power Family
« on: Tuesday 30 November 21 15:22 GMT (UK)  »
Hello JB -

No. John Power's tree on ancestry does not have the grandparents of Patrick Power (1873-1952), who was the son of Thomas Power, born 1846, and Mary Walsh, born 1852.
It has no further information on this Thomas Power and Mary Walsh.

And the tree does not have the grandparents of Hannah Walsh (1889- ) daughter of Thomas Walsh (1861-1893), and Mary Roche (1856-1940)

It does say that Thomas Walsh was born 21 Jan 1861 in Haggard, Glenmore, Kilkenny and died 22 October 1893 in Haggard.

And it says that Mary Roche was born 9 July 1856 in Forristalstown, Glenmore, and died June 1940 in Jamestown, Glenmore.

It says they married 21 Jan 1886 in Kilmakevogue, Glenmore.

I haven't checked those dates myself in the civil records online.

-- Ed H (oldohiohome)

9
United States of America / Re: frederick kendall
« on: Tuesday 30 November 21 14:38 GMT (UK)  »
Edit: He arrived in Philadelphia, so there would be no reason to presume New York City for an address. There is no 220 W 221st St in Phila today.

Edit:
here is his 1910 arrival on a free site:
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:23Q5-THD

The passenger list says his final destination was New York, NY, so I would think the address of the person he was joining was in New York City, and 220 W. 221st St. fits.
Thanks, I didn't notice that.
And James Rose said he was headed to New York as well.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 247