Find Ancestors

Hi the two people who have my richard rawcliffe have both been told Ive paid money for some of my research and had help from good resourceThe first person of the two has been told to check her information my richard s grandad also richard was born in 1876 Her richard was born 1880 but she has pair my richard wife with her richard if that makes sense the other person has gone down the same route so what can you do thanks for the sibbling information I will take a good look at it thank you barbara

Ah, I know that problem well. When I very first started out, I found my gr-grfather in a tree here. I adopted the information about his parents. They were Richard and Mary X. I started investigating. I discovered the person (distantly related to the husband of a sister of my gr-grfather) had just picked a random Richard X who married a Mary around the same time and place -- and picked a couple who were 100% unrelated to me!

(Not to mention trees at Ancestry who have a distant ancestor of mine from Cheshire being the grandson of someone born 250 years *later* in the US state of Virginia ... and my grx4 grfather in Cornwall having a son born in Tennessee ...)

If you're sure of your Richard Rawcliffe being the one who married Sarah Lovett -- I presume because he was a naval man -- then best to ignore the reckless ones.

how would you find out if some one is adopted can you get that info quite easy I bet maudy mary rawcliffe is a alien ha ha it looking that way barbara

First, Barbara, can you address this "Maudy" business? It really is an extremely unusual name. Especially for someone apparently born in the 1960s.

Is it not possible that you are misreading what is really "Mandy"? In some handwriting, an "n" looks more like a "u", as I know from considerable experience.

In fact, the one "Maudy M" I did find, when I looked at the handwritten addition to the index and then found the original entry, was really a "Mandy M".

Is it likely that your Richard adopted a child, having married when he was middle-aged? I wouldn't think so. I *would* think it possible that Sarah Lovett had a child already when she married Richard ... although we don't seem to be able to find a match for a Maudy/Mandy. Anyhow, no, it would be absolutely impossible to get access to an adoption record, even if you knew what you were looking for.

It's also possible that M was really a daughter-in-law. I did see a case here where a daughter-in-law had signed a death certificate as a daughter, to avoid the hassle of explanations. (Her husband was the son of his mother but not his deceased stepfather, whose name he used ...) That could mean that Richard had a son, who was married to M.

janney I think I understand what you are saying about richard having a son and the daughter in law signing the death certifcate is a good hunch because richard moved to liverpool and join the merchant navy he was proable a single man and having alot of fun at the time and father a child as you know the saying they had a girl in every port barbara

I do suspect that either he or Sarah had a child before the marriage.

Now, one more time. (Is this the 10th time? Or just the 3rd or 4th?)

Can you tell us from looking at the death certificate whether the name could be MANDY rather than MAUDY?

The thing is, you're wanting to look for this person, and knowing her actual name is really rather important.

If you can scan the death cert, I'd be happy to give you an email where you could send it, as would others I think, so we can have a look.

Barbara

Please do check if the informant on Richard's death certificate is definitely Maudy or could be Mandy. Would you like to send me a copy? I will PM my email address. Not that I can find a Mandy either. But it does eliminate some possible fruitless searches.

I note you have said you have sent for the death cert of Sarah Ann Lovett. Let us know what that bring, thought the GRO are rather slow at the moment, could take 10 days.

I'd also look into the siblings of Sarah Ann Lovett, to see if anything useful is there, e.g. they could have a child called Maudy.

Barbara, there is often a problem with other people's research. If the person is not vitally important to them it is a sad fact that they do not research as thoroughly as if the person was vital. It wouldn't do for me, but the situation is so.

I found a very impressive tree on Ancestry this week with my relative. It contained several thousand relatives, photos, documents etc. It showed their daughter, my relative, but had her living as a servant with an unrelated family in 1851. But I know she was married by then and living with her husband and son, albeit nearby. This person then had the daughter marrying a different person to mine some years later, but I have the certificates, so I know mine is right. I hold my hands up if I am wrong, but my evidence seems stronger than theirs.

There is, of course, no proof of anything with genealogy. Unless you remember your mum giving birth to you, you have no proof that she is your mum. But let's ignore that possibility!

Be very wary of other people's research and treat it only as a guideline.

Often people on this website are a good, if not better, than professional researchers.

Margaret

thanks janney for your offer please send me a e.mail address I dont have ascan ner but the local libary do and I am booked in at two o clock this afternoon will e mail you the details barbara

Iam in the local library . And when Igo on the computor I always go striaght to favourites and into mystuff but here in the library you cannot go into your favouries so Iam stuck and I am not to good anyway on the computor . I did ask a member of the library, did she think it was mandy or maudy and her answer was mandy sraight away . so Iam guessing mandy it is.Is there any other way to send it . I need to know the password to get me in so will have to speak to husband barbara

Sent you an email address -- but I think I'm happy to go with that person's reading!

Hi Again

Sent you some links in the right sort of area :O)

Got the image!

Compare the "n" in Mandy with

the "n" in "Litherland"
the "m" in "thrombosis"
the "m" and "n" in her street name
the "n" in "without inquest", "Coroner", "coronary" ...
(all the handwriting is the same person; her name isn't her signature)

It's definitely MANDY!

my daughter took it home and scan it for great stuff

Aaaargh. I'm trying to search telephone directories c1984 for the two addresses on the certificate, and Ancestry is giving me:

"Due to current technical difficulties, only partial search results are shown above. Please try your search again later to see full results."

Alrighty then. I will!

okay will do janey barbara