RootsChat.Com

It is odd!

Another of the forms on the CWGC (Headstone Text) there looks like a gap between the 'M' and the 'E' in BROOME, although it also gives the initial 'E' beforehand.

They seem to have settled on Broome for all Memorials, but perhaps he was a Brown with a close relative (brother?) named Andrew? 

If this is Florence, she was either named as his beneficiary before she married - possibly intended wife, or she was the only known surviving relative through the Brown she married (but for that to be the case, he would have died fairly soon after marriage and she was still using the name Campanelle - questionable, but there was money involved, albeit a small amount).

It throws up many different directions of search!

Quote from: Andrew Tarr on Friday 11 March 16 09:16 GMT (UK)

Quote from: C_W on Friday 11 March 16 08:51 GMT (UK)

.... Then there others I have found that were deliberately vandalised one night and pushed over by some very stupid bored youths.

Quite a few gravestones are 'pushed over' by a local authority which has decided that they are a hazard under all-pervasive H&S rules.

If they are for you family make a claim against the local authority which had them pushed over, this was deemed illegal by the courts.
The local authority is responsible for re-instating any they have vandalised in this way.

The correct procedure is for them to make the memorial safe by use of a temporary support.

Cheers
Guy

Cheers
Guy

That's interesting, Guy!

Did the Court make this decision in the last few years, as I wasn't aware of it?

The grave where my parents are buried was re-opened 10 years ago to add my sister.  One day when I arrived with flowers, I found a notice tied around the headstone about it being unsafe.
When they opened the grave, they left the headstone and plinth tilted on soil that had been dug out.  I pointed this out to the cemetery staff and they said that the notice shouldn't have been put there as they could see it was a tended grave.  (if it had fallen on me it would have been their fault for leaving it on a tilt anyway!)  I had to ask them a further couple if times about more infill because of the ground settling.

It was upsetting at the time, not just for 'our' grave, but for those who had these notices against much older gravestones, with relatives no longer visiting.  I know they removed some and laid them against the plinth, but haven't seen any of these notices for the past few years and wonder if it is to do with the ruling?

It is also upsetting when you go to a churchyard and find that they have removed all stones and grassed over entire areas.  I think this happened a lot in the 60s and 70s when everything was being modernised, and even historical buildings were demolished without thought.

If they need to find the sender, the BBC should run the story in the Bedfordshire local news, rather than Lincolnshire.

I agree that there should be a warning on Ancestry about checking sources on public trees.

I looked at one that was high on the list and supposedly a near match.  I couldn't quite believe what my eyes were showing me as the tree not only had numerous children for one couple, which were actually from different families who happened to have parents with the same common forenames, but there were also children listed at the top who were actually older than their supposed parents.   It was so glaringly obvious, but not to the tree owner.

There was another close match who had obviously just copied it and added all of this mishmash to their tree. 

The top tree in question also had many thousands within it.  I think some people go about it like they would social media and by adding 'ancestors', it is akin to adding 'followers' or 'likes'. 

I keep my tree private because I feel that I need to verify everything before I publish it as 'fact'.