Some of the Perils of Online Databases 4

Following up on my posts about problems one might encounter in online databases (Some of the Perils of Online Databases – one, two and three) here is another wrinkle I found in the various databases. This one concerns missing information.

James Shepheard

Sometimes the Clerk or Vicar had lost his notes when it came time to fill in the register.  In this case it was my great-grandfather that he forgot! With just the baptism register information it would have been almost impossible to figure out who this individual was and what family he or she belonged to. As it happened, he was the first person I started looked for in this area, as he was the last of my direct line to be born there. And I had his birth certificate, so I knew when and where he was born.

A few days earlier, on August 16th, there was a baptism entered for his cousin, Louisa Shepheard (Sheppard on the entry), whose father was not known.

 

Cornwood parish, Devon baptism register entries for Louisa Sheppard (top) and [James] Shepherd; source - source – Plymouth and West Devon Record Office, Birth, Marriage & Death (Parish Registers), retrieved 17 August 2012 from FindMyPast

James, or in this case just the surname Shepherd (that is the way the entry was spelled), does not turn up on any search on Ancestry, FindMyPast, TheGenealogist or FamilySearch. Even variations of the name spelling turn up no baptism for him. Louisa can be found on searches of FindMyPast and FamilySearch and both sites have copies of the baptism register page. She does not come up on searches of Ancestry or TheGenealogist.

Both children were registered with civil authorities with the surname Shepheard.

Remedies

If you cannot locate information about an individual on either indexes or images, do a broader search of an area, on several databases or different types of sources to try to locate the basic data. And let the database owner know so that they can correct their database or add the relevant information.

Celebrating 50 years of marriage

Linda and I celebrated our 50^th wedding anniversary this weekend. And we are pretty happy about it.

A half-century of marriage is a milestone that not many people achieve. Only about six percent of married couples reach this important event.

In our families, early death or divorce stopped any potential for many long marriages. Linda’s parents enjoyed over 44 years together; my parents were two days shy of celebrating their 35^th anniversary. Further back in my direct line, to my 3^rd great-grandparents, there were only six couples whose marriage lasted as long as ours has, one couple reaching 58 years. One set of Linda’s 2^nd great-grandparents was married 60 years, the only couple to make it past 50.

One of my sisters made it to 56 years; one of Linda’s brothers was married 60 years. Both are gone now, sadly. We miss all the people we have lost over the years, of course. But we carry much of who they were within us, which has made us richer.

Anyone whose marriage lasts this long has different ideas of why. First, of course, you have to live long enough. Too many people in our families, in my opinion, died well before they should have. Second, there needs to be love between the parties, lots of love, enough to be able to get through the tough times or the mistakes that many of us make. Third, people need to be compatible. That does not mean that they should be the same. My wife is outgoing; I am quiet and more introverted. She makes friends easily; I have fewer of those kinds of relationships. She can be calm in most instances; I have a low boiling point. She likes to go with the flow most often; I am a planner. She likes white wine; my preference is red!

In other words, we complement each other.

I am also extremely fortunate to have found someone to put up with me for so long.

This kind of anniversary leads you to look at your life, but not just back on it. We have come through in relatively good health – apart from the normal aches and pains that septuagenarians inevitably develop. We have children who are mature and accomplished and whose company we enjoy. We have grandchildren who constantly amaze us with their talent, potential and joie de vivre. We have been able to travel to many spots in the world, in many instances to see them as they do not live close to us anymore.

Because of a pandemic, we won’t get to celebrate this special occasion with our family this year. We are looking forward to a 50+1 party next year, though. Wish us luck with that!

Edwin & Mattie Miller, Wayne’s grandparents – married 58 years

James & Mary Walker, Linda’s 2^nd great-grandparents – married 60 years

Robert & Susan Anderson, Wayne’s 2^nd great-grandparents – married 51 years

Some of the Perils of Online Databases 3

Following up on my posts about problems one might encounter in online databases (Some of the Perils of Online Databases – one and two) here is another wrinkle I found in the various databases. This one concerns what might be found in different versions of parish information.

Sarah and John Adams

I found an example where the parish baptism register recorded two baptism events on the same day, but on one of the Bishop’s Transcripts children’s names were reversed.

Sarah Adams was baptized on 24 April 1808 in Cornwood parish, Devon. She was described as the “Bastard of Jane Adams” on the parish baptism register entry. A note was written alongside the that said, “the mother was permitted to be delivered in this parish under an engagement that Plympton would consider the child as belong to that parish.” Jane was not a normal resident of Cornwood parish.

 

Top: Cornwood parish baptism entries for William Northmore and Sarah Adams; source – Plymouth and West Devon Record Office, Birth, Marriage & Death (Parish Registers), retrieved 11 October 2012 from FindMyPast

Bottom: Cornwood Bishops’ Transcripts entries for William Northmore and Sarah Adams; source - "England, Devon Bishop's Transcripts, 1558-1887," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:S3HT-6R9S-6F7?cc=2515875&wc=QZ1P-1LP%3A1589444512 : 11 September 2019), 004398895 > image 209 of 220; Devon Record Office, Exeter

The image found on FamilySearch is from the Bishop’s Transcripts, not the parish register. It only indicates the child was “base born” but does not comment on the mother’s predicament as a non-resident of the parish.

Prior to passing of the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834, individual parishes were responsible for poor relief and they took great care to ensure that only their own legitimate families were listed for any support. Local county and regional governments took over welfare responsibilities after 1834.

For John, there is additional problem between the websites.

On the parish baptism register, John is shown as the bastard son of Jane Adams, the same Jane as for Sarah above. There is also a note about the lying in appended to the entry which says, “Note the mother was permitted to lie in in Cornwood under a promise fr[om] Plymton to consider the Bastard as theirs.” There was a second baptism that same day for Anne Northmore, daughter of Joseph and Mary.

FamilySearch has only the Bishop’s Transcripts and the information on their image is different. It says that John was the son of Joseph and Mary Northmore and Anne was the bastard daughter of Adams. No first name for the mother was recorded which is curious if the information was copied from the parish register.

 

Top: Cornwood parish baptism entries for Anne Northmore and John Adams; source – Plymouth and West Devon Record Office, Birth, Marriage & Death (Parish Registers), retrieved 11 October 2012 from FindMyPast

Bottom: Cornwood Bishops’ Transcript entries for John Northmore and Anne Adams; source - "England, Devon Bishop's Transcripts, 1558-1887," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:S3HT-6R9S-66Q?cc=2515875&wc=QZ1P-1LP%3A1589444512 : 11 September 2019), 004398895 > image 214 of 220; Devon Record Office, Exeter.

So, which one is right? Either child would fit in the Northmore family. The couple had nine children in Cornwood, one every two years from 1792, and either one would fit in the group.

Bishop’s Transcripts should normally match up with the parish registers. It seems that is not always the case here, so one must review other documents to determine the makeup of families. I did that for Jane Adams. She appears to have married William Head in 1819 in Cornwood. She had a six-year old girl living with her in 1841 by the name of Jane Adams. Further research indicated the girl was most likely the daughter of John Adams, Jane’s son. I lean toward the parish register entry about John being right as it has more information about the event and other records seem to support that interpretation.

It appears that on the parish register, the two entries originally were written as “John son of” the Northmores and “Anne bastard daughter of” Jane, but these were erased and information about John and Anne were reversed. It is possible (probable?) that the Bishop’s Transcript had already been sent to the diocese office before the error in the parish register was discovered and corrected.

Curiously, baptism entries for neither of Sarah or John Adams appear on Ancestry, FindMyPast or TheGenealogist lists. FindMyPast has the images from the register which show the children, but their names were not transcribed to the indexes.

Remedies

As I indicated for other examples, if there is a discrepancy between different images, such as between parish registers and Bishop’s Transcripts, let those in charge know so they can get the right information online or at least append notes to recognize the differences.

If you come across information on indexes that is not consistent with other data or with the images from which it was obtained, let the database owner know so they can make adjustments or corrections.

In all cases where information is inconsistent or in obvious error, consult as many other sources as possible to determine what the true facts or most likely interpretations are. Remember that all records were made by people using information they were given by others and may contain errors of fact or transposition.