How much checking will you do?

[webwiz]

The new GRO indexes have thrown the cat amongst the pigeons as far as I am concerned. I have already identified someone whose mother's maiden name does not match where I have him. Either his father remarried or I have put him in the wrong family. I have not done much with deaths yet but I fully expect the new age at death on early records will reveal similar errors.

So my quandry is how much checking of existing records should I do? I have 4700 records in my tree and a substantial number of births, possibly a majority, prior to 1911, plus quite a lot of deaths that now have age at death.

Checking all of them will be a massive job and will require careful record keeping of what has been checked. The severe restrictions on searching make it more difficult. Since these restrictions appear (to me) to have no useful purpose I wonder if they will be removed eventually which would make the job easier, and provides me with an excuse to prevaricate.

What are your plans?

 

[peter]

Unless you have a public tree, why not confine your checks to your direct ancestors?

 

[webwiz]

I have the certificates for many of them, those which I haven't will be my priority, but I am uncomfortable with having any unchecked data which is checkable.

 

[Bryman]

Since these restrictions appear (to me) to have no useful purpose I wonder if they will be removed eventually which would make the job easier, and provides me with an excuse to prevaricate.

I suspect that any restrictions are unlikely to be removed because the search facility was set up to help with identifying individuals for whom certificates are to be ordered. Sorry but I think you may just have to bite the bullet.

 

[webwiz]

You may be right, but I don't see why the restrictions could not be optional like on almost every other site. And from their point of view they might get more orders if looser searches turned up unexpected targets.

 

[peter]

You may be right, but I don't see why the restrictions could not be optional like on almost every other site. And from their point of view they might get more orders if looser searches turned up unexpected targets.

I don't think that line of argument will convince the GRO, but by all means include it in your survey response.

Don't expect the GRO to offer something that is state of the art - after all, it has taken them a long time to get this far. Findmypast only removed their restrictions when they totally redesigned their website, and Ancestry still restrict the use of wildcards.

 

[canadianbeth]

I just added two names to my ancestors, who may or may not actually be relatives. I found my paternal grandmother some years ago in Isleworth, after learning that she had been placed in a workhouse. Another girl with the same name was also listed so I assumed, hopefully correctly, that she was a sister. That was in the 1901 census. When I looked for her in the 1911 census I could not find her; she was older than my grandmother so would have left and could even have been married. I did find what could be two brothers however, given where they were born and where they were - one as a boy in training at Exmouth, age 15 and the other at Mandora Barracks. Checking 1901 again I found them both also at Isleworth. If there is any other way to check further, I would appreciate knowing. The parents were not in the picture; apparently they were imprisoned for neglect. In any case, I added the two young men; if I get a reply then I can find out if they are correct. I did not add them to my FTM program; will not do that unless I know for sure. I have a name for my paternal great-grandfather - it was on my grandmother's marriage certificate - but can not find him at all in the census and he was listed as deceased in 1918. Too common a name without any spouse or children that would be listed.

 

[Rhian]

A search with the new GRO birth search could find all four children's births and list the mothers maiden name which goes some way to proving they are the same family. Having found the mothers maiden name and knowing the fathers could lead to the marriage, probably up to two years before the first child's birth, but it would be worth checking the GRO to see if any other children were born in the same registration area with the same parents names, there could also be deaths as infants that might be related. The marriage recprd should also provide at least the two fathers names which will help census searches before the marriage.

 

[canadianbeth]

I cannot find my grandmother in the GRO. I did find the other three with the same names but the mothers are all different so no way of knowing if any are correct. Also, it asks for a registration district, and where at least three of them were born is not listed - Twickenham, Middlesex. (which is interesting since my Dad said she was Irish) Not being from England, I have no idea where that is. I also could not find my great-grandfather. Maybe he is the one who was Irish? In any case, since none are still living, I am still no closer to finding out who my paternal grandfather was.

 

[Pauline]

Twickenham was then in the Brentford registration district.

 

[canadianbeth]

Thank you. Now I am really confused. What are the odds that not only my grandmother was not married when she had my Dad and two aunts, but was my great-grandmother also not married when she had my grandmother and at least two other children? I found names for my grandmother, an aunt and an uncle, all with the same mother's surname of Joyce. That was my grandmother's surname as well, and the name under which my Dad was registered (but not what he used when he came to Canada, nor did my aunts. They used the name my Dad said was his father's). Also, Grandma's name was reversed from what my Dad said it was, which also made it harder to find her. I have seen her written as Dorothy Ann, Dorothy Annie and Annie Dorothy in different places. Seems she was registered as Anne. If she is the correct person. Now I wonder if the name she put down for her father, when she did marry, was incorrect. Unless he was also a Joyce. That would definitely muddy the waters, so to speak.

 

[canadianbeth]

And I just re-read the form I received from Barnardo Homes regarding my Dad; apparently there were six children admitted to Isleworth in 1897, so there are two more out there that I might be able to find, although I only found the four in the 1901 census. I suspect there was more than one building known as Isleworth, as I found the two girls in one census listing and the boys in another.

 

[Pauline]

Are you aware that there was a James Joseph William Joyce who married an Emma Sarah Joyce in Twickenham in 1881? Their children as given in the 1891 census seem to match the Joyce-Joyce births in the GRO index in Brentford 1881-1891. So I don't know if this is your family, or if they are just confusing you.

 

[canadianbeth]

Thank you so much for this. The last three names of the children fit, although Grandma is once again called by another name, this time Anna. The ages are correct, and there are six. The younger one I mentioned earlier, was born in 1896, so maybe the parents were released from prison by that time. (although if they were would the children not have been returned to them?) I will poke around some more and see if they are in the 1911 census.

I am saving all these census pages I find to my Evernote app, for future reference and so I do not have to go searching again for them. I am not adding them to FTM just yet, except as notes as possibilities.

So a Joyce married a Joyce. I hope they were not related. The Barnardo people described my grandmother as simple-minded and easily led, which could just as easily be due to her upbringing and little education.

 

[canadianbeth]

On checking further with James J.W. Joyce, it does not appear that he is the link I need. According to census records he and Emma went on to have several more children after Anna, all during the time when they were allegedly in prison and up until 1901.

 

[Rhian]

Isleworth was another parish in Brentford registration district. There are lots of links on the genuki site you may find some links to parish records. Easiest way is use your search engine of choice with genuki and Isleworth.

 

[peter]

Easiest way is use your search engine of choice with genuki and Isleworth

Spot on - it's what I do. There is also an index that relates placenames to districts, but Google is far quicker and easier.

 

[Pauline]

On checking further with James J.W. Joyce, it does not appear that he is the link I need. According to census records he and Emma went on to have several more children after Anna, all during the time when they were allegedly in prison and up until 1901.

Odd, though, that the 4 children in the workhouse seem to match fairly well with the children of this couple. And also, that in the 1901 census the oldest child living with them is only 4 - where were their older children?

Do you know when your grandmother's parents were in prison, and how long for? If it was a case of neglect, the children placed in the workhouse may not have been returned to them afterwards, but maybe by moving right away they were able to keep the children born later.

Or maybe this James and Emma are just red herrings!

 

[Pauline]

where were their older children?

Answering my own question - in London it would seem. I found a newspaper report of an inquest into the death of James and Emma's infant daughter in early 1903 in Ramsgate, and this said the couple had 12 children, 7 of whom were in London.