KENT-ENG-L Archives

Archiver > KENT-ENG > 2004-08 > 1091381060


From: John Bartlett <>
Subject: Re: [Kent] Beware of wrong assumptions!
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 10:24:20 -0700
References: <20040801170734.34792.qmail@web60901.mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20040801170734.34792.qmail@web60901.mail.yahoo.com>


On Sun, 2004-08-01 at 10:07, Sharon Pilkington wrote:
> Or how about if you find an army colonel, and his family listed in the
> 1841 Kent census living in Maidstone Barracks with the same names as the
> family you are searching for?
> I have obtained a will c1854 whom I believe belongs to this same man only
> at the time he wrote it he was a general,and he was also said to be in
> maidstone in the will. Is it safe to think the colonel, and the general
> are one, and the same?
>
> Sharon
>
There ought to be a record of his service (& promotion) somewhere in a
Ministry. Does anyone know where?

> fastmail Kate Dempsey <> wrote:
> How about if the father of the bride is recorded as deceased and the father
> of the groom isn;t. Is the father of the groom almost certainly still alive?
>
> Regards
>
> Kate

I think the subject line should be, "Beware of assumptions!". How much
value do you want to place on the word "almost"? Maybe there was no
legitimate father and they wanted to keep it quiet. My grandmother was
*almost* certainly illegitimate, her birth registration has yet to be
found under the father's name, there are *possible* records in her
mother's maiden name, but her wedding certificate shows his name and
states he is deceased.
> --
> John on Vancouver Island. http://members.shaw.ca/bart34/genealogy.html
> http://www.archivecdbooks.ca/acdbcanada.html - Do-It-Yourself genealogy.

This thread: