Find Ancestors

Joanne, we really do have a failure to communicate here.

I'm trying to find out what information you have about this James Burne 1904, and you're not telling me. YOU found him on the census in 1911. *I* can't find him!!

He has to be this one because this is the only one there is, born 1901-1910:

BURNE JAMES 1904 7 Rochdale Lancashire

But that one doesn't seem to be born Birkenhead -- *I* don't pay to see details, so all I can do is search for "born Birkenhead", and he isn't.

I'm asking *you* for the details. Can't you just copy the information here?

With his grandparents -- who are they? his brother -- who is he?

The one I identified ages ago and posted in the thread here, I assume:

BURNE JOHN 1908 3 Rochdale Lancashire

So the HANNAN family I referred to are his grandparents and family?

Mary 1862
Thomas F 1860

and children
John 1887
Thomas 1890
Laurice 1893
Robert 1895
Alice 1897

"James family is so hard to follow as the census show one minute with this family and the next with someone else"

But Joanne, we don't know that this *is* your James, let alone that the Walter you're talking about is his father ...


Here is a possible Ms Hannan + Mr Byrne marriage in the right place:

Marriages Dec 1903
BARROW John Rochdale 8e 79
? BYRNE John Rochdale 8e 79
? HANNAN Rose Anna Rochdale 8e 79
PEARSON Alice Rochdale 8e 79

It's the only possible.


And these are the births to match:

Births Mar 1904
Byrne James Rochdale 8e 27

Births Mar 1908
Byrne John Rochdale 8e 34


Here is the couple in 1911:

BYRNE ROSE 1884 27 Rochdale Lancashire
BYRNE JOHN 1874 37
BYRNE MARY 1911 3 MONTHS

Sons with grandparents because of new baby?


Here is Rose in 1901, mistranscribed:

Name: Rose A Hasman
Age: 17
Estimated birth year: abt 1884
Relation: Daughter
Father's Name: Thomas
Mother's Name: Mary
> Where born: Ireland

Civil parish: Rochdale

Thomas Hasman 40
Mary Hasman 38
Mary E Hasman 19
Rose A Hasman 17
John J Hasman 14
Thomas F Hasman 12
Lawrence P Hasman 9
Robert E Hasman 7
Alice Hasman 4
Emily Hutcheson 15


In 1901, there is a John Byrne in Rochdale who was born c1878 in Ireland, a boarder, possibly with father Richard (who is 53 but shown as unmarried.)

But there are other John Byrne-s in Lancashire closer to the right age, most of them born in Ireland as well.


I just don't see a Walter coming into it.

Here's what I'm thinking.

James Byrne was already married when he married May.

That's why he spelled his name Burne, and named a false father.


For example, there's this marriage:

Name: James Byrne
Spouse Surname: Mainon - it's actually Rose Manion
Date of Registration: Jul-Aug-Sep 1928
Registration district: Rochdale
Registration county (inferred): Lancashire
Volume Number: 8e
Page Number: 165


There are births in Rochdale 1929, 1931, 1933.


The naughty one may not have been May.


If you get the birth certificate for James Byrne 1904 Rochdale, we'll have the exact date of birth for searching. People kept their birthday more often than their name!


James's birth was registered Jan-Feb-Mar 1904. He could be this one:

Name: James Byrne
Birth Date: Feb 1904
Death Registration Month/Year: 1969
Registration district: Surrey Northern
Inferred County: Surrey
Volume: 5g
Page: 511

i will get that one in the few weeks and give you all the infor from it

What i will do is copy and paste every thing i have on james and his family .
JO
:))

Joanne, please please please don't send stuff by PM unless it's about living people.

This is what you sent me.

------------------------------------------------------------------

JAMES BURNE 1904 Birkenhead

Ancestry HintsSearching...James Burne
1904-1942

*
May McCornick

*
James J Mccornick
* + Add Child

* + Add Spouse

* Siblings

*
John Burne

* $ Ancestry HintsSearching...Walter Burne
1884-
* $ Ancestry HintsSearching...? Hannan
1884-

* $ Ancestry HintsSearching...John Burne
1832-
* $ Ancestry HintsSearching...E Harriman
1835-
* $ Ancestry HintsSearching...Thomas Hannan
1860-
* $ Ancestry HintsSearching...Mary ?
1862-

* + Add Father
* + Add Mother
* $ Ancestry HintsSearching...Joseph Harriman
1756-
* + Add Mother
* + Add Father
* + Add Mother

hope that makes some sense

------------------------------------------------------------------

Actually, it makes no sense at all, sorry.

I pondered it for a while and decided it must have something to do with a tree you have at Ancestry, and what happens if you add James Burne 1904 Birkenhead to it.

But really, it just makes no sense. And if you're going to go adopting Ancestry's "hints" into your tree, we may as well just throw up our hands. I spend my time looking at trees at Ancestry and requesting, firmly, that people take nonsense out of their trees about *my* ancestors that came from these stupid "hints". Like how my grx4 grandfather, a parish clerk who was born and married, and died, in Cornwall, had a son who was born and married, and died in Tennessee.

Ancestry did that to my ancestor because it figures the surnames Sibley and Shipley are really the same thing. In your case, it seems to have decided Hannan and Harriman are the same thing. (On the other hand, it doesn't find its own mistranscription of Hannan as Hasman, in 1901, of course.) It's nonsense.

I really don't understand what any of that is -- whether it's information you've put in a tree, or information Ancestry has offered you, or what.

Do read my post today at 20:20. It contains what I'm pretty sure are actual facts. No Walter comes into it, except as something false stated by James when he married, as far as I can tell.


What I'm suggesting is that it was perfectly legal for May to marry Hubbard even if James was still living -- because James married May illegally, since his first wife was still living. So James and May's marriage was invalid. It is just a *theory*, but it seems to fit the facts.

Janey,

Do you really think someone with dyslexia will follow what you are saying?

I think Joanne may be a bit overwhelmed by the information you are giving

her as I'm sure a lot of people would be, with or without dyslexia.

She has already said she is going to take a break.....so please let her do

that......

Kind regards,

Cathy

Cathy, if you have something to contribute, please feel free to do so. If you have someting to say to me that has nothing to do with Joanne's thread, where *I* am the one helping her, try the PM function.

What I'm saying to Joanne is that it is all here in print for her to go over.

I don't follow things especially well if someone says them to me out loud, and I can't go back and listen to them again. I know what that's like.

But when it's all in print, a person can read it over and follow it through, as many times as it takes. And ask questions if something isn't clear.

I have provided Joanne with a lot of info that is not in this thread because it's sensitive. We haven't had any problems. Everything has been very clear to both of us, even though it is not to a casual reader of this thread, because it is indeed sensitive and I've tried to keep those bits out of the thread.

Where we have got stuck is on this James Burne with father Walter thing.

I'm trying to get Joanne to look outside that box -- because Joanne, you seem to have got stuck in it.

I think that information is false. The only place it appears is on a marriage certificate, and the only reason it's there is that James stated it. There is no reason to believe it to be true, given what she and I do know about later events.

This James Burne in the 1911 census -- almost certainly a mistake for BYRNE -- is a possible person. I suggested him a long time ago, in fact.

BUT his father was NOT Walter. His father was John Byrne. At least, I think that is quite obvious, from the fact that he is staying with grandparents named Hannan, and Rose Hannan married John Byrne. But only the 1904 birth certificate will say.

Joanne is ordering that birth certificate, I think.

So if you have any more suggestions, Cathy, whoever you are, I know I'd love to hear them.

Janey,

All I am saying is that if someone is dyslexic they are going to find a 1000

word reply difficult to follow....If you can't understand that l I'm sorry.


And actually I did contribute to this thread but I was shot down in flames

as being thought of as upperty!

Kind regards,

Cathy (whoever i am) X

i have now ordered James Burne Birth Cert. so fingers crossed

My 14days free is up now with Ancestry so i will not be using them any more.
sorry :((

I 'lost' the thread for a while although I was on it at the beginning but came back to it last night, it IS difficult to follow if you've missed the 'bits in between', and I think Janey has done a remarkeable job keeping up with the twists and turns of it :)

one thing I can comment on though is NOT to take any helpful 'hints' from Ancestry when adding to your tree...they are almost always helpful hints consisting of someone else's mistakes and not to be relied on at all!

I know, the "bits in between" are the bits where the puzzle was actually sorted out, and Joanne and I know what they are.

The thing with James Byrne/Burne is that he's not Joanne's actual rellie, as he was her nan May's first husband -- but Joanne is very understandably curious about what happened to him! And figuring out who he was is kind of necessary, for that. (And we are still looking for any child/children of that marriage.)

I do think I've really been doing my best, and so far have answered quite a few important questions.

Joanne, you can take a break any time you like! and you don't need to keep saying "sorry". You're doing an excellent job, especially all that certificate-ordering -- you're better than me at that, at this point. ;) I'm still speculating about whether one of my recent ancestors was a bigamist, when what I need to do is order that certificate .................

Joanne , I wouldn't necessarily conclude that they weren't married because you haven't been able to find a record... it was wartime, and it is possible that records were lost during that time.

[edited out discussion of info now deleted above]

Sorry
one day i will get the hang of this
to many rules
i get lost in them, i do keep flicking reading what you can and can't put on but then i get in a muddle so
SORRY