Newsletter
- 9 September 2012
GRO
responds to Freedom of Information request
More
errors on marriage certificates
Errors on marriage certificates - an insider's view
Corrections in the marriage register
Parish
registers - the inside story
Ancestry expand Dorset collection and start work on Surrey
Findmypast.co.uk to offer worldwide subscription?
Removing
living people from your family tree
Time to research your Scotch ancestry?
Message
in bottle sets world record
Brick
wall #3: Mary Pike (continued)
Dad's
Army records may stay closed
The LostCousins newsletter is
usually published fortnightly. To access the previous newsletter (dated 24
August 2012) please click here; for an index to articles
from 2009-10 click here.
Whenever possible links are
included to the websites or articles mentioned in the newsletter (they are
highlighted in blue or purple and underlined,
so you can't miss them).For you convenience, when you click on a link a new
browser window or tab will open (so that you don’t lose your place in the
newsletter) - if nothing seems to happen then you need to enable pop-ups in
your browser.
To go to the main LostCousins
website click the logo at the top of this newsletter. If you're not already a
member, do join - it's free, and you'll get an email to alert you whenever
there's a new edition of this newsletter available!
GRO responds to
Freedom of Information request
I have received a detailed response to the
Freedom of Information request I submitted last month, and it makes interesting
reading. The full document should be available on the Home Office website
shortly, but here are the important points:
Note:
it's worth remembering that even if the project had been completed,
the GRO had no plans to put the registers online (as they are for Scotland).
The digitisation project was undertaken for the convenience of the GRO, not the
convenience of users like you and me!
It's hard to imagine that the GRO would
spend £25 million or more in order to realise a saving of just under £1 million
at a time when government departments are under pressure to cut their
expenditure. So if they continue to look at the problem in the same way that
they have until now, it's unlikely we'll ever get what we want.
But as you'll know if you tackled the
challenges I've set in my recent newsletters, solving problems often requires
lateral thinking. In fact, in my very first challenge there's an example of how
the GRO could solve their problem!
You may recall that the June
challenge focused on the family of a builder called George Long. When he
died in 1915 he left £12,770 - a fortune for those days - even though he had a
large family and an estranged wife to support. Judging from the way that the
family moved around it seems that like most Victorian builders he would build a
few houses at a time, then use the proceeds from their sale to build some more.
How can we relate what George Long did
to what the GRO ought to do next? The first thing is to recognise that the
partially digitized records are a valuable asset, rather like an empty plot of
land - the second is to figure out how that asset can be built upon using only
the limited resources available, so that it can generate a profit.
Let's step back for a moment. Right now,
when you or I want to find a birth, marriage, or death that took place in
England or Wales, the first thing we do is look up the GRO indexes - whether at
FreeBMD, Ancestry, findmypast, or one of the many other sites that have online
copies. Clearly the GRO doesn't get any return when we use the indexes at
FreeBMD, but it might surprise you to know that they don't get paid even when
we look up the records at subscription or pay-per-view sites. This means that
currently their only source of revenue is the sale of certificates - and whilst
we may think of them as expensive, the fact is that right now the GRO barely
covers its costs, so there's little or no profit to fund new projects.
Would you invest in a venture like that
- a business with only one, barely-profitable, source of revenue? I certainly
wouldn't - and yet as UK taxpayers we have invested over £8 million in a
digitization project that was put on indefinite hold when it was barely halfway
through. There must be a better way of doing things!
George Long wouldn't have built a row of
half-finished houses - he'd have built half as many in the first place and finish
them before the money ran out, so that he could sell them and use the proceeds
to develop the rest of the land. I bet you that if he was around today his
advice to Sarah Rapson, the Registrar General, would
be "Forget the rest of the records for now - focus on generating income
from the work that's already been done, because that income will help pay for
the rest of the project."
I'd pay to search a more detailed index,
wouldn't you? And I'm sure that Ancestry and findmypast would fight tooth and
nail to get an exclusive contract, rather like two buyers who have fallen in
love with the same house and are each determined to outbid the other. (That's
something that George Long would definitely have understood!)
It would be so easy for one of the big
genealogy websites to turn the data that has been collected into an index
because they already have the infrastructure. But think of the enormous
benefits it would bring to family historians - so many 'brick walls' would come
tumbling down if the age at death was in the indexes from 1837, rather than
from 1866, and if we could search the death indexes by the name of the
informant, or the birth indexes by the place of birth. And, particularly when
you think about the births that were registered with no forename, wouldn't it
be wonderful to be able to search for births using the parents' names?
Once the GRO has a new source of revenue
it will be possible to recommence digitizing and transcribing the remaining
records. I'd suggest they start with the early marriages rather than finishing
off the births and deaths, because there's so much potential for family
historians to solve mysteries and fill gaps in their family tree by searching
on the father's name and occupation, or the names of witnesses.
It's such a good idea that there has to
be a catch - and I already know what it is. The GRO will claim that they don't
have statutory authority for what I'm proposing, even though it's only a small
step from what many local registrars are already doing.
But will that prevent it happening? I
can't believe that the government will let the GRO's obsession with red tape
put paid to a sound project that will not only generate revenue for the GRO
without any up-front investment, but also provide employment for British
workers. They might even hope to get a few extra votes from grateful family historians
in 2015!
Last month the Irish Ombudsman issued a
damning condemnation of the restrictions imposed by the GRO Ireland on access
to the registers of births, marriages, and deaths.
You can read her report here;
whilst it isn't directly relevant to the situation in England & Wales, it
certainly illustrates the increasing tension between family historians and the
civil registration authorities.
Knowing what to believe and what not to
believe often makes the difference between knocking down a 'brick wall' and
knocking our head against it. In recent newsletters I've written about the likelihood
that some of the information on a marriage certificate is incorrect - but this
time I'd like to turn to censuses.
The information on the 1911 Census is
certainly more reliable than on previous censuses - after all, we can see our
ancestors' handwriting, so the possibility of errors introduced by the
enumerator has been eliminated - but it's still riddled with errors. Some of
them are the result of carelessness or low levels of literacy, and some can no
doubt be attributed to a poor memory, but others must be a deliberate attempt
to mislead.
Where incorrect information has been
provided deliberately, whether on a certificate or a census form, the first
question I'd want to ask is "Who was it intended to fool?". If the bride or groom knocks a few years off their
age does this mean that they've lied to the person they're marrying, or is it
simply intended to stop others - parents, friends, the vicar - commenting on
the age gap?
The other day I came across a census
form on which the head of household had written the precise birthdate of every
member (other than his stepson, whose birthday he clearly couldn't remember).
Does that make the information provided more or less believable?
I suspect that, like me, you'd be more
likely to believe someone who gave their birthdate as June 14, 1851 than
someone who merely said that they were 60 years old on the day of the census.
But Robert Scattergood, who provided both pieces of information when he
completed his census form in 1911 was lying - neither
his age nor his birthdate was correct (he was actually born in 1846).
Note:
if you want to look up the household the references are PN9657 SN486.
It wasn't only Robert's own age that was
wrong: he said that his unmarried daughter Jane Beatrice Scattergood was 33
years old, having been born on February 22, 1878 - but in fact she was born in
1874 (as you can see from the 1891 census, where she was a visitor in the Stowers household).
In 1903 Robert Scattergood,
a widower twice over, married Cecile Marion Bunnett,
a widow. I strongly suspect that
he lied to her, both about his own age and that of his
daughter Jane, because he was worried about the age difference. When Robert and
Cecile married she was just 34, whilst Robert was approaching his 57th birthday
- and daughter Jane's real age was 29, only 5 years younger than Robert's new
bride.
Clearly this pretence had to be kept up in
1911 - Cecile was bound to see the census form, as Robert would be out at work
when the enumerator came calling - and since when
Robert died in 1920 the age shown on his death certificate was just 70, it
seems likely that Cecile never found out the truth.
Postscript: a few months after the 1911 census
Jane Beatrice Scattergood married Leonard J Bigington,
who at 30 was 7 years younger than she was. However, I'm
fairly sure he didn't know that, because when she died in late 1947 her age was
recorded as 70 years.
Note:
the key lesson from this example is that the inclusion of precise birthdates
didn't make them any more accurate. The accuracy was spurious.
Many of the genuine mistakes in the 1911
census were the result of confusion resulting from the new questions - the
fertility census. Several of my ancestors made the same mistake as Robert
Scattergood, and entered the answers opposite their own name, rather than their
wife's - and one of them gave the figures for both his marriages, which was
very helpful as it confirmed my suspicion that his first wife had given birth
to children who died in infancy.
Earlier this week a LostCousins member
asked me to take a look at the 1911 census schedule for the Wright family of Leeds (PN26957
SN130), because she couldn't work out who the final two members of the
household were. It didn't take me long to figure it out - how about you?
Tip:
you won't find this census schedule at Ancestry using the references I've quoted because they have omitted
the Schedule Number from their transcription. But you will find it by searching on the Piece Number and the family's surname..
More errors on
marriage certificates
I'm continuing to receive examples of
marriage certificates with errors - and, of course, these are only the ones
that were eventually untangled by the members concerned (there must be many
more which are still unresolved).
Mary told me about an error on her own mother's
certificate:
My
mother married in 1946 and often commented that her marriage certificate was
'wrong' as it stated that my paternal grandfather was deceased. This was
clearly not the case as he appears in the wedding photos and in one he is stood
next to the vicar who must have been having a bad day, as he knew Grandpa
personally. Two years ago a friend met my mother and asked mother why she had
never had the certificate corrected. Mother's response was that she was too
embarrassed.
Although
I had to jump through a few hoops including an appeal to the Registrar General
I did manage to get a correction comment on the certificate before Mum passed
away.
Well done, Mary! By the way, there's an
example of a corrected certificate later in this newsletter.
John wrote to me with two examples from
his tree, one from Scotland and one from Wales:
My
grandfather was a Police Inspector in Glasgow. When my grandmother died in Dec
1934, the family lore is that Granddad Simpson told his daughter Daisy, who was
then 18, that she now had the job of being the woman of the house. By all
accounts Daisy was quite headstrong, so she declined the proposition and left
home!
Nine
months later (Sep 1935) Daisy then married Daniel O'Brien in Glasgow. She
describes her father wrongly as "John Simpson, Law Clerk (deceased)" but
her mother correctly as "Janet Simpson, m.s.
Guthrie (deceased)". Presumably this was because of the fall-out with her
father, and perhaps because she did not want word getting back to him that she
was marrying - especially as I suspect Daniel may have been a Roman Catholic,
which would not have gone down well with my grandfather.
Sadly,
Daisy's marriage cannot have lasted, as in Dec 1936 she married Ali Mohammed.
Again, her parents were named as "John Simpson" (no mention of his
being deceased!) and "Janet Simpson m.s. Guthrie
(deceased)". Unfortunately, Daisy seems not to have divorced Daniel before
marrying Ali, describing herself as "Daisy Simpson, Spinster".
Inevitably, in 1940 she was sentenced to one month's imprisonment for bigamy,
and her marriage to Ali was nullified by the Sheriff Court!
By
then Daisy seems to have been estranged from most of her family, and I have
found no trace of her for the next 40 years. I believe that she died in Leeds
in 1980 under the name Daisy Coleman, as the death registration shows the
maiden surname (Simpson) with date and place of birth (about July 1916,
Scotland) - this corresponds to "my" Daisy Simpson and to no other Scottish
birth of the time. However, I have not found any record of her marriage to the
informant (Thomas Coleman) so perhaps she had decided twice
was enough. (Or possibly there are some
other wrong certificates out there ........!)
(2)
My great-grandfather was William Golding Marsh (1840-1921). He was born in Wiltshire,
but seems to have moved to Wales in the early 1860s, probably for work reasons.
He married my Great-Grandmother Mary Perry in Apr 1865 in Abersychan,
Monmouthshire, and they subsequently moved to Barrow-in-Furness, which was then
developing as an industrial town drawing people from all over the UK.
However,
the Certified Copy of the 1865 Marriage Registration, and all references in GRO
Indices, BMD searches etc, show that he was married
under the name of William Marsh Golding! He does seem to have signed it as that
himself (at least there is nothing on the Copy to suggest otherwise) but Mary
and the two witnesses made their marks, so possibly William's literacy was not
great. Perhaps a look at the actual document in the local Register Office might
throw more light on what happened.
Because
William was in Wiltshire in 1861 but in Barrow-in-Furness in 1871, it took a
bit of lateral thinking to discover that he had got married in Wales in 1865!
Fortunately the subsequent censuses show his eldest daughter Elizabeth as
having been born in 1865 in Trevethin, Monmouthshire,
which allowed me to search for Mary Perry's marriage (without using William's surname)
and this brought up the marriage registered in Pontypool.
It's not just marriage certificates that
can be wrong - my grandfather was always known as Harry John Buxton Calver (Buxton was his mother's maiden name), but in the
GRO indexes and on the copy of his birth certificate that I obtained from the
GRO his forenames are recorded as Harry Buxton John. Was it a mistake at the
time of registration, or did the registrar make a mistake when copying the
entry for the GRO? It will cost me £10 to find out!
Errors
on marriage certificates - an insider's view
As I've recently written a series of
articles about the frequency of errors on certificates, especially marriage
certificates, I was very interested to receive the following note from a former
Church of England clergyman (who asked me to state that it's possible there
have been some changes in procedure since his retirement). I'm sure you'll find
it as interesting as I did.
1. When a clergyman takes the details from a
prospective bride and groom he can only record what they tell him. He may use his noddle and query this or that,
but in the end it is their responsibility to speak truthfully - if they know
the truth. The system of Banns and
Licences, and the questions to the bride and groom during the ceremony, are an
attempt to verify the ability of the two parties to be married, for this very
reason. As are, or were, the
restrictions on the time of day - we must be able to see the bride and groom to
check that they are who they say they are.
2. The clergyman may make errors when filling in
the registers (technically this should not be done until after the ceremony,
but in my experience is usually done beforehand unless for some reason the
Registrar is present and does the job him or herself). There are set procedures for correcting
mistakes.
3. The church is issued with two registers which
are kept in parallel. I had to deal with
a case in which the register entries for a given marriage (officiated by my
predecessor) were different. The
Registrar made me interview the witnesses (who were fortunately obtainable) to
ascertain the correct information. It
was time consuming, and then difficult to achieve the necessary corrections in
the registers themselves. And people
wonder what clergy do all day!
4. Many clergy seem to have and to have had, a
cavalier attitude to the keeping of registers - "I was not ordained to be
a civil servant" sort of thing. I
have had to deal with registers which were an illegible disgrace. Church registers are never inspected by any
outside authority, and they should be on a regular basis. Once I realised the foregoing during my first
curacy, I wrote in the registers in BLOCK capitals - and wrote along a ruler as
draughtsmen do, and when I see registers now available on Ancestry I am
eternally grateful that I did this and kept it up all through my register
writing days.
5. The records kept by the GRO come from the
quarterly returns sent in by the clergy.
So, if you have a clergyman, or woman who cannot write legibly [when] copying
his or her own entries of the past three months, the opportunities for error
are immense.
Corrections
in the marriage register
There are procedures for correcting
errors, but it's rare to come across a certificate which incorporates such
changes, so when John sent me a copy of a certificate from his family tree I
knew at once that other readers would be interested in seeing it:
Was the bride unaware of her true origins? This seems
unlikely, as on the 1911 Census there's an Emily Croucher
aged 17 living with her parents William and Emily, but working as a domestic
servant. Could she have been employed by a family called Novelle,
I wonder?
Note:
in the 1891 Census her father is recorded as John W Croucher.
His occupation is General Labourer in both years.
Why did she choose to marry under a
different name? Was she trying to conceal the marriage from her parents? In
1911 2 Apple Market, the address she gave, was a confectionery shop, occupied
by the proprietor and an assistant - so it seems likely she had left home and
was making a new start.
However there are many unanswered questions.
What prompted the decision to set matters right in 1928? And who was Edmund
James Kirke, the co-signatory of the Statutory
Declaration?
Where did the Novelle
surname come from? It is quite a rare surname, mostly found as Novell, although
I noticed that many of the occurrences on the 1901 Census are in Surrey or
Sussex. If the surname had been invented by the bride herself, what was she
trying to hide? And is it a coincidence that it was in 1914 that the composer
Ivor Novello became famous with the publication of Keep
the Home Fires Burning? (By the way - it wasn't his real name, either.)
This isn't a competition, but if you can
shed some light onto this mystery, do please let me know!
Parish registers
- the inside story
Quite a few of my ancestors were baptised or married
at the parish church of St George-in-the-East in London's East End, but it was quite by chance
that I discovered a wonderful introduction to the registers on the church's own website.
Whether or not your ancestors come from
London you'll find that it provides a fascinating insight into register
entries, including what might go wrong. For example, it highlights three
instances in 1857-58 where the vicar refused to carry out a marriage on the
grounds that the groom was planning to marry his dead wife's sister - a
prohibition that was not lifted until 1907 - and there are other examples of
marriages that didn't take place.
It also discusses the mistakes that were
made, and later corrected. For example, at the marriage in 1856 of William
Keith and Matilda Bentley, the groom's father was named as Thomas Keith - but
in 1868 the register was corrected in the presence of the couple to reflect his
correct name, which was William.
What's particularly fascinating about
this guide is that you can look up the register pages online and see for
yourself what happened (they are part of the London
Metropolitan Archives collection at Ancestry). There are two parts to the
guide: you'll find the first part here and the second
part here.
Ancestry expand Dorset collection
and start work on Surrey
This week Ancestry added the Dorset
Tithe Apportion and Maps Collection, which covers the period 1835-1850.
Even if, like me, you don't have any family connections with Dorset it's an
opportunity to discover how tithe maps might help you in your research.
Meanwhile Ancestry are hard at work
digitizing the parish registers held by the Surrey History Centre in Woking;
this project will eventually expand to include other records, including land
tax records, and electoral registers.
Findmypast.co.uk to offer
worldwide subscription?
Although there has been no official
announcement, a LostCousins member was told recently by a Customer Services
representative that findmypast.co.uk would "probably" offer a
worldwide subscription this autumn.
This would be a very welcome enhancement
- whilst the Pioneer subscription at the US-based findmypast.com website was so
cheap that I bought one myself, I haven't found the US site nearly as easy to
use as the UK site.
Tip:
you can find the latest news on the findmypast.co.uk website by following this link.
Removing living
people from your family tree
We all know that we shouldn't publish a
family tree that includes living people unless we have the express permission
of each and every one of them, but it can be very tedious removing the relevant
data.
Fortunately there is a free program
called Res Privata
which will do it for you, and whilst the program is no longer available from
the author's website, you can still download it here.
Another challenge is to separate the
part of your tree that's relevant to a particular cousin from the rest (handing
over a complete tree to every putative cousin greatly increases the risk that
your data could fall into the wrong hands). I don't know of any free program
that will do this, but I am able to do it quickly and easily using Genopro,
the family tree program that I've been using since 2002. There's an article and
a brief example of the program in action in my April 2011 newsletter, which you
can read by clicking here (the
discount for LostCousins members mentioned in the article is still valid, by
the way).
It continually amazes me how many
researchers, even some who are quite experienced, rely on an online tree instead
of having a family tree program that runs on their own computer. Even if you're
prepared to accept the risks of storing your data online, no online tree
program is as fast, easy to use, or powerful as a program that runs on your own
computer.
Tip:
if you have an online tree you should be able to download it as a Gedcom file - all good family tree programs will import or
export Gedcom files.
Time to research your Scotch ancestry?
Findmypast.co.uk
and Grant's have got together to offer 85 free
credits worth £10 for anyone who buys a bottle of Grant's whisky with the
special promotional label.
Message in bottle
sets world record
A Scottish fisherman has set a new world
record by finding a message in a bottle 98 years after it was released - see
this BBC News article
for more details.
Although I've never put a message in a bottle,
I'm always hanging onto things that one day will give someone else an insight
into my life - the latest addition is my Paralympics ticket. What are you keeping to interest and intrigue the
family historians of the future?
Continuing the nautical theme, I don't
think I've previously mentioned Lloyd's Captains Registers, which give details
of merchant sea captains and the voyages they undertook. The registers are held
at the London Metropolitan Archives, but there's some useful information in the
online index that you'll find here.
Brick wall #3: Mary
Pike (continued)
The solution to this 'brick wall' is online
now - you'll find it here.
However, if you haven't yet tested your research skills on this problem, why not read the article
in my last newsletter and have a go? Remember that the only way to get better
at knocking down 'brick walls' is to do it!
Note:
I was interested to learn that Philip Sankey, who
baptised Mary Pike, is a relative of LostCousins member Sue. It just goes to
show that you can make all sorts of connections through LostCousins!
My article in
the last newsletter was about mothers whose names appeared in marriage registers
where the father's name should have been, but it prompted Jackie to tell me
about her great grandfather whose first name was Lily! Now, I've come across Lupin before, and there's a male character called Lavender in
the book I've just finished reading, but Lily? It wasn't even a temporary
aberration - he gave the same name to one of his sons, and two of his grandsons
were also called Lily.
Hampshire Genealogical Society's Open
Day on Sunday 30 September offers free admission, numerous stands, and the
chance to hear Mark Bayley (of The Genealogist)
talking about 'Breaking down brick walls', and Celia Heritage (professional
genealogist, lecturer, and LostCousins member) on the topic of 'How far did
your ancestors travel?'. For more details of the Open Day
click here.
Incidentally, I notice that Celia has a
new 5-week course starting on Thursday 27 September entitled 'Building your
family tree'. Whilst it's aimed primarily at beginners, I suspect a few
slightly more experienced researchers will be attracted by the offer of one
year's support. The course takes place at Tenterden,
Kent, and you can find more details of this and other courses here.
Dad's Army records may
stay closed
A pilot project carried out by the
National Archives has shed doubt on the feasibility of digitizing and indexing
the World War 2 records of the Home Guard, the civil defence organisation that
inspired the classic BBC comedy series Dad's
Army.
As many as half the records may relate
to personnel who were born less than 100 years ago, which would mean that
publication would contravene the Data Protection Act. In Durham, the area
chosen for the pilot, half the volunteers were under 27,
and 28% were under 19.
The simplest solution is to delay the
project for 10 years - but this would deprive family historians of the
opportunity to access the other 50% of the records. Let's hope that one of the
big genealogy companies is prepared to take a long-term view and digitize the
records now.
You may have come across headstones with
photographs of the deceased built-in, but according to a news
report in the Guardian newspaper,
the latest fad is to have QR codes that provide an instant obituary for anyone
with a smartphone.
Another whacky proposal was put forward
nearly 200 years ago - architect Thomas Willson
proposed building a mausoleum in the shape of a pyramid 94 storeys high on
London's Primrose Hill. Willson reckoned that, with
space for 5 million bodies, the mausoleum would solve London's shortage of burial
grounds for ever. Projected to cost just £2500 to build, Willson
reckoned the mausoleum would make a profit of £10 million when full - but the
plan was abandoned in 1829 when Highgate Cemetery was opened. You can read more
about Willson's plans here.
In my last newsletter I wrote about the scandalous
attempt by Santander to backtrack on a promise it had made to 230,000 small
businesses in the UK of "free banking - forever".
After two months of not listening to its
customers, the bank finally climbed down on Thursday, no doubt prompted by the
potential cost of handling 230,000 complaints to the Financial Ombudsman
Service, which at £500 each in administration fees could have cost them well
over £100 million, quite apart from the time, effort, and loss of goodwill.
The fact that thousands of very small
businesses were able to overcome one very large one reminds me not only of the
way that Gulliver was tied up in knots by the Lilliputians, but also of the
battle between family historians and the General Register Office.
There is one difference, however -
what's good for family historians could also be good for the GRO, if only they
would see things from a different perspective. They have chosen to tie
themselves up in red tape, as the response to my Freedom of Information request
makes clear.
On Monday I was
at the Paralympics watching Wheelchair Tennis, and was fortunate enough to bump
into Andy Lapthorne,
one of the top British players, on my way out of the Olympic Park.
Unfortunately Andy had to settle for a Silver medal this time, but I'm sure
he'll collect many Gold medals in the future - he's only 21. Coincidentally
Andy and I support the same football team, and he lives in the London suburb
where I lived in the early 80s - all the more reason then, for him to autograph
my ticket!
But whilst the tennis was very exciting,
I had other things on my mind - I was two-thirds of the way through In
the Blood, a crime mystery based in Cornwall and featuring genealogist
Jefferson Tayte.
Every time the players changed ends I'd
read another page on my smartphone (using the free Kindle app), but it wasn't
until the journey home that I finally reached the end. I can't remember the
last time I read a book that I found impossible to put down, and now the
challenge will be to delay reading the follow-up, To
the Grave, until the next time I take a long aeroplane flight. That is
a tough one!!!!
One of the benefits of reading Kindle
books on my smartphone is that they're in colour, rather than the black and
white of a standard Kindle. So it's quite a coincidence that as I was writing
this newsletter Amazon announced three new
Kindles, all of which have 7in colour touchscreens
and can be used as tablet computers. Even the most expensive UK model is under
£200, although in the US they have a model coming out with a larger screen (no
doubt that will be more expensive if
it ever arrives over here).
I'm not going to be rushing out to buy
one because my Kindle
Keyboard 3G is absolutely perfect for taking on holiday. The brighter the
sunshine the easier it is to read (so I'm more likely to be wearing sunglasses
than reading glasses), and it offers free worldwide Internet access,
something that no other device offers, certainly none of the other Kindles. It
has saved me a fortune in data roaming charges since I've had it, and it's also
a useful backup when I'm in the UK but can't get a signal on my phone. True,
the 'experimental browser' is a little clunky, and doesn't support multiple
windows, but it's perfectly adequate for checking my Gmail or the weather
forecast.
Anyway, back to In
the Blood - you can buy the paperback here,
but it's a LOT cheaper to go for the Kindle version - the current price is just
£1.60, and if you go to Amazon.co.uk by clicking one of the links in this
newsletter LostCousins will receive about 8p in commission (we'll also get
commission on anything else you buy during the same visit). By the way, you
don't need a Kindle, a tablet or a smartphone - you can read Kindle books on
any PC by downloading the free Kindle
for PC or Kindle
for Mac software.
Talking of Amazon, Gina in Canada wrote
to tell me how she saves a fortune on postage by buying Christmas presents for
her relatives in the UK at Amazon.co.uk - and for a small extra charge they'll
even wrap and label them (see here
for details of this service). I also discovered recently that when you order
from Amazon.co.uk you can get free Super Saver delivery to several European
countries provided that the value of the delivery if more than £25 (since the
eligible destinations include Spain and Portugal it could be a cheap way to
send Christmas or Birthday presents to expat relatives).
11/9/12 The Irish Ombudsman is actually an Ombudswoman (sorry, Emily).
I hope you've found this newsletter
interesting - if so, instead of writing to tell me, why not use those few
minutes to add some more entries to your My
Ancestors page? LostCousins exists to link researchers who share the same
ancestors - and I can't do it without your help!
Peter Calver
Founder, LostCousins
© Copyright 2012 Peter Calver
You
may link to this newsletter, and I have included bookmarks so you can - if you
wish - link to a specific article by copying the relevant entry in the list of
contents at the beginning of the newsletter. However, please email me first if
you would like to re-publish any part of the newsletter on your own website or
in any other format.