At first it seemed like a good idea - making people think about genealogy, thinking about their ancestors, etc. But now it just seems like a shop front for businesses who want to profit out of peoples interest - driving that curiosity in a typical commercial fashion. I don't like 'the package'. Of course it's always gone on with professional genealogists and some charlatans amongst them - telling people what they want to hear, etc. Should all information be free? Well, maybe not. Maybe that would make things too easy, but this 'corporate' atmosphere lately, with Tony Robinson's face being synonymous with family history, it all kinda spoils things. Maybe you prefer the new regime?
My personal research is mostly done and I'm as sure as hell glad that the churches my ancestors belonged to let people like the LDS film or scan their records instead of waiting for people to come along wanting to compile it into spreadsheets to sell to keep clubs going.
Hi, hope this is in the right place
I've been trying to use the St Helens Deceased Search in the last couple of days to find a few relatives who've turned up in the 1911 census - but I keep getting an error message saying 'Invalid rangeto attribute'. I don't think it's ever happened to me before. Does anyone know if this is a problem with the website or whether I'm doing something wrong?
Sorry if this has been asked before - I couldn't find a thread on it.
Many thanks
Is 'Ancestry library edition' available at St.Helens Library?
Visited our local mobile library van (Knowsley) yesterday and got a leaflet advertising that our Central Library had Ancestry Library Edition available for anybody to use FREE of charge. I range them to double-check and this is the FULL INTERNATIONAL version. I was wondering if St.Helens Library has the same thing available there and how well publicised it is.
Wish I'd known about it before becoming an Ancestry member at home - could have done my research for free On the other hand, much of mine gets done in the mornings around 6.30, while I'm waking myself up. But at least it will save me having to upgrade to the more expensive version for my US research .
From the Obituary column of the St Helens Star October 1989.
On October 4th, Hugh, the beloved husband of the late Mary Elizabeth Banks and a dearly loved father of Rosemary, Elsie and Thomas
Hugh Banks was the son of Thomas (b; 1881) and Christiana Banks (nee Storey). Thomas was the brother of my Grandfather William Banks )1878 - 1936) who married Alice Ann Middlehurst in 1900. If you are any of these siblings or know the family l would be most appreciated of any help in my research.
I'm fairly well up on the laws relating the things like marriages. There was a big change in 1837 when government (as opposed to church) records started. Before 1837, everyone (except Quakers and Jews) had to marry in a CofE church. After 1837, other churchs were allowed provided they were licensed for the task. [Sorry if I'm teach people to suck eggs here.]
However, I've just read in a small book on church records that other demonination church could only do marriages after 1837 if both bride and groom belonged to that denomination. I've done a load of Googling but can't find specific answers. So, does anyone know if this restriction really existed and, if so, how long it lasted ?
Alternatively, does anyone have an example of, for instance, a catholic and known anglican marrying in a catholic church soon after July 1837 ?
If anyone is interested there's an offer (Only one left) to buy version 4 Family Historian software at a greatly reduced price at the following http://www.fhug.org.uk/cgi-bin/index.cgi
When you're researching, do you just go straight backwards from your starting point (ie yourself/children/grandchildren)? Do you look for marriages/families of aunts/uncles/great-aunts etc.
I'm just curious, as I've been so 'into things' that EVERYBODY is getting included in my tree - but of course it's all getting VERY cumbersome. To the point where, I'm now looking at surnames and thinking 'Which bloody branch of the family are they attached to?'
Do you continue with all these people in your tree OR do you build them a separate one, to keep things a bit more manageable?
I didn't intend to 'branch off' originally, but sometimes names just MAKE you interested in a person - or something you read, makes you nosey to know more about them.
When I discovered that my great aunt Florence Nevada Thompson had married a Thomas Stirrup Mustard - that really made me inquisitive about the unusual names - does that happen with other people as well? Would anybody else have pursued their descendants or just left it as recording the marriage as an event in Florence's life and then left it at that point.
I found one poor girl described as 'Idiot' at the age of 5 - by 25 she was described as 'Deaf/Mute from Birth' - thank goodness the word 'Idiot' had been dropped. That really struck a chord with me, as my own daughter was 'deaf' at birth - how despicable it would have been for her to have been classed as 'Idiot' on a Census. Fortunately in my daughter's case, it was very easily rectified, but it does make you wonder ................
The Long Company were a fairly large group of poachers and some more serious criminal elements who operated in the St Helens-Liverpool area in the 1840's. They were implicated in many poaching incidents but also committed some more serious crimes. One of the latter was the death of the game-keeper Richard Kenyon in November 1842, when he confronted the gang during their activities. The trial which followed, in 1843, was widely publicised. Five members of the gang were sentenced to death but the sentence was later commuted for all but one, who was hanged. One of the others was transported down-under.
The members who were tried were (ages at 1843):
John Roberts (27) - hanged
Henry Fillingham (27) - eventually sent to Tasmania
James Hunt (26), [color=#ff0000]Thomas Jacques (25),[/color] Joseph Rimmer (24) - reprieved, but may have spent some time in prison
I suspect that other members of the gang may have suffered time in prison, especially some of the Jacques (my lot).
The trial is reported in The Times in the December 28th, 1843, edition. I have downloaded that from their archives. There is also a paper written by J. E. Archer, called Poaching Gangs and Violence: The Urban - Rural Divide in Nineteenth-Century Lancashire which I have a copy of. This paper has an extensive list of references and refers to Liverpool and Preston newspaper archives and the LRO. Unfortunately, I do not have an easy way of accessing these old newspapers.
If anyone has more information about The Long Company I would love to hear. There is also a possibility that some of you may be related to some of the people I mentioned above, and are blissfully unaware of the events of the gang