RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: peterpiper on Wednesday 11 September 19 19:02 BST (UK)
-
Hya Peeps, needing help again!
The 1939 register has my oldies living under a different surname, which has been crossed out and the correct family name written in , one entry has "1947 DNA M" along side it, I suppose this means DNA Match, does this mean that someone else is (or has been) researching this family? If not, who made the alterations
Thanks for reading,
pete
-
Nobody would have written DNA Match on the 1939 Register. The code must have a different meaning.
-
It is most likely a district code, the date being when an event took place, affecting one of your 'oldies'.
DNA was the district code for Bagshot in Surrey. https://www.findmypast.co.uk/articles/1939-register-enumeration-districts
-
Thanks for the information, on looking again (with my specs on) the entry is ONA M, which is Stoke on Trent, the area I need.
I'm attaching a picture of the entry, I hope, any further info welcome.
-
Possibly the date of a marriage in the ONA area?
Emeltom
-
I suggest that it indicates that there was a marriage in Stoke on Trent in 1946.
Have you checked this on freeBMD?
-
More info, Norah was married to Webb 1946, so that will be what the alteration means.
There's so much more info available since I last started researching that I'm having to learn all over again.
Thanks for reading and for replies
pete
PS. Emeltom, and JenB sorry, I was typing this when you replied, seems like the M is sorted, Thank you, but who would have altered the others?
-
I took another look at the 1939 Register for my Mother. I had not found her previously. Finally found her redacted although her younger brother is there but born seven years later. A big undertaking and mistakes happen.
-
Looks like piccie attachment didn't work, back to the learning
pete
PS yes it did, must be tired, can't concentrate
-
Looking at the full image (which we are not allowed to post). I'd say that the Mary J Gilbert's name change (in green ink) is linked to the note in green ink at the left hand side which is dated 1957 - therefore something happened around that date to cause the change in her name (would have been done by the NHS who updated the register)
The other two name changes I (at a guess) would say were done at the time the register was compiled seem to be in the same ink and writing. Maybe the person writing it down assumed that all the occupants had the same surname and were corrected by someone in the household before he got to the final name?
Matching births in Stoke on Trent District, for the younger two occupants, have a surname of O'Brien and were registered with a mother's maiden name of Gilbert.
Mary J was said to be single in 1939, James was said to be married.
Its 'possible' - though by no means certain, that these two were the parents of the younger two but for whatever reason (possibly as he was married and though didn't live with his wife was not free to marry) she was still single and using her maiden name
The nearest marriage I can find for a James O'Brien and a Mary Gilbert is in Q3 1955 Stoke on Trent District - though that does have the bride as Mary A, not Mary J. Again this is just a theory, but perhaps by then James was free to marry and the 1957 note related to Mary's name change was when she notified the NHS of her marriage and name change.
NB. Search Free BMD Q3 1955 for each name separately as James' entry has been mistranscibed as vol 6b rather than vol 9b so he doesn't appear on the same entry as Mary. - I've sent in a correction report but it will take a while to update the database
Its a theory to explore, but I'd recommend searching Free BMD thoroughly first to see if there are any other earlier marriage options for James and then try to track down when his first wife died and proceed to the marriage cert from 1955 to confirm he was a widower by then.
EDIT So sorry I forgot to say, I think your first step would be to get a birth register pdf from the GRO (cheaper than a cert and exactly the same info) for one of the children to verify the mother's first name. If it does turn out to be Mary then the above theory could hold a little more weight.
There was a death for a Mary Agnes O'Brien in 1980 , Stoke on Trent District and that lady shared a birth date with the Mary J Gilbert, later O'Brien, on the 1939 register
Boo
-
Boo, Thank you very much for your time and effort.
Your theory's are facts! researching my own notes from a few years ago, which I thought were lost,
all ties in.
The marriage of James & Mary in 1955 is James's 2nd, he "split "from his 1st wife sometime between 1913(the D.o B. of his 1st Son) & the birth of Joseph in 1926, his 1st marriage was dissolved about 1954, his 1st wife went on to re-marry in 1955,
So, to my reckoning, James's Son from his 1st marriage (my Dad) is half Brother to Joseph & Norah, making their offspring my Half Cousins, some of which may be still living, or doesn't this count with the illegitimacy problem?
Once again,
Thank you very much
pete