Genealogy Chat

In my family we have two babies who were buried "unofficially" with family members, in graves which were officially full.

A single grave is supposed to accommodate a maximum of four burials. Both of these babies were, I am told, buried in small spaces dug "at the feet" of the other coffins, rather than on top of them. Their names appear on the grave deeds, as recorded by the churches in question, but not on the headstones.

This may have been to avoid any interference from the local authority due to the rules being broken by sympathetic clergy. I'm not sure if it would have been a big deal or not.

I have been told that this happened quite a lot.

Amanda

Good Luck.

Hi Karen

Have you sent off for JW Camplings birth certificate to get the mothers maiden name and see if he is connected into your family?

Chris,

Yes, that is a good idea - it is a huge cemetery with a large military section - it could have needed to be re-organised around the time of WW1.

Thank you
Karen.

Pam, the baby was buried in 1904, then my gr. grandmother buried in the same gravespace in 1928, then my gr grandad in 1943. Followed by one of their daughters in 1967.

Claire, I suppose it could be possible that another person is in there as well although the council officer who sent me this info only listed the 4 people as above.

Apparently there is a memorial on the grave so I think I will go over there next week and have a look to see if there is a clue.

Karen.

Karen

Have you researched the Graveyard History?

I am just wondering because 'IF' the Graveyard had to be reorganised to save space then it may be possible that graves were then made to share.

If the original owners of the grave couldn't be found then maybe graves were 'doubled up' as a matter of course?

The upside is that if little John William Campling wasn't a relative then maybe the Cemetary Custodians chose a nice couple to bury him with :)

Chris

Could it be possible that another person was buried in the grave 1904 or prior?

Hi
As Mary from Italy said, babies were buried in any grave, more due to finance I believe.Was it buried on the same day as your granddad?

Pam

My Grandad died in 1949 and he was buried in a grave with a little baby in it. No relation.
The family grave, his wife who died in 1941 was in was full.
The reason was that my Dad could only afford this grave, and no one else was going to be buried in it.,

As I understand it, babies were commonly put in any old grave, with people they weren't related to.

I have a case where a young girl who died was buried in a grave with an Auntie and a cousin, both of whom have a totally different surname

Thank you both, I agree you would think there would be some connection to the family. My gr grandmother's maiden name was Wilkinson and my gr grandad was Baylis. They married in 1902. If there is a link it isn't obvious.

I will order the birth/death cert for the baby.

Karen.

Is there any connection between the baby and your g.grandparents?

If the child had died after them or at the same time I could understand them being buried together as very young babies who died were often placed in someone else's grave or coffin, but it seems strange that your gr.grandparents didn't die until much later. I would have expected the baby to have some connection to the family.

Kath. x

Have you discounted that this is not a child of your g grandparents or g grans before she married? As they were buried after the baby to me it seems they would be related. They would have to have bought a larger plot following the baby's burial
Why not post your g grandparents details so see if anyone can find a link to them. I think I would be inclined to buy the birth cert though.

I found out yesterday that interred within the gravespace of my great grandparents is a one year old baby boy. I have spoken to older family members and none of them know anything about this.

The baby died in 1904, my ggmother in 1928, my ggrandad in 1943.

I am wondering if perhaps this was done to save space in the churchyard. Does anybody have any ideas please?

The baby was called John William Campling - I found a record on Ancestry brn 1903 qtr Jan/Feb/Mar in Hendon died 1904 qtr Jul/Aug/Sept in Uxbridge. Poor little thing.

Regards
Karen.