Author Topic: Hmm is this strange?  (Read 806 times)

Offline medpat

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,259
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Hmm is this strange?
« Reply #18 on: Saturday 04 July 20 18:24 BST (UK) »
1939 Register  -  ANNOTATION OF HER MARRIAGE

GEDmatch M157477

Offline medpat

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,259
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Hmm is this strange?
« Reply #19 on: Saturday 04 July 20 18:30 BST (UK) »
Birth

Doris Walklate

Registration Quarter:   Apr-May-Jun
Registration district:   Wolstanton, Staffordshire
Mother's Maiden Name:   Woodcock
Volume Number:   6b       Page Number:   157
GEDmatch M157477

Offline LizzieW

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,647
  • I'm nearer to finding out who you are thanks DNA
    • View Profile
Re: Hmm is this strange?
« Reply #20 on: Saturday 04 July 20 20:50 BST (UK) »
Found these maybe your Doris

Name:   Doris Walklate
Arrival Age:   26
Birth Date:   abt 1921
Port of Departure:   Port Said, Egypt
Arrival Date:   14 Jun 1947
Port of Arrival:   Liverpool, England
Ports of Voyage:   Port Said; Piraeus and Malta
Ship Name:   Empress of Australia
Shipping Line:   Canadian Pacific Line


Another marriage ? Not put husband's name in just in case he was younger and therefore still alive

Name:   Doris Walklate
Registration Date:   Jul 1950

Registration Quarter:   Jul-Aug-Sep
Registration district:   Newcastle under Lyme
Inferred County:   Staffordshire

Volume Number:   9b
Page Number:   886


Looking at the link to Findagrave by BumbleB, just above your post (or below depending how you've set up your PC), the grave shows both Wilfred(Wilfrid)'s death and also Doris's so it would seem she didn't re-marry.


Offline garstonite

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,276
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Hmm is this strange?
« Reply #21 on: Friday 17 July 20 09:30 BST (UK) »
so now I am very interested
my Surname is Oakes
my familytree back to 1675
I have dozens of Oakes in my tree from Over - then Middlewich
I would be very interested to see the Ancestor you have gone back to in the Oakes family .
the vast majority of my Oakes are baptised in St Chads ,Over ,Cheshire
William Oakes baptised 11th June 1758 is the 1st born of Ralph Oakes and Mary Trelfa - they had 13 children all baptised Middlewich  :) and then THEIR children baptised Middlewich  :)
oakes,liverpool..neston..backford..poulton cum spittal(bebington)middlewich,cheshire......†† sacht,helgoland† .......merrick,herefordshire adams,shropshire...tipping..ellis..† jones,garston,liverpool..hartley.dunham massey..barker. salford

Online Meelystar

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 464
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Hmm is this strange?
« Reply #22 on: Friday 17 July 20 10:06 BST (UK) »
I donít think an open verdict at an inquest is the same as open case. By my understanding it just means that there is insufficient evidence to determine what happened and that there are suspicious circumstances.  I believe an open case is one in which there is still an active investigation by the police. I very much doubt this would be the case unless new information has come to light.
I think you need to look at some local newspapers as mentioned by earlier posters, I would imagine they would have a lot more information. 

Offline LEMB

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Hmm is this strange?
« Reply #23 on: Saturday 18 July 20 19:00 BST (UK) »
I donít think an open verdict at an inquest is the same as open case. By my understanding it just means that there is insufficient evidence to determine what happened and that there are suspicious circumstances.  I believe an open case is one in which there is still an active investigation by the police. I very much doubt this would be the case unless new information has come to light.
I think you need to look at some local newspapers as mentioned by earlier posters, I would imagine they would have a lot more information.

Yes you are right! Open Verdict.

Thank you :)

Offline LEMB

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Hmm is this strange?
« Reply #24 on: Saturday 18 July 20 19:08 BST (UK) »
so now I am very interested
my Surname is Oakes
my familytree back to 1675
I have dozens of Oakes in my tree from Over - then Middlewich
I would be very interested to see the Ancestor you have gone back to in the Oakes family .
the vast majority of my Oakes are baptised in St Chads ,Over ,Cheshire
William Oakes baptised 11th June 1758 is the 1st born of Ralph Oakes and Mary Trelfa - they had 13 children all baptised Middlewich  :) and then THEIR children baptised Middlewich  :)

Hello! Ooh interesting, my nana is an Oakes and it starts from her all the way to 1660 from what i've been able to find! But yes, the majority of mine are from Over / Winsford too. I've checked and I think we definitely have a match! I've just found Ralph and Mary and there never ending list of children! :D haha.

The child, Thomas Oakes 1962 who married Mary Cawley 1960 is my line of Oakes. It's abit confusing though as I think Mary also married Thomas's brother, William?! I'll have to check again, I heard the story ages ago.

Please feel free to message me anytime if you'd like to go over history! :)