Handwriting decipher thread must post link to full page

spurious · 28-08-2018 12:06am

Twins are not a possibility are they?

Have you looked at 25 June 1795 too? The second entry for that date.

**edit
findmypast transcribes your entry above as Patk Isan.

pinkypinky · 28-08-2018 9:26am

21st October has 2 names as well - opposite gender - I agree twins are a possibility.

yaledo · 28-08-2018 9:55am

Thanks - very grateful for your input as always.

Twins might be a good explanation. It fits with there being a full extra field in the entry.

I'd dismissed it as I've found twins much later on that each had a separate entry [and a separate 2/6d !] - but this is probably a different priest.

I've also come across an entry where the father's name was given as "John Bane Junior" [July 1799] - where there was a need to distinguish between two different John Banes.

Do you think its possible that this 'John Bane Patrick' might be "John Bane, son of Patrick" - [like the format occasionally seen in Griffiths Valuation]

pinkypinky · 28-08-2018 10:10am

Yes, that's possible too. I've seen that format used in old rent rolls.

pinkypinky · 28-08-2018 11:41am

What's the place written under Eliza Bolger's name - fourth down on this page, please?

https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/deaths_returns/deaths_1910/05434/4519481.pdf

She died in the workhouse so I presume this was her address.

spurious · 28-08-2018 11:56am

Effernogue, I think.

yaledo · 28-08-2018 4:19pm

Do you think its possible that this 'John Bane Patrick' might be "John Bane, son of Patrick" - [like the format occasionally seen in Griffiths Valuation]

Managed to solve this - I found another entry from July 1805, where the ink is a little less smudgy - Mary, born to "John Bane Pat[k]", Cluniff. Looks like he's recorded as John Bane Patrick, to distinguish him from the other John Bane from Cluniff, who is recorded as "John Bane Jun[r]"

I'm doing research on two Moycullen families, and I'm completely spoiled by the extent and quality of the parish records there.

New Home · 28-08-2018 11:18pm

(L. G. Meara) NVM, it looks like the post got deleted.

pedroeibar1 · 29-08-2018 8:56am

pinkypinky wrote: »

What's the place written under Eliza Bolger's name - fourth down on this page, please?

https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/deaths_returns/deaths_1910/05434/4519481.pdf

She died in the workhouse so I presume this was her address.

Agree with Spurious - Effernogue, it's near Ferns.

pinkypinky · 29-08-2018 12:06pm

Any thoughts on the note on the first marriage here please?

The bride and groom have the same surname so I expect it to be some kind of consanguinity note, but there's nothing in the dispensations column.

pedroeibar1 · 29-08-2018 2:24pm

pinkypinky wrote: »

Any thoughts on the note on the first marriage here please?

The bride and groom have the same surname so I expect it to be some kind of consanguinity note, but there's nothing in the dispensations column.

I can't read it as posted/linked. Tried opening the page separately but the magnifier does not work.

mickmackey1 · 29-08-2018 2:52pm

Well here's the full view on pdf. Think it's Latin though, at which I'm useless -

yaledo · 29-08-2018 3:09pm

The entry two below has a similiar annotation - i can see the word Matrimonius for sure, but can only have a guess that the rest looks roughly like:

Stransus fuit autrea matrimonius langanitur

That last word could be something to do with blood [like sanganitur]

Hermy · 29-08-2018 5:04pm

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

I can't read it as posted/linked. Tried opening the page separately but the magnifier does not work.

If you click Microfilm 04602 / 05 arrowed in the image that'll take you back to the page with the magnifier function.

Wyldwood · 29-08-2018 7:56pm

Looks like Sponsus fuit antea in matrimonio consanguinitum - the groom was previously in a blood relationship? Doesn't make much sense, maybe somebody with fresher latin than mine will be along.

edit: I wonder does it mean the groom was previously married?

edit 2: looking at the civil registration John is a widower so my guess is that's the meaning of the note.

Vetch · 29-08-2018 8:37pm

Wyldwood wrote: »

Looks like Sponsus fuit antea in matrimonio consanguinitum - the groom was previously in a blood relationship? Doesn't make much sense, maybe somebody with fresher latin than mine will be along.

edit: I wonder does it mean the groom was previously married?

edit 2: looking at the civil registration John is a widower so my guess is that's the meaning of the note.

I think the last word is 'conjunctus' but agreed otherwise.

pedroeibar1 · 30-08-2018 12:12am

Agree with Vetch - sponsus fuit antes in matrimonio conjunctus - the groom was formerly joined in matrimony.

pinkypinky · 30-08-2018 9:19am

Thanks all. I hadn't seen that one before.

srmf5 · 01-09-2018 12:06am

Can anyone make out the cause of death for this baby? She was a twin and her twin had the same cause of death recorded but I can't make it out or else I'm not familiar with the term.

spurious · 01-09-2018 12:17am

I think it might be Inanition, exhaustion due to lack of food. Perhaps there were birth defects that made them unable to feed?

hblock21 · 07-09-2018 10:10am

https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/deaths_returns/deaths_1900/05768/4630061.pdf
No. 269 John Kiely. Can anyone make out what the cause of death was?
Thanks

BigCon · 07-09-2018 10:15am

hblock21 wrote: »

https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/deaths_returns/deaths_1900/05768/4630061.pdf
No. 269 John Kiely. Can anyone make out what the cause of death was?
Thanks

Strangulation by hanging himself whilst temporarily insane.

pedroeibar1 · 07-09-2018 12:09pm

The notifier was the Coronor for Co. Tipp who held an inquest on 24 October, so a look at local press after that date might give more info.

VirginiaB · 07-09-2018 2:46pm

So sad!

DamoRed · 08-09-2018 2:32pm

Find My Past is free this weekend, and I've found various nuggets relating to family members.

This enquiry is about a claim and counterclaim of assault in the Petty Sessions Court

https://search.findmypast.ie/record?id=IRE/PETTYS/4619370/00352&parentid=IRE/PETTYS/4619370/00352/1874997 1st & 2nd entries

What I have so far:

11 - June 9, 1871; Complainant: Mary Molyneux; Defendant: Rose Lee, Hazelhatch; Witnesses: Mary Molyneux & Mary Lyons?; Complaint: That defendant did at Hazelhatch on 4th June ___ & 5th do(ditto) use threatening language ___ ____ and did assault her & her children; Particulars: Case dismissed?

12 - June 9, 1871; Complainant: Rose Lee; Defendant: George Molyneux & Mary Molyneux; Witnesses: Rose Lee, Mary Lee?; Complaint: That defendant did assault complainant? at Hazelhatch on the 4th & 5th of June ___; Particulars: Case dismissed?

spurious · 08-09-2018 2:56pm

DamoRed wrote: »

What I have so far:

11 - June 9, 1871; Complainant: Mary Molyneux; Defendant: Rose Lee, Hazelhatch; Witnesses: Mary Molyneux & Mary Lyons?; Complaint: That defendant did at Hazelhatch on 4th June inst. & 5th do(ditto) use threatening language to Compl(ainan)t and did assault her & her children; Particulars: Case dismissed?

12 - June 9, 1871; Complainant: Rose Lee; Defendant: George Molyneux & Mary Molyneux; Witnesses: Rose Lee, Mary Lee?; Complaint: That defendant did assault complainant? at Hazelhatch on the 4th & 5th of June inst; Particulars: Case dismissed?

inst. means this month. I'm not sure if it can also mean this year.

DamoRed · 08-09-2018 3:00pm

Another one, from 1882

https://search.findmypast.ie/record?id=IRE/PETTYS/4619372/00568&parentid=IRE/PETTYS/4619372/00568/1893073

5 - Complainant: Timothy Colclough; Defendant: George Molyneux, Hazelhatch; Witnesses: T Colclough, J Dowling; Complaint: That defendant allowed a number of geese? (on) his property to trespass on complainant's meadow pasture land at Hazelhatch in said district twice on the 31st of July 1882: Particulars: Defendand to pay 8d fine & 2d costs. 6d ____ if warrant issued.

Christ Almighty! If allowing these errant geese to wander once onto the neighbour's meadow wasn't bad enough, he went and let them do it again! Lock him up & throw away the key! :mad:

On previous entries, the complainant is named as S.C. P or Peter Brady. In this instance, what does the SC stand for? Is it Sub Const. short for constable?

spurious · 08-09-2018 3:03pm

DamoRed wrote: »

5 - Complainant: Timothy Colclough; Defendant: George Molyneux, Hazelhatch; Witnesses: T Colclough, J Dowling; Complaint: That defendant allowed a number of geese? (on) his property to trespass on complainant's meadow + pasture land at Hazelhatch in said district twice on the 31st of July 1882: Particulars: Defendand to pay 8d fine & 2d costs. 6d add(itiona)l if warrant issued.

On previous entries, the complainant is named as S.C. P or Peter Brady. In this instance, what does the SC stand for? Is it Sub Const. short for constable?

Sub. Const. was a rank in the RIC.

DamoRed · 08-09-2018 3:14pm

Thanks for both, Spurious. My grandfather was a Civic Guard, it now appears that his father, Peter, for whom I'd no occupation information, was also a law keeper. Great to be able to add this to his records.

I meant to say, that in searching for records of one great-grandfather, I had the rare privilege of seeing both maternal and paternal on the same page, if for very different reasons.

This has been a very fruitful few hours of searching on Find My Past, a site where I've never had a subscription before. That's sure to change, if only for a month here or there, as needs arise.

BigCon · 13-09-2018 2:47pm

Any ideas for this one?

First entry on the page - https://registers.nli.ie/registers/vtls000634795#page/194/mode/1up

Handwriting decipher thread *must post link to full page*

Comments

Handwriting decipher thread must post link to full page