Find Ancestors

Hi Derek,

Can I ask you when you next go to Matlock could you look up the marriage of Elizabeth Morral & Gervas Metthews Stanton By Dale 17 July 1815 please to if that gives us any clues.

Thank you so much hope I'm not to much trouble.

Wendy

Hi Derek,

I believe Alice McFarlane was born in Inchicore, Dubline. I don't know whether William went to live with his brother James for a bit in Dublin. Could be Charlotte went to visit and gave birth there. I know not long later James McFarlane and his family went to live in India, but I don't know how to look for Indian records. I've found a couple of records of James's family going backwards and forwards to India, but that's all.

Thanks for what you found so far.

Regards

Julie

Hi Derek
Back in November you sent me a PM with some bits and bobs you managed to find about Humphrey B Bpt 26/12/1729 James B Bpt 25/6/1734 & replacement James Bpt 26/12/1735, all sons of James & Hannah (although you put that in Latin).
I have been trawling through the Old Whittington PR's and come up with the following: Both Humprey's and Wife Elizabeth (nee Glossop) have their buriels recorded 2 days after their deaths as given on the headstone.
Elizabeth being recorded as Widow of humphrey. (incidently she is the only one that has two T's in her surname in the records) All facts tie in nicely and we can relax and be happy. You've guessed whats coming! Back to the OWPR's
Hannah Bpt 1/10/1731 D of James & Hannah nice named D after Mum. James Bpt 25/6/1734 S of J & H yep he died we knew that one.
James Bpt 26/12/1735 S of J & H yep knew about the replacement.
John Bpt 25/8/1745 S of J&H big gap but feasable although Mum would be 52
Rosamund Bpt 13/7/1735 D of J & H I know these are Baptism dates but it's just over 5 months before replacement James. Now the real bombshell. Godfrey Bpt 17/12/1729 S of J & H. a week before Humphrey.
There is no bapt record for Humphrey although the records are littered with Humphrey's spelt every conceivable way. So who the HL is Godfrey?
Is it possible you got the date wrong for Humphrey and that he was born earlier? Mum would have been 36ish a bit old for first child. We don't have details of J & H marriage or places of birth, they could have moved to Old Whit in 28 or 29 and had a few more prior. This would also account for Humph not being Bapt there. Doesn't explain Rosamund though.
Looking forward to your sagelike comments and words of wisdom.
Warwick

Warwick....

HUMFRIDUS BELFIT 17.12 1729
GODFRIDUS BELFITT 17.12.1729
HANNAE BELFIT 1.10.1731
JAMES BELFITT 16.06.1734............are all children of JACOBAE and HANNAE Belfit at Whittington.......

They are Baptism dates, and do not necessarily bear any relation to Birth Dates.........althought the entry for Humphrey does say born 17th and baptised 29th.which I can't explain except as a misprint maybe.
EDIT..there are Humphreys and Godfreys going back into the 17th century....Rosamunda was baptised 10.06.1728

Derek

Hi Derek,
Thanks for prompt reply, I thought it would take longer just to read it!
The records I was using are from the Derbyshire Library Service, transcribed from what remains of the Parish Records.
Definately says Rosamund baptised 13/7/1735
I need to go and recheck the dates on James & Hannah's grave, I may have misread my scribble. I thought she died 1780 age 87 but the Pr's have her buriel as 28/5/1789, which moves her DOB forward 9 years, which makes all the children's dates more acceptable. Incidently she's the one that always gets 2 T's not Elizabeth as I said before. Hannah would be about 43 when John was baptised, on the other hand daughter Hannah would be coming up for 14, and if Rosamund was 1728 then she would be 17. They wouldn't be the first parents to cover up for a daughters mistake.
This Humphrey thing is really bugging me, could they be twins, Godfrey not expected to make it and given emergency baptism, the records normally say 'privately' in such cases, Humph could have been done 9 days later when things quietened down.
Thanks once again Derek
Warwick

Hi Warwick.........'fraid to say that my Sources are better than your library Sources........I'm working,in this case ,mainly from Bishop's Transcripts..you may know that before |parish records were invented.....differennt dates for different Parishes..all Baptism Marraiges and \\burials had to be subniited to the Bishop.........and this practice continued after PR's arrived on the scene..so in many cases you have two cracks of th whip..and also BT's are the only place where you find both parents!!...and..I don't think there is any real problem with Humphrey and Godfrey..they existed and were brothers..and 170's is a long way back to get records that are even legibe, let alone accurate.


Rosamund was definitely 10.06.1728..the first child of Jacobae and Hannae...I'm sure you know that Jacobae is James and not jacob...as in the Jacobean period of James the First.still fools some people!!

Derek.

Hi Derek,
Yes I'd guessed you were working from the Bishop's Transcripts from your Latinised versions. However the same incumbent was supposed to complete both versions and it was supposed to be done on the day of the event!! The number of PR's with bits of paper stuffed in them with lame excusses like I left the book at home! The teachers never believed that one when I was at school. Also the BT's were less prone to churches burning down!
Warwick

hi derek
i am not sure wether i have asked this before [sorry if i have ]
i have a
samuel and esther kirk who had
william 1784
rebecca 1787
john 1791
elizabeth 1802
cant make up my mind wether they were born /baptist in nottingham or derbyshire
thank you
lorraine

Hi Lorraine..no you haven't asked before..if you had 'd have sent you the following reply:-

SAMUEL KIRK married ESTHER HEATHCOTE at Chresterfield Derbyshire
16.02.1783

Their children, all born Chesterfield, were.

William baptised 28.01 1784
Rebecca baptised 02.09.1787
John baptised 17.08.1791
Elizabeth..born 10.10.1802 baptised 22.12.1802

The master strikes again!! lol.

Derek.

Hi Derek, hope you are well.

Here is a poser for you. I have Edward Arthur Ashpole born 4 May 1876. Dad Arthur and Mum Mary Wheatley who supposidly married in Derby 1877.As the family come from and were back in Bedfordshire in 1881, I would like to make sure this info is correct.

Many thanks

Hi Gooner.....I don't know how and why they did it..but your information is correct..and they were back in Stagsden by 1879 when and where Winifred was born.....and remained there until at least 1911....

They married in Derby:- ARTHUR CATCHPOLE and MARY ANN W WHEATLEY OctNovDec 1875..so depending exactly when they married she may have been carrying EDWARD ARTHUR ASHPOLE whose Birth was registered in Derby AMJ1876.......and if she wasn't already wasn't already pregnant they certainly got on with it a bit sharpish!!..
You will have gathered i don'y have the Parish \records for Derby after 1860..but these facts are all on BMD and census.
I don't know bedfordshire too well..but the three names i have are Kempston, Stagsden..and Biggleswade where apparently Mary Ann was born AMJ1855.......and at some point after 1881 they moved to Luton...

So its all true..how and why i leave to you to find out!!

Nice to hear from you again.

Derek.

hi derek
thank you very much

right i know who william married and who rebecca married
but who did john and elizabeth marry [or did they ]

william married mary goodburn he is my 3 times great granfather
you have given me rebeccas marriage already

but i am not sure about john as there are alot of john kiks about
i will leave that with you and see if you can work it out

thanks for your help
lorraine :-D

Thanks Derek, just needed that confirmation. I know the places well as I am living in the area. I wonder why they were in that area for such a short time :-S.

Hi gooner..seeing the sights and getting pregnant..must be something in the water!!

:-D :-D :-D. Derek. The view in Derby is definately better than the views in Kempston or Luton ;-)

Hi lorraine..well just in case i got my wires crossed:

REBECCA KIRK married WILLIAM GOODWIN 24.06.1805

JOHN appears not to have married...and appears to be dead or done a runner by 1841

ELIZABETH KIRK..married THOMAS HARVEY at Chesterfield 06.04.1823 but she is a widow ..a shoe bender..in 1851..living with three lodgers and a niece aged 10..Elizabeth Dale Kirk.
she appears to have died before 1861.

Derek.

wow derek
thank you so much
[you did it again

thanks again
lorraine <3

Mmmmm..Lorraine...are you aware that WILLIAM KIRK married before he married Mary Goodburn..and had two children??????
I see he made it to nottingham.....

Derek.

hi derek
yes i know he was married before to another mary have it all on my tree

now trying to find williams siblings and who they married and now you have helped me again

but there is sooooooooo many kirks
i did see a tree on ancestry and they have john married but born in nottingham but like to check things out before putting on my tree

so not sure if there right or wrong

thanks again
lorraine

Lorraine..just given someone and almighty rollicking on Ancestry for copying and/or filching chunks of someone else's tree..you can always tell becasue they copy the mistake..and so it gets perpetuated and the same mistake appears in other trees........
Like William Kirk married Mary Burham in 1813.....no he didn't, he married MARY BURNHAM at St.Marys Nottingham in 1813..had two childre. one od which died in infancy
I believe he married MARY GOODBURN in nottingham 1820..some other idiot..whom i am about to sort out!! has him marrying mary Goodburn in Chesterfield 1813!!......fisticuffs coming up!! Ilove catching people out.

John was definitely born Chesterfield....
Derek