Author Topic: 1939 Register up and running (Part 2)  (Read 40203 times)

Offline bibliotaphist

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 575
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
1939 Register up and running (Part 2)
« on: Tuesday 03 November 15 22:45 GMT (UK) »
I'm loath to start yet another thread on the 1939 Register; apologies for tacking this on the end of this one  (*). Does anyone know the answers to these questions about column 11 of the register - the first column on the second page?

1. What is on the rest of the second page of the original 2-page spread beyond column 11 of each page of the register - why wasn't the whole of the second page scanned?

2. Related - why is column 11 cropped / cut off so short on the right-hand edge of the page image? Three of the five registers I've unlocked have the end of the writing cut off and the already opaque military service reference is partly unreadable :'(

3. I have a couple of entries where column 11 has either a reference to a page ("See page 16" - unless I'm being thick the page images aren't visibly numbered) or "Re-regd" followed by several letters, a number and a date - again cut off short on the right-hand edge. Does anyone know if it's possible to follow up these references?
(edit - answered my own question there. The remote page reference was visible on another page.)

4. Has anyone - such as Findmypast - produced an idiot's guide to the military service jargon we're likely to encounter in that column?

5 (edit - added). One out of the five records I've unlocked consists of three pages. The other four are only one page each. Why's that then?
(edit - answered my own question there. The extra pages were to include the remote page reference.)


Moderator Comment: Topic continued from Register up and running
* (We split the other topic and started with this one after all as the old one was running into thirty pages) :)

Offline loo

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,345
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 Register up and running (Part 2)
« Reply #1 on: Tuesday 03 November 15 22:54 GMT (UK) »

I agree for the sake of accuracy and completeness, it would be nice if people could get their deceased relatives unredacted, but if they don't already have the certificate, it would be a costly business.
   

Agreed, but don't we all complete the life cycle in our research by getting death certificates and transcripts of burial registers & tombstones etc. ;)

Surely it's one of the basic rules of research kill off your ancestors. :o

Cheers
Guy

No, we don't all do that.  We have financial limitations and must set priorities as to which records we are able to pay for.  Some records are potentially more useful than others, so those are the ones we order.
 
Further, findmypast seems to be rather obstinate on this score since they won't accept photos of headstones, burial records, or obituaries.  The National Archives in Canada accepts copies of newspaper obituaries but I have not asked about headstones or burial records, but I expect they would suffice.

 In addition, in some jurisdictions it is difficult or impossible to get a death cert if you are not the next of kin.  And, as a final point, we may not know what became of the person in the end or know enough details of their death in order to order a certificate.  We don't all live in England, you know, and neither do the people who were enumerated on the 1939 Register.

I find it a bit cheeky that you would imply that people aren't doing good research if they don't do it your way.
ARMSTRONG - Castleton Scot; NB; Westminstr Twp
BARFIELD - Nailsea
BRAKE - Nailsea
BURIATTE
CANDY - M'sex, Deptford
CLIFFORD - Maidstone
DURE(E) - France, Devon, Canada
HALLS - Chigwell
KREIN, Peter/Adam - Germany
LEOPOLD - Hanover, London
LATTIMER, MAXWELL - Ldn lightermen
MEYER - Lauenstein
MURRAY - Scot borders
STEWART - Chelsea; Reach
SWANICK - Mayo & Roscommon; Ontario
WEST - Rochester & Maidstone
WILLIS - Wilts, Berks, Hants, London
WOODHOUSE - Bristol tobacconist, London
WW1 internees

Offline andycand

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,384
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 Register up and running (Part 2)
« Reply #2 on: Tuesday 03 November 15 23:28 GMT (UK) »
Hi

This National Archives guide for the 1939 Register is well worth reading

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/1939-register/

Andy

Offline Mean_genie

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 960
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 Register up and running (Part 2)
« Reply #3 on: Wednesday 04 November 15 01:00 GMT (UK) »
Registration was compulsory and people were prosecuted for refusing to register. That was the 'stick'; the 'carrot' was that you needed to be registered to get a ration book. Ration books were prepared using the original household schedules, which were sent to the local Food Offices once the enumerators had finished copying details into the register books.


Offline Scrumper

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 93
  • Martin 1886 - 1950
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 Register up and running (Part 2)
« Reply #4 on: Wednesday 04 November 15 01:18 GMT (UK) »
When you're trying to go forward, this register is no use, I need to know who officially closed is  :-\
Davies in Wales :(

Offline Guy Etchells

  • Deceased † Rest In Peace
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 4,632
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 Register up and running (Part 2)
« Reply #5 on: Wednesday 04 November 15 06:01 GMT (UK) »
No, we don't all do that.  We have financial limitations and must set priorities as to which records we are able to pay for.  Some records are potentially more useful than others, so those are the ones we order.
 
Further, findmypast seems to be rather obstinate on this score since they won't accept photos of headstones, burial records, or obituaries.  The National Archives in Canada accepts copies of newspaper obituaries but I have not asked about headstones or burial records, but I expect they would suffice.

I totally understand that some people have financial limitations, but also understand the dangers of not completing the “life cycle” for ancestors where failing to kill them off can lead to wasting vastly more money chasing unconnected lines.

Findmypast have to be obstinate on this. You are potentially asking them to break the law if they get it wrong opening them up to a range of punishment.
They would have far rather have simply scanned the entire register and redacted images of people who complained that they did not their information shared but the law does not allow them to work that way.
They have to show they have shown due diligence when opening these records.
I should also point out FindMyPast have not just sat back now the register is online they have a dedicated team updating the records and removing redactions where possible as proof of death is provided through a number of routes including applicants.
Most of the records were able to be opened when the register went online, more will be opened next week or the week after and so on.

In addition, in some jurisdictions it is difficult or impossible to get a death cert if you are not the next of kin.  And, as a final point, we may not know what became of the person in the end or know enough details of their death in order to order a certificate.  We don't all live in England, you know, and neither do the people who were enumerated on the 1939 Register.

That is one of the reasons why the applicant has to provide the official proof for those who have since moved abroad.
If the applicant does not what happened to the person they are seeking why should a totally unconnected company who has scanned his/her entry as one of a batch of over 41 million other people?

However the people who were enumerated on the 1939 Register all lived in the Great Britain, at the time, though those in Scotland & Ireland do not appear on this register which is for England & Wales.


I find it a bit cheeky that you would imply that people aren't doing good research if they don't do it your way.

Perhaps you do but that is considered “best practice” here in the UK and has been for many decades.
However in you indignation you missed the smiley at the end of the line indication the remark was tongue in cheek.

Cheers
Guy
http://anguline.co.uk/Framland/index.htm   The site that gives you facts not promises!
http://burial-inscriptions.co.uk Tombstones & Monumental Inscriptions.

As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.

Offline LizzieL

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 7,216
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 Register up and running (Part 2)
« Reply #6 on: Wednesday 04 November 15 07:32 GMT (UK) »

I agree for the sake of accuracy and completeness, it would be nice if people could get their deceased relatives unredacted, but if they don't already have the certificate, it would be a costly business.
   

Agreed, but don't we all complete the life cycle in our research by getting death certificates and transcripts of burial registers & tombstones etc. ;)

Surely it's one of the basic rules of research kill off your ancestors. :o

Cheers
Guy

Ideally I would love to get official certs for every event, but resources only allow me to get those for the main lines. For more recent deaths of those in not direct line, I satisfy myself with less official (and free) sources e.g my own memory, attendance at funeral, gravestone photos. After all for my own research I don't need to prove to any official that someone has died, I only need to confirm it to myself.
Berks / Oxon: Eltham, Annetts, Wiltshire (surname not county), Hawkins, Pembroke, Partridge
Dorset / Hants: Derham, Stride, Purkiss, Scott, Sibley
Yorkshire: Pottage, Carr, Blackburn, Depledge
Sussex: Goodyer, Christopher, Trevatt
Jersey: Fowler, Huelin, Scott

Offline kooky

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,651
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 Register up and running (Part 2)
« Reply #7 on: Wednesday 04 November 15 08:30 GMT (UK) »
I am wondering how PStainthorp found the other pages with the written updates on?
Kooky
Clulo - Staffs.,Warwickshire, Lancs.1780 -1950
Fisher- Nafferton,Hull, Manchester.1770-1840-1950
Kane&McNeill,Forkhill, Armagh and Glasgow,Bray Dublin.1850s -1920
Boshell and Dowzard- Dublin, 1840s -1911
Kay/Bremner Edinburgh 1800 - 1841.Kay Staffs.& Lancs1842 -1901
Kay - Newcastle on Tyne 1780-1861
Swindell, Marple & Manchester 1900->
Makinson, M/c & Prestwich 1870 ->
Beacom/Jones - Enniskillen 1780 ->

Offline bibliotaphist

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 575
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 Register up and running (Part 2)
« Reply #8 on: Wednesday 04 November 15 08:40 GMT (UK) »
I am wondering how PStainthorp found the other pages with the written updates on?
Kooky
See attached image.

One out of the five households I unlocked had a reference in purple ink to "See Page 16".

The right-hand edge of the image had a white arrow indicating it was made up of more than one page. (The other four households didn't have this and are only one page each.)

Clicking on the right-pointing arrow, eventually I got to another page of the register, presumably page 16 where that person's details were entered again - exactly as they were entered on the first page, so not sure why or where it's got me! Hardly counts as an update.

The other reference in blue pencil visible in the attached image, which also relates to one of mine - "22.10.4? / re regd YEHA - 274673[8?] / CA" ...not a clue how to decipher this one!!

(And it's cropped off at the right, which is infuriating.)