THE SEARCH & WHAT I FOUND

I apologise for not doing much family history, my excuse is my head is spinning and I cannot focus due to having to move home.

Some of the copies I ordered from Utah arrived, but which stupid person had written 1737 instead 1731 on the marriage record rquest? Oh yes ...that would be me. So I have two baptisms for two Johns, with one being in the Leeds area but the father as Timothy, a name not used by later generations at all as would be expected. I will only be able to find a clue when I send off for the marriage record again. As the minimum charge is $US4 which covers 2 copies I will send for 2 or 3 again to make it worth the effort.

A chance remark by someone has put me on a different track for this blog. I will concentrate on the life of an individual and so, as you will see below, this blog is about the illegitimate grandson of William Thomas and Elizabeth.

THE STORY OF WILLIAM EDWARD DENNELL

Many years ago when I first started this quest, I was told by an aunt [who has since passed away] the story about a maid who was made pregnant by one of my grandfather's brothers, the baby was kept in a basket under the table whilst the maid worked. As the baby grew he was brought up by another brother and the family was told to call the boy 'cousin Bill'.

This information was noted and filed under 'stories' in the filing cabinet that is [or should I say was] my brain.

I was surprised that the family were wealthy enough to have a maid [not a luxury afforded by the majority of the working class] and was assured that the family had been affluent at one time.

When I found the family in the 1891 Census there was Edward William Dennell, grandson, age 7 months. There was also a maid, 16 year old Mary Moran. It couldn't have been a daughter's illegitimate son because there were no living daughters of William Thomas and Elizabeth.

So, who was the father of Edward William, there were 6 candidates, and more importantly, was Mary the mother at 16?

Using the information I had I started searching on the Findmypast website, if he was 7 months old in the April of 1891 he must have been born at towards the end 1890. I searched the Birth indexes for the whole of 1890 – he wasn't there. I broadened my search to run from 1889 to April 1891 – he wasn't there. So I wondered if he was registered under a different name, but what name would it be? I tried Moran but no match was found.

It was time for believing transcipts so I turned to the FreeBMD where the search can be more focused. I searched for all Dennells born 1890 in the Sheffield Districts and …. nothing! I mulled it over for a while then looked for any William Edward same year, same place. There was an Edward William Knight that fitted the time and place. So I took a chance and ordered the birth certificate.

Also I had in my possession, from family papers. a funeral card for a Emily Knight Carson, was this connected?

The certificate arrived and showed a Workhouse birth to Emily Knight, a general domestic servant. So there was a connection and a reason the funeral card being kept by the family. I haven't found any record that shows Emily working for William Thomas and Elizabeth but I am determined that I will.

Which son is the father can only be speculated upon. There is a choice of 6 sons Frederick William, John Eric, Walter, William Thomas, Robert Bruce and the twins Joseph and Leonard. As no father was stated at the birth I had to work using the story and possibilities.

Frederick is stated on the marriage certificate as Edward Williams' father and he was the only son who did marry. He lived with his parents until the death of his father in 1908. He was present at his father's death and there I lose him until his own death in 1915. So did he not marry because he was too committed to the upbringing of Edward?

John Eric was married for the first time when Edward was born, although he did get divorced about 1 year later, and married for a second time in 1893.

Walter [my grandfather] was unmarried until 1892. So was the third candidate. It was plausible that it could have been the father and the whole family agreed at the time that it would never be mentioned.

William Thomas did not marry until 1898 at Chesterfield in Derbyshire. Was the move from Sheffield enforced because of the illegitimate birth?

The next suspect is Robert Bruce who did stay in Sheffield and married in 1897, at the time of the birth he would have been about 16. Still possible.

Joseph and Leonard were about 11 years old at the time of the birth so can be discounted.

So it would seem that Edward's biological father remains unknown at the present time. We do know, however, that Frederick William, William Thomas and Elizabeth's eldest son, played a big part in Edward William's upbringing.

Back to William Edward and his life. According to Census returns he lived with William Thomas, Elizabeth, Fred and a general servant [not his mother] until after April 1901 probably until Elizabeth died in 1909.

On the 1911 Census there is a William Edwards that fits all the other criteria who is a Private in the West Yorkshire Regiment, a position held by our William Edward at the time of his marriage to Annie Webster in 1916.

Between 1920 and 1925 William and Edna had 4 children, George, Bettina, Margaret and Edna. William died in 1974 at the age of 84.

PROBLEMS AND MISSING PEOPLE

Sorry for the delay in writing again but not only was I having to wait for certificates ordered at the same time as everyone else because of the price increase they were imposing at the beginning of April and being distracted by other people's problems, both of the family history type and general health problems.

I received the certificates last week and have eventually managed to scan them all [all being 5 from 9 ordered]. They refunded [well their idea of a refund] 4 payments because they could not be found, although receiving less than 50% is not much of a refund, but that has happened before so I knew the drill.

The process is simple, I find the details on www.freebmd.co.uk then I use the details i.e., date, quarter, etc., to find the certificate on www.findmypast.com to see the original index entry, then I order the certificate in an attempt to prevent errors but I still fall foul of transcript errors.

So I received only 1 out 3 births; 1 out of 3 deaths; and 3 out of 3 marriages.

These are being analysed at the moment, I will investigate the details of the refunded ones as soon as I can.

Now I have a problem, my grandfather's aunt, Maria, had an illegitimate son two years before she married a Birmingham man, Henry Cater in 1859. They are in the 1861 Census living in the St Pancras area of London, by 1871 Maria is back at her mother's in Sheffield but still registered as married, Henry, however, cannot be found even as Henry Carter and other variations. In 1876 Maria married her son's father, James Bingham, stating that she was a widow. I have found a Henry Cater death in 1872 in Birmingham but it was registered by a Rosa Cater I cannot find her to see if she was a relation of my Henry or is this the wrong person? If it is correct then why cant he be found in whatever guise in the 1871 Census?

Any ideas please?

Dissecting Certificates for Information

I have changed the settings on the Family History information so now you have to hover over yellow – bad idea!


That took all day so not much research been done – then it was wrong so being changed back to grey.

I'll own up to something now, I tried to divide the tree into my maternal and paternal lines but it didn't work so I ended up having to reload a back up copy and guess what??? It had the certificate references missing, so that is my next task.

This is my second day of gleaning info from certificates, because I find it difficult to write I am typing a document sheet containing both a transcript and my own notes about the information.

It may be an idea to give you an example and therefore show you why I think certificates are essential.

For example the certificate of ny Grandfather's Aunt Caroline's second marriage to Jacob Madin gives the following information:

The transcript -

1857 Marriage solemnized at St Philip's Church in the parish of St Philip's Church in the County of York

February 22nd; Jacob Madin Caroline Hemingway; Full Age Full Age; Widower Widow; Labourer ---; Philadelphia Philadelphia; James Madin John Dennell; Labourer Labourer; married after Banns by me Joseph Farrell Wright; Jacob Signed Caroline Marked; Witnesses William Brook & Maria Dennell



The information -



1/ February 22nd was a Sunday

2/ Full Age - Both were over 21

3/ Jacob was a widower = therefore what can be found in 1851 Census?

4/ Both were living in the Philadelphia area at the time

5/ John was a labourer at the time of the wedding

6/ Witnesses William Brook Maria Dennell

7/ Joseph Farrell Wright states no position in the Church.



Research needed -



1/ Was this before weddings became popular as Saturday events? Were Sundays a common wedding day?

2/ a known fact as I have Caroline's birth date

3/ Will search the census transcripts online for Jacob Madin & Caroline is stated as a widow so when did her first husband die?

4/ What was Philadelphia area like? Where was it?

5/ This is the first mention of John as a Labourer, what sort & where?

6/ Who was William Brook? Date shows Maria was heavily pregnant with the illegitimate Walter and still unmarried.

7/ J F Wright was the Assistant Curate at St Philips for 5 years 1855-1860

OK. I've cheated because all the work has been done for a few years. I have just used this marriage to show what information can be obtained apart from the obvious.

I am still transcribing all the other certificates in my possession and copies that have been kindly given to me.

More later

talking pont

I haven't yet received the ordered paperwork [certifcates and PR pages] but there again I expected the certificates to be delayed, everyone will have been ordering before the immense price rise.

 

Distractions caused by family hasn't helped, 1 person in elderly respite care, 1 still suffering the after effects from a previous accident & another having a heart attack this week. Therefore not much has been done with regard to Family History.

 

The following newspaper article was pointed out to me yesterday:

 

“It always seems to reduce celebrities to tears on TV’s Who Do You Think You Are?, and now academics say delving into family history could do more harm than good.

 

Researching your ancestors can open a ‘Pandora’s box’ of damaging ‘secrets and skeletons’, according to a study out today. [Where's my Pandora's Box? Please????]

 

Warwick University sociologists are warning amateur historians to beware - their research could only exacerbate conflicts and rifts with relatives.

 

The main dangers come from uncovering unwelcome information, coming into contact with hostile family members - or becoming addicted to the research itself, and neglecting time with loved ones. [Guilty]

 

The Warwick team has been poring through responses from people taking part in Sussex University’s Mass Observation Project.

 

Dr Anne-Marie Kramer received 224 replies from people who had carried out family history research.

 

One in seven mentioned conflict or discord as a result of their delving, Dr Kramer was due to tell the British Sociological Association’s annual conference today (FRI).

 

One correspondent, a 70-year-old woman, found out both her mother and her grandmother were pregnant when they were married.

 

But she was then condemned by an elderly cousin for finding out the previously-unknown information. [the joy of being a generation younger than my cousins]

 

A 45-year-old woman discovered a relative had never been a naval officer, as the family had always insisted.

 

Her mother-in-law was also furious to find out her own grandmother - a former maid - had given birth outside marriage, despite later preaching about respect and ‘the right way to do things’. [What is unusual about that?]

 

Others complained about ‘intrusive’ relatives demanding too much information as part of their own family tree enquiries.[Yes, that is the minefield area]

 

And a 70-year-old woman complained: ‘My husband is into family history research in a big way.

 

‘It is his constant topic of conversation and it is driving us up the wall. [GUILTY – I can turn any conversation to the history angle, I blame 3 years studying history and 27 yrs of Family History Research]

 

But many responses were more positive about the chance to learn about ancestors - and pass on family memories over time.[Yes! Yes!]

 

Dr Kramer said Britain was ‘immersed in a seemingly unprecedented boom in the family heritage industry, with shows like Who Do You Think You Are? and websites such as Genes Reunited.

 

But she warned: ‘In investigating their family history, researchers could open up a Pandora’s box of secrets and skeletons.

 

‘The rifts are not confined to the historic past - bitterness and resentment towards siblings or parents can result where information is not disclosed.’ [I've no siblings and only 1 parent who although here physically that is all]

 

Right my comments on that warning done.

 

I have realised that I should have given a few pointers on how to use the web page so:

•  The grey bar at the top contains more information e.g. clicking on Index gives a list of everyone included in my Software = TIP – When you've clicked on the person you want to know about, use CtrlF and enter the name again to search for the name on the page because it may be near the bottom.
• Use a magnifying glass to read the captions I've used too small typeface.

 And that is me done for today

SOFTWARE ISSUES AND ME

These are things I have on order


9 Birth, Marriage & Death certificates [there is a 33% increase today {6th April 2010}, so I ordered as many as I could afford pre-price increase.]

3 photocopied Parish Register pages from the IGI – I discovered a couple of weeks back that any information on the IGI index can be ordered from the LDS in Utah at the cost of $2 per copy – very useful information for anyone who cannot get to see the original! So I found some entries for a John Daniel birth in 1703 and a marriage to a Esther in 1737 which I want to check to see if the Daniels bit could have been Dennel.

All of which are due the end of next week but the photocopies have to sent from the US, and the request from sent to there by mail. There appears to be no way to send the request electronically. I have had to fill the form in on the computer then print it off, then it has to be sent via a Post Office, not easy as they seem to be few and far between.

Today I am trying to enter Census information into the software, but I had decided to try some new census inputting software, an upgrade because the version I had been using had been great.

I have tried the new version now and can't get my head round the configuration needed to suit my needs so back to the old one.

Why do software writers decide after 4 years of a programme working fine that the new version would have to emulate the major American one? If I wanted software that was more biased towards America, I would have chosen one of those, not upgraded to the one that was fine.

The brain power seems to be used up now so I will leave you wondering.

THE FUTURE OF MY RESEARCH

Welcome to my obsession/hobby at Family History Land.


I have an old notebook where I do my scribblings of information while I am working on the Family History, I decided today to check all these notes thereby making sure anything relevant is entered into my software.

I am linking grandchildren births and deaths in so that I have a full family picture, I decided to start with my great grandfather. Unfortunately this meant adapting the software wording etc, so it has turned out to be based on trial and error.

The number of scribbles are unbelievable, I feel like the old western miners who hit upon a vein of gold. Deciphering them is another matter though! What did I mean by e.g. George 1827? Was it a year of estimated birth and he needs researching? I now try to make full notes so they make sense when viewed later.

An interesting event yesterday was contact re-established with my cousin who has now got a website and he has offered to host a web page for me SO if you go to http://www.dennill.name/ you see all the info I have on the descendants of John Dennel born about 1703.

Every time I find something new and update the software information I will send it to him and he will put the update on the website. You can reach me at the email address that is on the web page and also here ptdennell@yahoo.com

ONE LUCKY STRIKE

At the moment very little work is being done on the family history due to life intervening. [see My Other Blog] I have virtually lost the use of my right hand so have to type one-handed with my left hand, of course I am a right-handed touch typist so this slows me considerably. I was watching re-runs of BBC TV's 'Who do you think you are?' recently and I noticed how easy they make it look.
What is your opinion on the fact that they don't tell you about the dozens of people they must have researching to find out the relevant information or the length of time it takes?


Do you think they are giving the wrong impression to people just starting out?


Do you think maybe they have an ulterior motive and really want people to use professional genealogists?


It brings to mind a letter in a magazine a few decades back where a professional genealogist believed that amateurs should not be allowed access to records due to their 'inability to use the information properly' PROPERLY?? What does that mean?


I must admit I was shouting at the TV last night that the celebrity should have looked at the death dates before ordering the certificates but if he wants to waste his money that's his business.


Leads seemed to have been completely missed out - how did he know his great-uncle had emigrated to America? How did he know where to look for the Railway Workers information? Maybe I blinked but I didn't see those bits.


As I say - makes it look too, too easy,


LUCKY STRIKE!!


And I don't mean the old matches called that. I have been searching for John Dennell, born about 1703, for over 15 years now.
I have been impeded by ill-health and a lack of transport, and so knowing that all I could do was to rule out the obvious places.
BUT I may have found him [subject to verification] I have found a marriage index reference that ticks all the boxes:
1/ John with a surname variation known well to anyone with the Denn[e][i]ll surname so that fits;
2/ Marrying an Esther, who we know to be his wife, so that fits;
3/ The year of the marriage fits within the range;
4/ The place of the marriage fits wthin the county;
I am trying NOT to get excited because it may not be my John at all and I will only find out for definite by seeing the actual marriage register which means travel.


I will keep you informed of my progress.


Any Denn[e][i]ll's reading this and don't know of the elusive John contact me for a quick family tree outline.