Author Topic: Eglingham Parish Baptism 1891 - Woodhorn lookup please  (Read 3079 times)

Offline c-side

  • Deceased † Rest In Peace
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,032
  • The 'three' now have a cousin
    • View Profile
Re: Eglingham Parish Baptism 1891 - Woodhorn lookup please
« Reply #9 on: Tuesday 10 May 16 01:18 BST (UK) »
Congratulations on the new son-in-law  ;D

No wonder you weren't able to count.  From experience I know that being mother-of-the-bride can cause all sorts of mental disarray  ;)

So far as I know I only have Thomas to check on Wednesday so might venture into the others - it could give a clue if Thomas doesn't turn out to have a middle name - and it keeps me out of mischief.

Christine

Offline c-side

  • Deceased † Rest In Peace
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,032
  • The 'three' now have a cousin
    • View Profile
Re: Eglingham Parish Baptism 1891 - Woodhorn lookup please
« Reply #10 on: Wednesday 11 May 16 23:55 BST (UK) »
I re-checked the baptism of Thomas but there is no middle name shown.

I had a quick look at Chillingham to see if Ellen B was there but no luck.  There was a couple of Mather baptisms but different families.  One child, co-incidentally, called Robert John - mother Ann, singlewoman in 1881.

I didn't get so far as Duddo and Carham as these books have yet to be microfilmed and I couldn't wait for them to get the books from 'out the back'

Christine

Offline Tickettyboo

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,203
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Eglingham Parish Baptism 1891 - Woodhorn lookup please
« Reply #11 on: Thursday 12 May 16 09:53 BST (UK) »
Thanks Christine, very kind of you to take the time.

Knowing that there was no middle name recorded on this baptism doesn't completely discount it but I'll leave it in the 'possible, but not definite' box.


thanks again, your help is always much appreciated.

Boo

Offline c-side

  • Deceased † Rest In Peace
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,032
  • The 'three' now have a cousin
    • View Profile
Re: Eglingham Parish Baptism 1891 - Woodhorn lookup please
« Reply #12 on: Friday 03 June 16 23:03 BST (UK) »
I finally got around to looking at Duddo and Carham on Wednesday but without any luck.  Again, like Chillingham, there was a couple called Ralph and Elizabeth Mather who made an appearance in the baptisms but not your couple.

I think casting a wider net in the Glendale area would be next, starting with Branxton (Branston?).  What do you think?

Christine

PS  Had a lovely time with the actual registers - so old and so much better then a microfilm  :D


Offline Tickettyboo

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,203
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Eglingham Parish Baptism 1891 - Woodhorn lookup please
« Reply #13 on: Sunday 05 June 16 05:55 BST (UK) »
Thanks Christine.
There is something special about looking at original documents that were written all those years ago.

Its really kind of you to offer to look further, but have checked the LDS catalogue and they do seem to have the relevant years for Branxton in their database so its doubtful that your time would be well spent.

I have Thomas' birth date confirmed via the 1939 Register and his school record - which also confirms his Dad's name. So, rather than have you check every parish register in the county looking for baptisms that may or may not have taken place, I'll bung him on the back burner for now.

That back burner is getting a bit crowded, but there's always room for one more :-)

Your efforts on my behalf are really appreciated.

Boo

Offline c-side

  • Deceased † Rest In Peace
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,032
  • The 'three' now have a cousin
    • View Profile
Re: Eglingham Parish Baptism 1891 - Woodhorn lookup please
« Reply #14 on: Sunday 05 June 16 22:53 BST (UK) »
I have a few (too many) on the back burner also.  You'd think, living in the county, that my Northumberland guys would be the least of my troubles but no, they are just as problematical as the rest  :-\

Let me know if you get a new lead  :)

Christine