Genealogy Chat
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
No information is insignificant
Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
---|---|---|---|
|
HeadStone | Report | 3 Sep 2006 20:44 |
To follow Paul |
|||
|
HeadStone | Report | 3 Sep 2006 20:46 |
Hi All, Several days ago I contacted the local Council Bereavement Service who deal with the cemeteries in the area and asked if they had a Mr. & Mrs. Jones buried in one of the local cemeteries. They very quickly responded with the cemetery, burial dates and grave numbers. The odd thing was that Mr. & Mrs. Jones were not buried together. Mr. Jones had died some 30 years before Mrs. Jones. In the same grave as Mr. Jones was a 5 week old child buried some 10 years after he had died, named Miss Williams. When I queried this they found a note in the files from Mrs. Jones giving permission, indicating that she was the wife of Mr. Jones and had since remarried and was granting permission for the parents (names given in the notes) of the baby to be buried in that plot. The note also gave her new married name. With this information it did not take long to discover that the baby's mother was the daughter of Mr. & Mrs. Jones, who I was not previously aware of. So Mr. Jones was in fact buried with his grand daughter. Now thanks to the information provided by the Bereavement Service there are two more lines of investigation to pursue. All because I questioned who was the baby in the grave. (The names used of course are fictional.) Bye Paul |
|||
|
AnninGlos | Report | 3 Sep 2006 20:56 |
which just shows you should never ignore anything. That lodger on the census could be the future son in law of the head of the house for example, or that witness at the wedding. Ann Glos |
|||
Researching: |