Tweet
This is puzzling me.
There are two sets of records, virtually identical, on the IGI, for Pole Lane Chapel, Darwen, Lancs (later known as Ebenezer Chapel).
They are RG4 1017 and
RG4 125.
1017 is the register which was kept at Pole Lane Chapel.
125 is a local census which was taken of everyone in the area, giving their birth and baptism dates (and much more besides) and I have often made very good use of this information. I use both records interchangeably.
But I have just noticed this, on 125
Betty Holden Kirkham, born 12 April 1785
PARENTS: UNAVAILABLE
and Jane Holden Kirkham born 4 March 1789
PARENTS: UNAVAILABLE
Why on earth would these two children not have any known parents?! There were hundreds of illegitimate children in the area and the Vicar obligingly puts the name of the father on the census, with things like "her child by James Fish, he deceased September 1803"
The record of this census is in good condition, so it cannot be that the names of the parents were unreadable - they have a given birth date and surnames, for a start!
Both registers are extracted records, but I am wondering if the Transcriber of 125 has suppressed the information for some unknown reason.
Any thoughts please?
OC
There are two sets of records, virtually identical, on the IGI, for Pole Lane Chapel, Darwen, Lancs (later known as Ebenezer Chapel).
They are RG4 1017 and
RG4 125.
1017 is the register which was kept at Pole Lane Chapel.
125 is a local census which was taken of everyone in the area, giving their birth and baptism dates (and much more besides) and I have often made very good use of this information. I use both records interchangeably.
But I have just noticed this, on 125
Betty Holden Kirkham, born 12 April 1785
PARENTS: UNAVAILABLE
and Jane Holden Kirkham born 4 March 1789
PARENTS: UNAVAILABLE
Why on earth would these two children not have any known parents?! There were hundreds of illegitimate children in the area and the Vicar obligingly puts the name of the father on the census, with things like "her child by James Fish, he deceased September 1803"
The record of this census is in good condition, so it cannot be that the names of the parents were unreadable - they have a given birth date and surnames, for a start!
Both registers are extracted records, but I am wondering if the Transcriber of 125 has suppressed the information for some unknown reason.
Any thoughts please?
OC
Comment