Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1
    Loves to help with queries
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    232

    Default Images for St Martins, Desford, Leicestershir

    I am wanting to re-look at the image for the above on my FMP subscription but it just keeps continually trying to load. I have reported the problem but don't want to wait for the problem to be fixed. A Margaret Lace(?) Warner 21 Sept 1777 Desford, mother Ann Warner. I have added in the baptism section of her profile: "Register shows Margaret as base dau. of Anne Warner." The same for Ann's other dau. Sarah 9 June 1771 and a son Samuel Masse(y)Warner 2 Apr 1780 who is called illegitimate on the register. With many thanks to anyone who is generous enough to do a check for me please. Lizzie

  2. #2
    Reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    16,672

    Default

    "Register shows Margaret as base dau. of Anne Warner."
    I don't think this is supposed to be a look-up site but I have had a quick peep and can report that the word "base" does not appear in the entry and the child's name is Margaret Lace. It's usually reasonable to assume that the child is illegitimate if, as in this case, the mother's name appears without a father's name but you shouldn't invent things for your records.

  3. #3
    Loves to help with queries
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    232

    Default

    Thanks Peter, as I said I needed to re-visit the registers but FMP simply kept loading otherwise I would not be asking for help. And I certainly did not "invent" this. I know I said I had added "base" in her bapt. section of her profile but that was only because I must have gotten it from somewhere and do you think I can remember. I certainly do not make things up. It was many, many years ago and I have been re-visiting a lot of people on my tree to do some tidying up. Cheers and thank you.

  4. #4
    Loves to help with queries
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    232

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LizzieB View Post
    Thanks Peter, as I said I needed to re-visit the registers but FMP simply kept loading otherwise I would not be asking for help. And I certainly did not "invent" this. I know I said I had added "base" in her bapt. section of her profile but that was only because I must have gotten it from somewhere and do you think I can remember. I certainly do not make things up. It was many, many years ago and I have been re-visiting a lot of people on my tree to do some tidying up. Cheers and thank you.
    I have been able to access the PR's. Seeing it is very clearly written Margaret's sister Sarah's bapt. entry reads base dau. of Anne......I am assuming that possibly the Parish Clerk has misheard the word base for Pace when writing the record being dictated by the vicar/priest. There is only 8 Pace bapts. in Leicestershire between 1562-1913, one in Desford 1641.

  5. #5
    Super Moderator - Completely bonkers and will never change.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    8,285

    Default

    Hi Lizzie,

    Firstly, congratulations on the re-checking. When you first start family history it's very easy to 'do things wrong' and make mistakes. I checked some of my early stuff and found I'd made five mistakes in seven entries in one baptism register! I don't think they were all down to bad typing when I transferred the details to the computer from my notes.

    Strangely, when I searched for the name Warner for 1779 +/- 2 years in the Leicestershire Baptisms dataset it came up 'no results' so I went back to Sarah's 1771 entry and then clicked the 'forward' arrow till I reached the necessary pages. Wonder if that might solve your access problem. Alternatively, have you tried 'clearing your cache'- whatever that means, as computer terminology is, to me, even more of a mystery than the Japanese and Swahili languages.

    Meanwhile:
    Sarah Warner, base daughter of Anne, bapt June 9th
    Margaret Lace, D of Ann Warner, bapt Sept 21st (The D of daughter is followed by an 'r' in superscript.)
    Samuel Masse, S of Ann Warner, illegitimate, bapt April 2nd

    Sarah's entry is the only one where Ann is spelt Anne.

    ADDED: Just seen your post #4.
    I have been able to access the PR's. Seeing it is very clearly written Margaret's sister Sarah's bapt. entry reads base dau. of Anne......I am assuming that possibly the Parish Clerk has misheard the word base for Pace when writing the record being dictated by the vicar/priest. There is only 8 Pace bapts. in Leicestershire between 1562-1913, one in Desford 1641.
    Considering that
    (a) Samuel is written as illegitimate I think you can assume that Sarah's description as 'base' is correct.
    (b) given the rarity of Pace as a surname in Leicesterhire baptisms as a whole, and the only one in Desford more than a hundred years before, I would say you are way off track.
    Besides which, you are assuming it was the parish clerk who completed the parish register. Judging by the signature at the bottom of the page I would say it was the vicar himself. In any case, the parish clerk would be aware of whether a child was illegitimate or not.
    Pam
    Vulcan XH558 - “Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.”

  6. #6
    Loves to help with queries
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    232

    Default

    A correction as a fellow researcher was using Pace/Lace as Margaret's surname until I was able to send him a copy of the register, although the reference to Pace above still applies. Also there doesn't appear to be any Lace bmd's Leicestershire close to Margaret's baptism and none Desford according to FMP.

  7. #7
    Loves to help with queries
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    232

    Default

    Thanks Pam for taking the time....... but also on checking all the Pace's/Lace's in Leicestershire there's no bmd's that come anywhere near Margaret's bapt. date. The only one in Desford is 1641. I'm seriously thinking that the Parish Clerk misheard the vicar or priests word "base" as "Lace" if in fact Parish Clerk's did do some of the writing of the registers. I must say I was a little miffed when told this was not a lookup site but more so when accused of "inventing" things. I would welcome your opinion on the base/Lace theory. And as far as clearing my cache, clearing my cash more like it!

  8. #8
    Loves to help with queries
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    232

    Default

    Pam......I really need to log off and get to bed.....it 11 past 10 here and I've had one heck of a day. Many thanks for your interest. Lizzie At least I've posted this in the right spot.

  9. #9
    Knowledgeable and helpful
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    England
    Posts
    661

    Default

    Scanning through the register it becomes clear that whoever wrote it up had a mental block when it came to spelling 'base' as it is frequently spelled Bace and then corrected to Base. It also looks like the surname Warner has been written in later, using a different pen.

    Registers weren't necessarily written up immediately - I've come across mentions of information written on scraps of paper kept in drawers etc, and then written up as a batch. Also I believe many clergy kept a 'day book', so information would often be written up from there at a later date.

    It seems perfectly feasible to me - especially given the Bace spelling - that it should be Base and has been wrongly recorded as Pace.

    For info - if you don't already have it - Samuel Massey was indicted 15 July 1777 (mother Ann Warner of Desford) but the notes column says "discharged". Leicester Records Office will have the full original record - I only have an index on CD.

    He was possibly a busy man as a filiation order was made in 1782 against a Samuel Massey of Worthington, the mother being Ann Dunton of Belton.

  10. #10
    Loves to help with queries
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    232

    Default

    jomot1.......with many thanks for your thoroughness and expertise. I was never trying to cast aspersions on Ann Warner's morals. It just seemed so obvious given the lack of Pace/Lace in Leicestershire and the fact that she had an earlier "base" child and another illegitimate child. And thank you for the further information re Samuel. I will certainly be following that up. I'm pleased I decided to post my query re Margaret......Lizzie

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Select a file: