John Jabez Roberts

[cando]

Easy to understand the mistranscription...some of the writing in the registers is difficult to read.

http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article154872111
Edward ROBERTS and John Jabez ROBERTS had unclaimed letters at the GPO Melbourne in 1856.

Cando

[sparrett]

According to the Electoral Roll of 1896 in New Zealand, John Jabez ROBERTS was registered at two addresses.

One in  the same street ( no street numbers are given, so one cannot say the same house) as Ellen WINNIE his niece.
Rhodes St Wellington.

The other in the same street as his nephew Thomas Earl ROBERTS and his wife Honorah
Bute street, Wellington

He is listed as a settler.

Perhaps one of these relatives was the informant on his death certificate and we wonder how much accurate information they had to contribute .

Sue

[cando]

ROBERTS John Jabez
Missing friends  21 Sep 1853
'Argus' missing friends index 1851-1853.  Marion Button.
Comment: From Liverpool

Cando

[dhouston]

How may nieces follow their uncle from Australia to New Zealand, live with them and pay for their uncles funeral?

Excuse me, but in 1899, one of my female ancestors moved to NZ from NSW, to live with her uncle.  I am also aware that when her uncle died, that his funeral was paid for by my female ancestor, and further that she received a benefit from his deceased estate.   Not only do I know this directly because my female ancestor told me so back in the pre internet era, (so long before family history was a popular hobby), but also I have confirmed it on several occasions since, including a letter addressed to me, on FD letterhead dated in the 1960s.

The amount of movement between NZ and eastern seaboard ports in Australia from about 1870s to WWI is huge.    Afterall, it had been anticipated by the English Colonial office that there would be SEVEN colonies federating into one in 1901.   

Cheers,  JM

The niece didn't gain money from her uncles estate. Her husband was bankrupt twice. The small estate was left to her brother. I don't have copies of the twins death certificates. An article was published in the newspaper September 1949 regarding the twins 83rd birthday. Was Henry Roberts 84th birthday. Thomas Earl was born August. They didn't know how old they were. Not sure if I will learn anything from their death certificates. Descendants don't seem to have new information or don't wish to share.

[Lucy2]

Hi dhouston

I have some more information to add here (and will do so, shortly).

*   Would be interested to know please, just which line of this ROBERTS family you are connected to ?
[Simply because we may be able point you in the direction of other researchers. ]

   ~  Lu

[cando]

I don't have copies of the twins death certificates. An article was published in the newspaper September 1949 regarding the twins 83rd birthday. Was Henry Roberts 84th birthday. Thomas Earl was born August. They didn't know how old they were.

dhouston

Please read reply#21.  You have misinterpreted the information on the birth certificates. The twins were born on the same day [9 Sep] and the births registered 25 days [7 Oct] later therefore previous issue to Thomas [twin 2] was Ellen 2 years and Twin 1 who was 25 days old at the registration date in Oct.  Do you now understand?

Cando

[majm]

The niece didn't gain money from her uncles estate. Her husband was bankrupt twice. The small estate was left to her brother. I don't have copies of the twins death certificates. An article was published in the newspaper September 1949 regarding the twins 83rd birthday. Was Henry Roberts 84th birthday. Thomas Earl was born August. They didn't know how old they were. Not sure if I will learn anything from their death certificates. Descendants don't seem to have new information or don't wish to share.

May I please ask about those birth certificates for the twins....  I see that Cando has already mentioned this.   
Are you saying that you hold both birth certificates and that you are absolutely sure that the Vic BDM certificates show you that the twins were born 25 days apart?    I am not convinced.  Apart from anything else, a female in 1865 in labour for 25 plus days .... and both babies of same gender ... possibly identical, so errr .... one placenta ....   

They celebrated their birthday on the same day but Thomas Earl was 25 days older.

You have misinterpreted the data on the birth certificates.  Please read the information under the heading

When and where married.  Issue living and deceased.

The births were registered by Edward ROBERTS on 7 Oct 1865 25 days after the births on 12 Sep 1865 so previous issue to Henry was Ellen 2 years and Thomas 25 days....on the date of the registration.

There was no marriage in Melbourne in Sep 1862 between Edward ROBERTS and anyone.  Not married.

Henry mentions his mother was Mary Durie not Caulfield

Well he is wrong if he was born 1865 Ballarat. 

Cando

[dhouston]

They celebrated their birthday on the same day but Thomas Earl was 25 days older.

You have misinterpreted the data on the birth certificates.  Please read the information under the heading

When and where married.  Issue living and deceased.

The births were registered by Edward ROBERTS on 7 Oct 1865 25 days after the births on 12 Sep 1865 so previous issue to Henry was Ellen 2 years and Thomas 25 days....on the date of the registration.

There was no marriage in Melbourne in Sep 1862 between Edward ROBERTS and anyone.  Not married.

Henry mentions his mother was Mary Durie not Caulfield

Well he is wrong if he was born 1865 Ballarat. 

Cando

Thanks I didn't know the date the births were registered. I was wrong regarding the 25 days. I'm right regarding their ages at death 84 and 86.

[majm]

Thanks I didn't know the date the births were registered. I was wrong regarding the 25 days. I'm right regarding their ages at death 84 and 86.

The date the births were registered is recorded on their Victoria birth certificates, and these have unique registration numbers, which are issued consecutively.   The birth certificates also include the date of birth, and a great deal more information as Victoria's BDMs are among the most informative in the world.   Birth certificates contain information provided first hand by the parents of the babies whose births are being registered.

Cheers,  JM