STEER-L Archives

Archiver > STEER > 2005-01 > 1107126719


From: "John Steer" <>
Subject: Re: [STEER] Emma Vincent Steer - Totnes
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 23:11:59 -0000
References: <00d301c50062$d34c11a0$3122a851@arthur>


Thanks for the replies on this question. The correction about Fore Streets
is a lesson which I can remedy when I complete the 1851 census project for
Devon, so the advice is timely.

As for Emma Vincent Steer we will need a baptismal record should it exist,
Totnes appears to have had a few churches and probably chapels, has anyone
searched the registers for these? The SoG's on-line index indicates a
paucity of filmed copies of Totnes registers, which means I can't get to
them in London unless through an LDS centre.

John Steer, Dorking, England

> > Jack is quite correct that "Totnes" in the 'address' is not correct,
> > and very misleading, when the Census Place is "Berry Pomeroy" (or
> any
> > parish other than Totnes itself in Totnes Registration District)..
> > But the boundary of Berry Pomeroy DID come right down to the River
> > Dart in Bridgetown. "Fore Street, Berry Pomeroy" was in Bridgetown.
> > "Fore Street, Totnes" was on the other side of the river. It was in
> > 1894 that Bridgetown was transferred to the borough and parish of
> > Totnes, and on modern street maps Fore Street, Bridgetown, is just
> > called "Bridgetown". Go to
> > http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/genuki/DEV/Totnes/ParishMap.html
> > and you can see the old boundary clearly, though the word TOTNES on
> > the map is actually inside the Berry Pomeroy boundary!!!
> > The TWO "Fore Streets" in this correspondence are in line with each
> > other, and not very far apart, but in different parishes at that
> time.
> >
> > Arthur


This thread: