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
Yet another pair of eyes, please.
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Deborah | Report | 1 Feb 2004 16:52 |
|
See below |
|||
|
Deborah | Report | 1 Feb 2004 16:53 |
|
Could someone please give me their thoughts on the following: My grandfather John Hepburn bn 4 Jul 1893, Sherburn Hill, Co. Durham. Confirmed. Parents George Hepburn & Margaret Richardson. Confirmed. George & Margaret married 10 Sept 1887, Sunderland. Confirmed George’s age on marr cert 21. Unconfirmed! This is where we hit trouble. This calculates bn c1866. Father (from cert) George Hepburn. On 1901 census age given 32 bn Easington. This entry is definitely him. On 1891 census age given 22 bn Easington. This entry is definitely him. This makes him born c 1868/69. Have not been able to find a birth reg, to obtain his Birth cert. Not registered, I think! Have checked the indexes thoroughly from 1860- 1872. On 1881 census there is only one George Hepburn of this age, with father also George. This gives age 12, bn Sherburn. (Comes under Easington. Looking good.) I now have the 1871 & 1861 entries for this family, but how can I be sure I am tracking the right family?! There is only one 2yr old George Hepburn on 1871, father George( Durham Records Online) bn Littletown, (again under Easington) Can anyone track a birth reg for him, or a baptism entry, or anything to help prove or disprove that this is my man. Open to any suggestions. Thanks, Debbie |
|||
|
Karen | Report | 1 Feb 2004 18:31 |
|
Hi Debbie I think I can answer your question! If George or Margaret were under 'full age' (i.e. 21) when they married, they would need the consent of their parents/guardians. If a couple didn't have consent, it was quite common for them to lie about their age. Hope this helps a little Karen |
|||
|
Deborah | Report | 1 Feb 2004 19:45 |
|
Hi Karen, Thanks for that. He did lie about his age when they married. Gr-grandma was only 17 when they married, her age stays consistent throughout. I don't think his parents weren't witnesses at the marriage. Margarets brother Benjamin was one, the other is Annie Hepburn, who I am assuming was George's sister. Though it could have been his mother. George's age only differs on the marriag cert. The 1891 & 1901 census entries I have are definitely them. I am so sure the 1881 & 1871 entries are him, but I have nothing concrete to base it on. Debbie |
|||
|
Stan | Report | 1 Feb 2004 21:51 |
|
Hi Debbie Birth registration was not compulsory until 1875. However most children in those days were baptised, and most baptismal records gave a date of birth by then. My grandmother was not registered in 1875, but apparently was able to claim her old age pension because she was not baptised until she was six, so she could remember it and found the right Church to get the records. Do check all the Church records for the area. You might be surprised how good they are. Best wishes Stan |
|||
|
Deborah | Report | 1 Feb 2004 22:28 |
|
Hi Stan, I've done the best I can at the moment with the parish records that are available on-line. With no luck yet. Unfortunately Durham is almost 300 miles from where I live, though I have been to Durham Record Office, it's not a trip I'm going to be able to make soon. Thanks for your help, though. Debbie |
|||