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
Oh Ye Wise Ones.
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Clive | Report | 1 Jul 2007 15:54 |
|
Thanks Gwyn Obvious isn't it? I didn't think of going back but having found that 10 years later they were Chambers that was enough. The transcriber has made a lot of mistakes and I just assumed it was yet another! Clive |
|||
|
Gwyn in Kent | Report | 1 Jul 2007 15:22 |
|
Marriages Mar 1845 >>>CHAMBERS Alfred Plomesgate 12 537 Clodd Emily Plomesgate 12 537 FISHER Robert Plomesgate 12 537 >>>FISK Hannah Plomesgate 12 537 Is this the marriage on freebmd? If so, I can't think why she is still called FISH... Yes I think she / they were likely to be CHAMBERS Gwyn |
|||
|
Clive | Report | 1 Jul 2007 15:05 |
|
The 1851 census for Sweffling shows Hannah Fish (b 1825, Sweffling) as the wife of Alfred Chambers. The 1861 census shows Hannah Chambers as a widow servant and her children James born 1846, Sweffling, and Hannah, born 1848, Sweffling as boarders in Lambeth St Mary. The children are now called Chambers too. Jethro born 1850 appears to have died as a Chambers in 1852. Are we agreed that in the 1851 census the Fish people ought to be called Chambers? Clive (apprentice not yet journeyman) |
|||
|
Clive | Report | 1 Jul 2007 14:58 |
|
In a mo |
|||