WHITEHOUSE FAMILY HISTORY CENTRE
Newsletter, 1st July 2008
QUARTERLY UPDATE
This has been a quiet quarter for the WFHC, but three of the indexes have been considerably enhanced,
namely, those for the older wills of the Worcester Diocese, the “Sun” Fire Insurance policies, and Australian marriages.
There were 57 new correspondents registered in 2006 or 2007. They have the references 415 to 458, 107, 112, 118, 124, 127, 128, 138, 140, 159, 169, 177, 230 and 266. In the first quarter of 2008, I registered 6 newcomers, referenced 216 and 459 to 463. In this quarter, there were 8 new registrations, numbered 146, 149, 172 and 464 to 468. Once again, some correspondents were de-listed, since their data did not include a firm marriage or census reference of 1881 or earlier. The numbers were then re-allotted.
The files of 10 existing correspondents were put on computer under the RADAP (Re-indexing, Archiving, Digitisation And Paper-destruction) project. The total on computer stands at 225, still not yet half of all Whitehouse genealogies in my files.
EXPERIENCES OF THE QUARTER
Many thanks to Netta Hughes, a recent comer to the WFHC, who very kindly photocopied from microfilm the papers of eight grants of probate or administration at Worcester, from 1634 to 1729. Of course, I reimbursed the photocopying and postage costs. I have placed an order with the Lichfield Record Office for some wills etc. in the 1725 to 1730 year range. Lichfield have very sensibly decided to charge a set fee per will or administration, regardless of its length. Currently it is £4, which might seem high, but other record offices charge more.
The “Place in the Sun” project is a voluntary effort to index the policy registers of the Sun Fire Office, which are held at the Guildhall Library. It has been in progress for 5 years and now covers 1808 to 1839 which have been added to my own index. I was interested to see there two policies taken out by a Nicholas Whitehouse in London in 1814 and 1816. I reckon that he is the same man who was born in 1776 in Worfield, Shropshire, and in whom correspondent 468 and another enquirer have a passing interest. Others in that family were known to have come to London.
Approaches to me this quarter have been unusually varied. One newcomer found me from a very unusual circumstance. He had come upon a census containing the wonderful name of “Dulevingard Whitehouse”, who featured in his tree. When he searched the forename on Google, my website came up with the sole entry, the search engine having found it in the Newsletters “Backfile”. The name entered in the census return had been mistranscribed by Ancestry and should have been rendered as Anlevinyard, which was a phonetic attempt at Ann Livinia.
Another route to my services came from a tip-off by a fellow researcher in a library in the West Midlands.
Two requests for help came from people whose trees had gone wrong, unknown to them. I was able to set them on the right course. One of them didn’t have a marriage or census of 1881 or earlier and so didn’t qualify for registration and this reminds me to say that I will try to help with any enquiry. No one is ever left without a reply.
Progress in digitisation (“RADAP”) has been slowed by my activities in connection with the centenary of the estate on which I live. I produced a booklet, the research for which involved tracking down the dates of sale and prices paid for the houses, which were built in the period 1907 to 1914. In this I was aided by the Inland Revenue Valuation Survey of approx. 1910 and later years. In 1909 and 1910, an Act of Parliament brought in a tax on the betterment value of the land, the idea being to tax the difference in value of the land when a house was built and when the house was ready for occupation and serviced by electricity, gas, water, roads etc. However, it was applied to all land as it stood on 30th April 1909 and the “incremental value duty” was levied whenever the property was sold. This daft Act was eventually repealed in 1920, but before then a small army of valuation officers went round with notebooks and their calculations seemed to require ascertaining the total value of the property (not just the land). In most instances, the name of the owner or lessee of the property is recorded. Where, as in my case, the land was built on recently, the valuer would often substitute the price actually paid for his computation of the value. These notebooks, called “field books” have survived and are to be found at the National Archives, Kew under piece IR 58. Maps which direct you to the right field books are in IR 121, but it is advisable to obtain help to find the correct map, which is not straightforward. This little known class of record is in effect a directory of the UK for approximately 1910. I thought you might be interested, particularly if you can’t wait for the 1911 census to become public.
Best wishes,
Keith
WHITEHOUSE FAMILY HISTORY CENTRE
Newsletter, 27th March 2008
QUARTERLY UPDATE
This quarter has seen the completion of two large projects. The first is the revision of the remainder of the indexed transcript of Whitehouse households in the 1871 census, by going through the counties recently added by “British Origins”. The second is an upgrade of the GRO Marriages 1837-1911, which has involved obtaining more spouses and churches for the Dudley and Stourbridge Registration Districts. As a result of this, 61.7% of the marriages now have an assigned spouse.
Two more small, esoteric records have been added to the Miscellaneous section, Great Western Railway Company share transfers upon death or marriage and a very few Staffordshire recusants.
THE “RADAP” PROJECT
This project for Re-indexing, Archiving, Digitisation And Paper-destruction is increasingly taking priority over most other WFHC activities.
As regular readers will know, I am destroying paper files and replacing them with a single neat tree, stored digitally and as a printout, which is being indexed to(principally) :
Pre-GRO marriages (this is a “referencing” file on the website)
GRO marriages 1837 - 1911 on the website
Overseas marriages (this is a “referencing” file not yet on the website)
The 1841, 1851, 1861 and 1871 censuses on the website
The 1881 census (this is a “referencing” file not yet on the website)
The probate files on the website
The term “referencing file” means a file which contains only entries that relate to correspondents’ trees and is therefore not a complete record of all Whitehouses.
There were 57 new correspondents registered in 2006 or 2007. They have the references 415 to 458, 107, 112, 118, 124, 127, 128, 138, 140, 159, 169, 177, 230 and 266. In the first quarter of 2008, I registered 6 newcomers, referenced 216 and 459 to 463. In case anyone is wondering about the numbering, correspondents’ files are being reviewed and those found not to meet the present day registration requirements, of a Whitehouse marriage or census date of 1881 or earlier, are being removed and the numbers re-issued. All have trees stored on my computer, with a paper printout.
Under the RADAP project, priority is given to the new correspondents. Last quarter, I warned that there would be a slow-down in digitising existing correspondents’ files. I am therefore quite pleased to have completed 19 of these, bringing the total to 207, being 45 percent (up from 39 percent at the end of 2007).
EXPERIENCES OF THE QUARTER
Improved 1871 census transcript
British Origins has been adding more counties to its 1871 census coverage, completing the whole of the 1871 census for England & Wales, with an index hugely superior to Ancestry’s. This caused me to set aside all other Whitehouse work and check my indexed transcript for all these added counties, which are Cambridgeshire, Cheshire, Cumberland, Derbyshire, Durham, Hertfordshire, Huntingdonshire, Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, Northamptonshire, Nottinghamshire, Oxfordshire, Northumberland, all of Wales, except Glamorganshire, which had already been covered, Warwickshire and Westmoreland. Of course, Warwickshire, with 891 names coming up under “Whitehouse All variants”, was the biggest task and yielded 16 new households. It was pleasing that only one Whitehouse household in Warwickshire was missing from the British Origins index, one that had been indexed by them as Whitehorn and by Ancestry as Whitchose (picked up by a Whit* search, where * is a wild card representing one or more characters). The writing here was a little difficult, but Whitehouse seemed the best reading.
This is the point for half a public apology. Last quarter I grumbled at the poor quality of some of the images on “British Origins”. In fact, it is possible to zoom these images to a variety of magnifications, selected from a menu and these images are absolutely fine. It’s only half an apology, because the screen does not explain what to do and I found out only by right-clicking on the mouse to bring up a menu that included the zoom !
GRO Marriage index improved
I was “caught out” by one of my correspondents, who had assigned a church to a marriage in Dudley Registration District, causing me to go to the West Midlands BMD website, where I found that the volunteers had done a lot of further work since my last detailed scrutiny. This caused me to go through all the marriages in Dudley and Stourbridge Registration Districts listed in my GRO index (1837 - 1911) transcript, matching them up to those found in West Midlands BMD and then using Free BMD to verify the spouse names. It was very time-consuming, but worthwhile. Some problems resulted, not least the fact that more than 40 GRO Whitehouse marriages are missing from the West Midlands BMD index. Also, I would like to thank correspondent Andrea Hackney for making available to me a Short Heath (Willenhall) Holy Trinity transcript, enabling me to add details of about 20 additional marriages there. With other contributions and researches, the number of marriages with an assigned spouse has risen this quarter by 700 and now stands at 5495 (61.7%). Of course, eventually, when the GRO digitisation project has been completed (2009 ?), all marriages will be cross-referenced by spouses.
One anomalous marriage turned out to be of an Elizabeth Woodhouse in 1849 at Dudley St. Thomas, which the GRO had indexed as both Whitehouse and Woodhouse. Having verified Woodhouse from the church register, I removed it from the GRO index transcript.
Already, I am planning the next stage, which is to expand my marriage index to include nearly all the full details that are shown on a marriage certificate. A pilot exercise, for Dudley St. Thomas, is in progress.
Esoteric records
The MISC EXPLANATIONS file has been expanded slightly, now including the GWR Shareholders index, newly created by the Society of Genealogists. This isn’t quite the exciting or lengthy document that might appear from its name, because it relates only to transfers that occurred outside the stock market, i.e. chiefly upon, death, marriage or change of name. However, some of the more prominent Whitehouses have been identified in it and a WFHC reference assigned to them.
I had planned to trawl the annual reports of The Royal Surgical Aid Society, which were featured in
“Family Tree Magazine”, August 2007, under the heading “Unusual printed sources”. They list subscribers to the society, which provided surgical aids to the poor. It turned out that these volumes are so unusual that they are not listed in the three most obvious places to look, namely the catalogues of the British Library, the Society of Genealogists and the Wellcome Library. I sent a small rocket to the editor for not making these checks and not telling readers where they could be found. I did subsequently receive a couple of suggestions, but to my way of thinking the author of the article (John Titford) ought to have done his homework properly and not placed the burden on the reader. Somehow, I don’t think my letter to the editor of FTM will be published.
Thank you, Andrew and Jean
My public thanks to Andrew Clayton of Tipton, who has contributed Dudley material to my paper collection. He has been a kind and assiduous researcher, so I pulled his file out and digitised it. When I digitise files, I work on them to ensure that I index as many marriages, censuses and probates as I can find, often extending the tree sideways to cover the marriages of brothers and sisters and sometimes going further back than the correspondent. I hope I have “added value” to Andrew’s, although his was one of the better researched.
“I can't believe how much progress I've made since you emailed me, Dulcie and I'm so thankful to Keith... ... for putting us in touch with each other.” Jean Smith of Coventry is one of my earliest correspondents and has waited over 20 years to be linked up with her husband’s cousin, Dulcie. It’s a reminder that these connections can occur after 2 days (yes, really) or as long as 25 years (this has also happened). The Whitehouse Family History Centre started life in 1981 as the Whitehouse Information Centre. Jean was a contributor to the collection of records in early days, when there were few census indexes, so the thanks are mutual.
Contacting me
Please see Section 6 of REGISTRATION FAQs. At least some people manage to work out that the 10-letter surname is Whitehouse, the three initials are fhc and the supermarket is Waitrose.
Best wishes,
Keith
WHITEHOUSE FAMILY HISTORY CENTRE
Newsletter, 1st January 2008
QUARTERLY UPDATE
This has been a quiet quarter as regards improving the records, because I have been giving as much impetus as I can to the RADAP project (see below). However, I have completed the first stage of checking the 1841 census for the West Midlands, covering the whole of Registration Districts 977 to 985, 996 and 997.
British Origins has recently been adding more counties to its 1871 census coverage and so I have started the big task of checking my transcript, using the British Origins index.
For a bit of light relief, I have extracted the Whitehouses from the new “Civil Service Evidence of Age Index”, which is on the “Findmypast” website - there were just three !
THE “RADAP” PROJECT
This project for Re-indexing, Archiving, Digitisation And Paper-destruction is increasingly taking priority over most other WFHC activities.
As regular readers will know, I am destroying paper files and replacing them with a single neat tree, stored digitally and as a printout, which is being indexed to(principally) :
Pre-GRO marriages (this is a “referencing” file on the website)
GRO marriages 1837 - 1911 on the website
Overseas marriages (this is a “referencing” file not yet on the website)
The 1841, 1851, 1861 and 1871 censuses on the website
The 1881 census (this is a “referencing” file not yet on the website)
The probate files on the website
The term “referencing file” means a file which contains only entries that relate to correspondents’ trees and is therefore not a complete record of all Whitehouses.
There were 57 new correspondents registered in 2006 or 2007. They have the references 415 to 458, 107, 112, 118, 124, 127, 128, 138, 140, 159, 169, 177, 230 and 266. In case anyone is wondering about the numbering, correspondents’ files are being reviewed and those found not to meet the present day registration requirements, of a Whitehouse marriage or census date of 1881 or earlier, are being removed and the numbers re-issued. All have trees stored on my computer, with a paper printout.
Under the RADAP project, priority is given to the new correspondents. The general aim to deal with all these and to meet a target of computerising the trees of “old”, pre-2006 correspondents at the rate of 25 per quarter. It is hard going, mainly because nearly all the trees have to be re-drawn and many need “armchair searching”, as I call it. Altogether, I have completed the trees of 182 correspondents, which is 39 percent of the total of 457.
There will be a slow-down during the next half of the year, because I need to complete the writing up of my Butler and McCreath family histories, as well that of as my own Whitehouse line. However, I shall give prompt attention to all new correspondents, as usual.
Experiences of the quarter
Genealogically stated, this has been a very disrupted quarter. After 24 years, I have re-decorated my study. This was no small job, as it meant taking down wall furniture, making good some damaged plaster, bricking up a fireplace, re-plastering a wall, making a new giant notice board (if anyone would like to know how to make one - mine is 5 ft 7 in long x 4 ft high x 27 mm thick - get in touch), mending a bookcase, re-hanging the wall furniture in different positions etc. These works produced a knock-on disturbance in other rooms and have generated a major re-organisation of where things are kept. Meanwhile, I have operating a taxi service, as our teenage granddaughter is lodging with us while she completes her GCSE exams. Her parents had to move to Wales rather suddenly when my son changed his job.
All this - and other things - have curtailed my Whitehouse activities.
Last quarter I wrote about finding a gap in my records for the 1851 census in which the village of Shelford, near Walsall, had been omitted. It was not too surprising to find shortly afterwards that there was a corresponding gap in my 1841 census transcript. It seems that I had assumed that the local index that I used covered the whole of the area surrounding Walsall, when it did not. On looking it up in “Ancestry”, I discovered that all 4 households had been misindexed by “Ancestry” - as Whitchana, Whitchonse, Whitchouse and Whitchover. You have been warned. For many further examples of misindexing, see the CEN EXPLANATIONS file elsewhere on this site.
Another interesting discovery was that “Ancestry” have not filmed or indexed part of the 1841 census of Willenhall, in the area of Waterglade (HO 107/985/5, ED3). I think that they came upon a blank page and assumed that this was the end of the book, when it wasn’t.
It is most pleasing to see that “British Origins” has made some further progress with indexing the 1871 census, alas spoilt by the poor quality of its images. Many are simply unreadable. I am having to use the “British Origins” index to check my own database for completeness and then go to the excellent images in “Ancestry” to read the entry [see 27th March 2008 Newsletter for partial retraction]. As mentioned above, this is in progress, with Berkshire and Kent of these additional counties checked for completeness. Kent was all right, with just one additional Whitehouse in the muster for HMS Pembroke, moored in Sheerness harbour. Berkshire gave rise to 5 extra households, 3 definite Whitehouses and 2 which might be. Of the latter, one was born in Uffington, something of a stronghold of Whitehorns, but the writing is so poor that one cannot say definitely which it is. “Ancestry” indexed it as “Whilelanse” - no comment !
The keen-eyed will have noticed that my version of the marriage index for England & Wales (Whitehouse and variants) has acquired a net 4 additional lines of entry - 5 additions and a deletion. Three of the extra lines arose because some Whitehouses in the tree of correspondent 453 changed their name to Willetts and married under the latter name. My practice is to count this as a variant and include it. By the way, this family came from Cradley, but there is an entirely separate Whitehouse family connected with Willetts, in Northfield. The other two additional lines are for Whitest. This relates to a family from Cudham and Chelsfield in Kent, in which the parish register contains a bewildering variety of phonetic names, mainly Whitest or Whitehouse, but bizzarely including a Waterhouse, a Whites and a Whitehurst in the 1790s. The confusion continued right through the first half of the 19th century and even beyond.
On the other hand, a marriage indexed by the GRO as Whitehouse turned out to be a Whitehorn and was accordingly removed.
Meanwhile, marriages continue to be “mined” for the index, which now contains a huge number of spouses. I should here just reinforce the point that my index differs from that offered by Freebmd. Freebmd just gives the total entries that have the same district, volume and page number in the General Register Office Index. For a spouse to be entered in my index, there must be (a) evidence that the marriage has taken place between the Whitehouse and listed spouse plus (b) the same district, volume and page number as in the official index. The promised new official index, which will give names of spouses for 1837 to 1911, has been delayed and is now scheduled for mid-2009. I’ll believe that when I see it.
Registration requirements
I have altered the REGISTRATION FAQs document, because I think that the list of requirements looks too off-putting. I have scrapped the need for a chart. Most correspondents fall into two categories - those that are rubbish at drawing charts and those that are highly adept at using genealogy programs, which occupy a lot of digital space and print out on reams of paper ! Generally stated, nearly all the information that I receive is under-researched for my purposes and needs further work. So, it’s better for me just to draw or re-draw the tree in my preferred format, “Tall Tree”, using a spreadsheet.
I’ve been wondering about whether to put on the website some instructions for drawing a “Tall Tree” in MS Excel, so let’s see whether anyone reads this and asks for them.
Contacting me
Please see Section 6 of REGISTRATION FAQs. At least some people manage to work out that the 10-letter surname is Whitehouse, the three initials are fhc and the supermarket is Waitrose.
Best wishes,
Keith
WHITEHOUSE FAMILY HISTORY CENTRE
Newsletter, 24 September 2007
QUARTERLY UPDATE
In the third quarter of 2007 I have done a lot of further work on records:
- the probate index has been extended from its present end in 1947 up to 1950, involving 185 additional grants.
- Irish and Jersey marriages have been covered for the first time
- Some Australian marriages are included for the first time
- the seven Whitehouses from Boyd’s London Burials Index (burial dates 1612 to 1817) are listed
- a major new index has been completed, of admissions to the county lunatic asylums in England & Wales, 1846 to 1890 with a few gaps
- the project to check the 1841 census of the West Midlands against the “British Origins” index has covered West Bromwich, Darlaston, Handsworth & Smethwick, Tamworth and Tipton (pieces HO 107/977 to 982)
THE “RADAP” PROJECT
This project for Re-indexing, Archiving, Digitisation And Paper-destruction is increasingly taking priority over most other WFHC activities.
As regular readers will know, I am destroying paper files and replacing them with a single neat tree, stored digitally and as a printout, which is being indexed to:
1. Pre-GRO marriages (this is a “referencing” file put on the website for the first time this quarter)
2. GRO marriages 1837 - 1911 on the website
3 to 6. The 1841, 1851, 1861 and 1871 censuses on the website
7. The 1881 census (this is a “referencing” file not yet on the website)
8. The probate files on the website
Additionally, I have just begun constructing a “referencing file” of overseas marriages and would welcome contributions from correspondents.
The term “referencing file” means a file which contains only entries that relate to correspondents’ trees and is therefore not a complete record of all Whitehouses.
Currently, I have the trees of only 143 of my 453 correspondents (32%) in this form. They include those of the 51 “new” correspondents, who registered in 2006 or 2007. They have the references 415 to 453, 107, 112, 118, 124, 127, 138, 140, 159, 169, 177, 230 and 266. In case anyone is wondering about the numbering, correspondents’ files are being reviewed and those found not to meet the present day registration requirements, of a Whitehouse marriage or census date of 1881 or earlier, are being removed and the numbers re-issued.
BMD EXPLANATIONS
This file replaces GRO Explanations, since its contents have broadened beyond the GRO England & Wales and now includes material not connected with any register office.
Genes Disunited ?
“I had a hot match on Genes Reunited with someone who had an Elizabeth Whitehouse born in 1835 but the parents were not right. I told them about you.” This was from correspondent 031, who was very grateful for a small piece of detective work that I did in order to tidy up her tree: “This means that I now have my 16 grt grt grandparents. I had given up hope of ever finding Hannah's 1828 mother's maiden name.”
Of course, I don’t sneer at Genes Reunited, because several people have found distant cousins that way. It’s a valuable resource. However, many trees require additional input in order to make connections with such relatives.
What the WFHC is all about
This quarter there have been two other excellent examples of how WFHC correspondents benefit from registering their trees with me.
Correspondent 288 referred to two sisters, Gertrude and Mabel Whitehouse. These matched with names in a “birthday book” inherited by correspondent 163 and so I was able to connect up the trees, with the result that correspondent 288 obtained a tree going back to a 1781 marriage.
It turned out that new correspondent 124 takes piano lessons from a lady that I know who lives just down the road. So she was able to drop in a copy of her handed-down manuscript tree. It contained a vital clue, in the form of mention of an Aaron Whitehouse as a brother of 124’s ancestor, William. Aaron had no dates and couldn’t be found in the IGI. However, Aaron is a very rare forename and when Aaron and Sarah Whitehouse turned up as witnesses to the marriage of a William Whitehouse, 124’s ancestor, I knew that he could not have died young. Sure enough, a marriage of an Aaron Whitehouse to a Sarah was found and their children fitted perfectly with the tree of correspondent 085. In the end a 6-page tree linking these two and a third correspondent (342) was constructed. The handed-down tree went back to a 1788 marriage, so 085 and 342 were delighted.
The WFHC benefits too
I was simultaneously pleased and annoyed when correspondent 452 had roots in Shelfield, near Walsall.
This correspondent included an 1851 census reference not in my file. On investigation, it turned out that there are 4 Whitehouse households in this village, all omitted from my indexed transcript. I still do not know how this error occurred, as I thought I had used both a local printed index and the BMSGH (Birmingham & Midland Society for Genealogy & Heraldry) published index for Staffordshire. It would have come to light sooner or later, since I have an ongoing project to check the whole of the 1851 census for Staffordshire in Ancestry. Unfortunately, with the RADAP project having priority, progress has been very limited. As a stopgap measure, I have checked the whole of piece HO107/2023, which covers Walsall and some outlying villages, in Ancestry, for omissions. There were no others, I am glad to say, but this check threw up some interesting misreadings of forenames by Ancestry. “Buche” is Phoebe, “Dulevingard” is Anlevinyard (registered as Ann Lavinia), “Ish” is Job, “Jerm” is James (not Jeremiah, abbreviated), “Mary”, aged 4, listed in the male (!) section of the Walsall Union Workhouse, is Henry and another “Mary”, aged 14, is poorly written but probably Fanny. You have been warned. If you couldn’t find it in Ancestry, try here.
The Pre-GRO marriages referencing file
This index of marriages in correspondents’ trees that took place in England & Wales before civil registration began on 1st July 1837 has been under construction for some while. As I keep explaining, to avoid misunderstanding, this is a “referencing file”. That is to say, it contains ONLY marriages on correspondents’ trees, referenced with their WFHC number. I have been adding to it slowly, as I have been re-indexing trees to the website. I have proceeded systematically, taking each tree in turn, because as records have improved, I have often been able to add more marriages than I have on my old card index or are evident from the existing tree. So far, the index has just over 200 marriages. I have been reluctant to put this “embryonic file” on the website, because I doubt that the general public of Whitehouse researchers will understand that it is highly incomplete, with only 32% of correspondents having been indexed or re-indexed under the RADAP project. However, I have taken that chance and uploaded it.
Contacting me
Please see Section 6 of REGISTRATION FAQs. At least some people manage to work out that the 10-letter surname is Whitehouse, the three initials are fhc and the supermarket is Waitrose. Regrettably, despite my efforts, the WFHC e-mail address is now being spammed and also attacked by virus-laden e-mails (intercepted by my isp before they even reach my own anti-virus protection). The latter probably means that there is a Whitehouse correspondent out there with my address in an infected computer. I urge all my correspondents to ensure that they have up-to-date virus protection.
Best wishes,
Keith
WHITEHOUSE FAMILY HISTORY CENTRE
Newsletter, 29th June 2007
QUARTERLY UPDATE
The second quarter of 2007 has seen some further progress in improving the records:
- the quality control project for the 1861 census, previously completed for the whole of Staffordshire, has been completed for Worcestershire and rural Warwickshire
- the project to check the 1871 census of Staffordshire and Worcestershire sections, against the “British Origins” index has been completed
- a project to check the whole of the 1841 census of the West Midlands against the “British Origins” index is under way
- more details have been added to the GRO marriage index
THE “RADAP” PROJECT
The records improvement programme will be slowing for a while, because I have to get on with the indexing and archiving of correspondents’ trees. As regular readers will know, I am destroying paper files and replacing them with a single neat tree, stored digitally and as a printout, which is being indexed to:
1. Pre-GRO marriages (this is a “referencing” file not yet on the website)
2. GRO marriages 1837 - 1911 on the website
3 to 6. The 1841, 1851, 1861 and 1871 censuses on the website
7. The 1881 census (this is a “referencing” file not yet on the website)
8. The probate files on the website
Additionally, I have just begun constructing a “referencing” file of overseas marriages and would welcome contributions from correspondents.
The term “referencing file” means a file which contains only entries that relate to correspondents’ trees and is therefore not a complete record of all Whitehouses.
Currently, I have the trees of only 120 of my 450 or so correspondents in this form. They include those of the 44 “new” correspondents, who registered in 2006 or 2007. They have the references 415 to 450, 112, 118, 140, 159, 169, 177, 230 and 266. In case anyone is wondering about the numbering, a few correspondents’ files were reviewed and found not to come anywhere near meeting the present day registration requirements, of a Whitehouse marriage or census date of 1881 or earlier. A couple turned out not to be Whitehouse, but Whitehurst and Woodhouse. These earlier numbers (112, 118 etc.) were therefore vacated and used up for some of the 2006 & 2007 intake.
BIG UPHEAVAL AS CENSUS FILES ARE MERGED
Today, I took a hard decision - to merge my census files for the West Midlands, with those of London and all the rest of England & Wales, Channel Islands and the Isle of Man. They have become one giant file designated E&W. Now that so many people have broadband, these big files are more realistic. It will make searching simpler and will save me time when I update the files and load the new version onto the website. To achieve this, I have added county codes (STS, WAR, WOR) to (I hope) all the addresses in the West Midlands, as well as to 1851 London. If you find an address without a county code or with the wrong one, please let me know.
BACK NUMBERS OF NEWSLETTERS
Another change is that I have merged all the old newsletters into a single file, slightly edited.
They are arranged with the most recent first and go back to December 2005.
Surprise, surprise
I’m quite used to surprising other people with a missive beginning: “Further to my letter of 16th November 1982, I am enclosing an improved tree...” The WFHC (previously the Whitehouse Information Centre) began in April 1981. Recently, it has been my turn to be surprised, by a correspondent who found a circular letter that I sent in 1980 to some Whitehouses in New York. His grandfather had responded to my circular and in doing so had preserved vital genealogical information. So, I linked him up with an English cousin and now a huge team of people is working on their family tree.
This is a convenient point to say that if ever anyone has been in touch with me in the past and they have a “serious” tree - or even a single event - in the Whitehouse name and it includes a marriage or census entry of 1881 or earlier, they are registered with me and are liable to be contacted. To save me trouble, it always helps if such people would contact me - even if just to say “Hello, I’m still alive” or “I’m now on e-mail”. It doesn’t matter if they are not sure whether they are registered: I can track them down in my register spreadsheet and provide them with their reference number.
Correspondent 441 and the missing Samuel
Samuel Whitehouse, a butcher, was missing from my 1841 and 1851 census databases. Assiduous researcher Jayne Sandles (441) found him on the 1841 census in Tettenhall, near Wolverhampton. This caused me mega-embarrassment, because he was not on my indexed transcript. To my horror, I found that my trawl of Sedgley (piece 998) had not covered the last three books, 16 to 18, which relate to the Tettenhall area. The mistake went unnoticed because this area is split between two pieces, 998 and 1002, the latter having been covered. As a result, I have searched the whole of piece 998, using the Ancestry index and the name Whit*, where * is a wild card denoting one or more subsequent characters. There was one further omission within the three unsearched books, but mercifully the remainder of 998 was complete. It’s a reminder that I am not infallible and it has hastened the launch of a project to check the 1841 census of the West Midlands using the “British Origins” database.
When it came to the 1851 census, Jayne showed that she is a fine researcher. She was convinced by directories that Samuel Whitehouse, the butcher, must have been living in Bilston Street, Wolverhampton, yet he was not in my indexed transcript, nor could she find him by using “Ancestry”, not even by searching under Whit*. A careful search street by street revealed an entry that was unmistakeably what she sought, but the head of household had been entered very clearly as James Whishine. I can guess what happened. Samuel, like many tradesmen, could probably write. He filled in the census form, writing his name as Saml Whitehouse, but the enumerator misread it and copied into his schedule as James Whishine.
The proximity thing and the balance of probabilities
Two trees of brickmakers were connected in this quarter, when the 1861 census showed Whitehouses from each tree adjacent in the 1861 census. It was just too much of a coincidence and a good tree could then be constructed, showing that they were very probably second cousins. Its probable correctness was reinforced by a strong naming pattern, involving Aaron, Moses and Stephen, all relatively rare names.
It reminds me to say that the standard that I apply in indexing and in drawing up trees is that the entries and the trees are correct on the balance of probabilities. This is a lower standard than “beyond reasonable doubt”. My reasoning is that if I include someone in an index who shouldn’t be there, my worst sin is to have misled someone and if I am wrong, other events will show this. On the other hand, if I have failed to index someone, I might have deprived researchers of a valuable clue. Whenever I feel some degree of uncertainty, I apply a question mark (query symbol).
“I can’t find my tree on your website”
Yes, I know. No trees are on the website. The long term aim is to put them on, partly for archiving purposes, but this will require 1 to 1.5 GB of web space, which, in turn, means using a paid-for web host. It would entail some disruption and I am reluctant to divert myself from more pressing matters, not least the RADAP project. Meanwhile, I will send any registered correspondent their own current tree or anyone else’s, so long as they have a good reason. For example, correspondent 095 does not believe that the tree that I have drawn is correct, because she thinks that “her” Job Whitehouse is the one which I have assigned to the tree of correspondent 212. So, I have sent her tree 212 and she can check it out for herself.
For the sake of good order, I re-affirm that no correspondent’s identity and address are revealed to another correspondent, unless they have a genealogical connection (or, in cases of doubt, unless both of them first agree).
“I can’t read the tree that you sent me”
All but a few of my collection of trees have been drawn or re-drawn by me in Microsoft “Excel” 2003. I like this widely available program, because it is so easy to alter and re-arrange information, join two trees together etc. MS Excel is part of MS Office and is widely used as a spreadsheet for keeping accounts and creating financial charts. Less widely known is that one can draw in it, using the cells for guidance to keep the tree straight.
Those who don’t have Excel can still read the tree, either by downloading an Excel 2003 reader from the Microsoft website or by installing the free “Open Office” suite. The latter is the better option, because one can then also re-sort the downloaded indexes on my website.
The Pre-GRO marriages index
This index of marriages in correspondents’ trees that took place in England & Wales before civil registration began on 1st July 1837 has been under construction for some while. As I keep explaining, to avoid misunderstanding, this is a “referencing file”. That is to say, it contains ONLY marriages on correspondents’ trees, referenced with their WFHC number. I have been adding to it slowly, as I have been re-indexing trees to the website. I have proceeded systematically, taking each tree in turn, because as records have improved, I have often been able to add more marriages than I have on my old card index or are evident from the existing tree. So far, the index has 177 marriages. I am reluctant to put this “embryonic file” on the website, because I doubt that the general public of Whitehouse researchers will understand that it is highly incomplete, with only 26% of correspondents having been indexed. However, I do aim to take that chance and upload it at the end of this year.
Contacting me
Please see Section 6 of REGISTRATION FAQs. At least some people manage to work out that the 10-letter surname is Whitehouse, the three initials are fhc and the supermarket is Waitrose.
Best wishes,
Keith
WHITEHOUSE FAMILY HISTORY CENTRE
Newsletter, 1st April 2007
QUARTERLY UPDATE, 1ST APRIL 2007
The first quarter of 2007 has been another of good progress:
- the name has been re-registered with the Guild of One-name Studies and applications for registration
of trees at the WFHC have been dealt with promptly
- the quality control project for "1861 CEN WMIDS" has been completed for the whole of Staffordshire and some parts of Worcestershire, pieces RG9/2019 to 2069
- the project to check “1871 CEN MIDS”, Staffs and Worcs sections, against the “British Origins” index has made excellent progress, with Staffordshire nearly finished
- a draft of the 1871 census of Scotland has been added
- improvements in the GRO marriage index by the addition of some more spouse names and WFHC references
- the non-GRO Marriage Index has been greatly improved, chiefly by the finding of spouses with matching page references and transferring them to the GRO marriage Index
- the Probate Grants index for the principal probate registry (England & Wales) has been extended by 4 more years, so that it now covers 1858 to 1947 (dates of grant).
Lost correspondents
I would like to draw everyone’s attention to a small change in the Registration FAQs document. I am having trouble contacting some of my pre-2006 correspondents and now reserve the right to publish their last known addresses and genealogical details. People change their internet service providers and then I lose contact by e-mail. My next step is to try to find them by using the “Google” search engine. That sometimes works. Step 3 is to look them up in an on-line telephone directory. If that fails, I write a letter to their last known address. When my letter is returned or I get no response, I declare contact to be lost and mark the register “LC”.
I work to long timescales here. The case of tree 009 029 417 418 is salutary. My last correspondence with 009 was in 1983, when I could not help much, because of the inadequacy of my records then.
In 2006, I registered 417 and within a couple of days had connected her to another new correspondent, 418. Recently, improved indexing enabled me to see that 009 also belonged. Fortunately, a “Google” search enabled me to contact him after 25 years.
Please do not let yourself become an LC ! Put my e-mail address into your address book, so that when you change your e-address, you will be prompted to update me.
Following are lost correspondents:
064 Mrs. Eileen Barratt, c/o Ministry of External Relations, Private Bag, Wellington 6020 NZ
077 Mrs. Susan Dodds (wife of Trevor Newton Dodds): 24 Emerson Av., Middlesborough, Cleveland TS5 7QH
078 Mr. Gareth Harris, 32 Carshalton Way, Lower Earley, Reading RG6 4EP
118 Miss Clare Dunn, "Caerleon", 7 Saxon Ct, Leegomery, Telford, Shopshire
295 Mrs. Julie Whitehouse (wife of Christopher D. Whitehouse): 95 Bretforton Rd, Badsey, Evesham, Worcs WR11 5UQ
301 Mrs. Val Newman, 40 Clarke Avenue, Wattle Glen, Victoria 3096, Australia
They are long-lost except for 295 and 301, lost only about 5 years ago.
The big task ahead
My next big task is to make better progress with the indexing and archiving of correspondents’ trees. As regular readers will know, I am destroying paper files and replacing them with a single neat tree, stored digitally and as a printout, which is being indexed to:
1. Pre-GRO marriages (this is a “referencing” file not yet on the website)
2. GRO marriages 1837 - 1911 on the website
3 to 6. The 1841, 1851, 1861 and 1871 censuses on the website
7. The 1881 census (this is a “referencing” file not yet on the website).
Currently, I have the trees of only 90 of my 444 correspondents in this form. The 90 includes those of the 37 “new” correspondents, who registered in 2006 or 2007. They have the references 415 to 445, 112, 118, 159, 169, 230 and 266. In case anyone is wondering about the numbering, a few correspondents’ files were reviewed and found not to come anywhere near meeting the present day registration requirements, of a Whitehouse marriage or census date of 1881 or earlier. These numbers (112, 118 etc.) were therefore vacated and used up for some of the 2006 & 2007 intake.
I have not forgotten US censuses. The vast number of Whitehouses in Maine and New Hampshire is a deterrent to complete indexing, but I hope this year to make a start on a referencing file.
The term “referencing file” means a file which contains only entries that relate to correspondents’ trees and is therefore not a complete record of all Whitehouses.
Best wishes,
Keith
WHITEHOUSE FAMILY HISTORY CENTRE
EXTRA NEWS, 4TH FEBRUARY 2007
The 1911 census will be released to the public, online and indexed, during 2009, i.e. 2 to 3 years earlier than expected. The National Archives has been encouraged to do this by a ruling of the Information Commissioner in favour of a complainant. Their project to improve and digitise the official birth, death and marriage indexes has met with technical problems. The new indexes are expected to start to become available on line in early 2008 and to be completed in 2009. This means that when the Family Records Centre moves to Kew in March 2008, some of the indexes will be held at Kew in paper form and some will be on line. You might think this a shambles, but I couldn’t possibly comment !
One good thing from our viewpoint is that ages at death for the years 1837 to 1865 will be given in the new, improved index. At present my version of the GRO Deaths index sorts into two sets within each forename, one set (1866 – 1911) with an age at death and calculated date of birth and the other (1837 – 1865) without. Care is needed to realise this and search both sets if necessary.
A project to improve the quality of my 1871 West Midlands census index for Whitehouses in Staffordshire is about half-completed, so I have taken the opportunity to launch an updated version. Besides the many corrections and re-interpretations, there are several additional households, found by searching in the British Origins index.
FURTHER NEWS, 9TH FEBRUARY 2007
I am re-registering the Whitehouse one-name study with the Guild of One-Name Studies, which means that I shall be answering all enquiries and will register new correspondents at any time.
QUARTERLY UPDATE, 1ST JANUARY 2007
The last quarter of 2006 has been one of huge progress:
- completion of the "1871 CEN OTHER" census database, the part that covers all other areas of England & Wales, Isle of Man and the Channel Islands, except London and the West Midlands
- improvements in the "1841 CEN OTHER" census database, the part that covers all other areas of England & Wales Isle of Man and the Channel Islands, except London and the West Midlands
- the quality control project for "1861 CEN WMIDS" extended to cover the whole of the Kings Norton registration district (2119 to 2127).
- addition of the years 1884 to 1911 to the GRO (England & Wales) births index
- addition of the years 1902 to 1911 to the GRO (England & Wales) deaths index
- addition of the years 1902 to 1911 to the GRO (Scotland) births and deaths entries
- improvements in the GRO marriage index by the addition of some more spouse names
- the Probate Grants index for 1858 to 1935 extended by 8 years to 1943
- addition to the census databases of the WFHC reference numbers of the remainder of those who registered in March 2006, plus some existing correspondents
Basic set of records established
It has been a great deal of work, but, at last, after just over 5 years, I have established a basic set of records for the Whitehouse surname. Births, deaths and marriage indexes for England & Wales run from 1837 to 1911 and for Scotland from 1855 to 1911. The England & Wales indexes run to nearly 39,000 names. The census records now extend across the whole of England & Wales, Isle of Man and the Channel Islands for 1841 to 1871 (totalling over 34,000 lines of entry) and a draft for Scotland is progressing alongside the Ancestry indexing project. Extending the modern end of the probate index has been hard going, with just extra 8 years (1936-1943) causing it to increase in size by a quarter.
"Surely they will reference my son." (Matthew Chapter 21, misquoted)
There is much still to do. Two "referencing files" are in progress, one containing marriages before civil registration began (pre- 1st July 1837 in England & Wales) and the other containing 1881 census extracts. These files are different from the databases mentioned above, because they contain ONLY entries that are relevant to correspondents' trees, with (of course) the WFHC reference number. In 2007, the main focus of my work will be to reference the trees of existing correspondents, in the GRO marriages and the 1841 to 1871 census databases and in the two referencing files. Of course, newcomers' trees will also be referenced, as they come in. The referencing files will be made available on the website when they have reached a meaningful size.
GRO Births Index
One never knows where trouble with these databases will strike next. On looking for an Ernest Whitehouse in the WFHC GRO births index database, I found that two entries were not sorting correctly in year order. Fortunately, I knew where the problem must be - a space being accidentally introduced at the end of a name. Excel regards spaces as characters and thus considers Ernest followed by a space to be a different name from Ernest without one. So, I have gone through the births, putting right an alarming number of similar errors, along with a few instances of a second forename being wrongly entered in the same column as the first.
Oddly, the marriages and deaths were free of such errors.
If anyone out there does find mis-sorting, or, indeed, any other kind of error, please tell me. Not reporting it is not considered kindness !
GRO Marriages Index
This index is amended frequently, as more spouse information, dates, churches and correspondent references are added. The present update is unusual, since an extra marriage has been added. It relates to an entry in the official GRO Index showing a Mary Ann Whitehorse marrying in the second quarter of 1838 in Dudley registration district. It took errors by Ancestry to make me realise that Whitehouse can be indexed as Whitehorse and this is what happened here. I located the marriage at Tipton St. Martin. All the "original order" numbers from 71 onwards have been moved on by one.
Probate and GRO Death index improvements
Shortly after the 1st January update, I introduced into the Probate Grants 1858-1943 and GRO Deaths Index an extra column. In this column, Calc Birth Yr., I have subtracted age at death from year at death, to give an approximate year of birth. These indexes have been sorted first by forename and then on the basis of this column. Unfortunately, because of the way in which Excel sorts, entries in which the Calc Birth Yr. is a blank space (there being no age at death to subtract) are shifted to the end, after the years.
So, taking the GRO Deaths Index for instance, a search under the forename John will show two series of entries, one with a registration year of 1866-1911 in which a birth year is given and one with a registration year 1837-1865 in which it is not.
Official probate index under trial
Here's a little secret for my readers, possibly an "exclusive". The Principal Probate Registry is computerising its probate index - that's the index to grants of representation (wills and administrations) in those heavy printed books and (from 1973) microfiches at First Avenue House, High Holborn, London. Work is proceeding backwards from recent times and has reached grants for the year 1951. The new index is on trial at First Avenue House, where it can be used free of charge. Its big advantage is that it goes by date of death. Imagine trying to find a grant for William Whitehouse of 22 Burton Road, Dudley, who died in 1952. The administration took place in 1981 ! Its disadvantages are that one can search only 4 years at a time and that the details of the grant are shown as merely the page of the printed book with a red line around the entry. It's clear that my spreadsheet index has many advantages over the new official index. When the new official index has made further progress, I shall be able to use it to improve my index, by locating all the later grants of those who died in 1943 or earlier.
It will be interesting to see how the Registry plans to pay for this computerisation. My guess is that the index will be free to use, but that the cost of the documents will rise. This could be a good time to buy a will (£5 if requested in person, £8 by post).
Ancestry - a bouquet
To balance the Ancestry-bashing that has been a feature of newsletters and CEN EXPLANATIONS, here's an instance where they did really well. In the 1871 census of Durham, there's a family of Whitehouses in Stranton. The forename of the youngest is a dreadful scrawl, partly overwritten that looked to me like "Cha Hy", short for Charles Henry. I took my cue from the older son who was abbreviated to "John Ja". To my surprise, Ancestry rendered the name as "Matty", which it just might be with a big stretch of the imagination. Fortunately, he was born in Sheffield, where there are strangely few Whitehouses and by looking in the GRO Births Index, I was able to identify a Matthew registered at the right time in Sheffield. Well done Ancestry !
Best wishes, Keith
WHITEHOUSE FAMILY HISTORY CENTRE
3rd October 2006
QUARTERLY UPDATE
The major visible events this last quarter are:
- completion of the 1861 census database for all England, Wales, Channel Islands and the Isle of Man
- partial checking of the West Midlands section of the above
- extension of the 1841 census database to include Channel Islands, Isle of Man and the whole of Scotland
- addition to the census databases of the WFHC reference numbers of many of those who registered in March
Completing the 1861 census transcription
About half of my genealogical energy this quarter has been poured into getting the 1861 census database (sortable indexed transcript) to what I call "theoretical completion". This term means that I have covered the whole of Great Britain, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man. However, much of my database relies on looking up entries using on-line indexes (Ancestry, 1837 On Line) and re-indexing. In practice, neither of the starting indexes gives complete coverage of all Whitehouses when searched under this name or common deviant spellings of it, so the fear is that some Whitehouses have been missed by both. That's why the completion is "theoretical". Additionally, the 1861 census is notorious for its "gaps" - returns that have got lost: Ancestry has published a list.
I have been using both the "1837 On Line" and the "Ancestry" index. The 1837 OL index is significantly worse than that of Ancestry. They usually list about the same number of "hits", but 1837 OL gives large numbers of false positives - that is to say, what is indexed as "Whitehouse" frequently turns out to be another name. Thus, for Yorkshire, 1837 OL listed 208 Whitehouse and variants, Ancestry 202 under Whitehouse and Whithouse. However, 1837 OL gave 38 false positives and did not list many Whitehouses that were found in Ancestry. It would be nice to think that 1837 OL was so useless that it could be simply ignored. Regrettably, this is not the case. It does yield a few entries that do not appear in Ancestry under Whitehouse or the more obvious variants. Remarkably, it produced entries that I could not find in Ancestry, even by putting in the correct piece and folio reference. They simply weren't there, there being a gap of several folios in the return that did not appear to have been filmed (9 Kidderminster Court, Salford: RG9/2915 FO 36 SCH 191; 175-1/2 Upper Windsor St., Aston: RG9/2175 FO 122 SCH 173).
1837 On Line has recently produced indexes and images for the 1841 and 1871 censuses, so it will be very instructive to see whether any new entries result - but that has to take a much lower priority than other things.
1861 census of West Midlands: errors and omissions lead to new quality control project
In the West Midlands, my 1861 census database was originally constructed largely from local indexes and trawling through microfilms without any indexing aid. It has since been checked in Ancestry and 1837 On Line. As a result of this, I discovered that two areas had I had not covered: the Staffordshire part of Stourbridge Registration District (Amblecote, Wordsley, Kingswinford, Pensnett, Brierley Hill - RG9/2068 to 2074) and parts of south Warwickshire. Moreover, there have been many errors in other places, I regret to say. They range from omissions during trawling to wrong schedule, folio and even piece numbers. I have therefore launched a "quality control" project to check the whole of the 1861 census of the West Midlands against images of the census entries and have so far completed Birmingham, Aston, Meriden registration districts (pieces 2128 to 2190), the Sedgley and Dudley parts of the Dudley registration district (2046 to 2062), the Handsworth part of the West Bromwich registration district (2019 to 2021) and part of the Kings Norton registration district (2119 to 2125). These were the most vulnerable areas, as mostly they relied on trawling. This exercise has resulted in a large number of corrections and re-interpretations.
Improving the 1841 census transcription
There's no question that the best index is that of "British Origins", but they have been working only on the 1841 and 1871 censuses and many counties have not yet appeared. In the last 6 months or so, Origins has added Cheshire, Shropshire, Yorkshire, Lancashire, Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire to the 1841 coverage. Originally, the WFHC database for these counties had to be constructed from the Ancestry index, because, at the time, there was no other. Recently, I have checked the Origins indexes for these counties. For Cheshire the same hits occurred in each. In Shropshire, excluding Halesowen, one extra household was found in Origins, an entry that was particularly difficult to read. When it came to Yorkshire, Ancestry yielded 36 households, all of which were found in Origins. However, Origins turned up 12 extra households not in Ancestry. Two of these were rejected as Waterhouse and Whitehead, in 7 of the others Whitehouse was either clear or the best reading, leaving 3 that were genuinely difficult to decipher but in which Whitehouse was a possibility. Thus, on the most generous basis, 7 out of 43 Whitehouse households (one sixth) were not indexed findably in Ancestry.
When going through the Origins index for Lancashire (1841), I found another instance of missed filming by Ancestry. At White Chapel, Liverpool, HO 107/562 Book 1, Folio 4, the whole of page 1 was missed and this contains a Whitehouse.
Even Origins is not entirely error-free. In the 1841 census of Halesowen it has made the spectacular blunder of indexing a family of the name Disley under Whitehouse.
Sorry to have gone on for so long, but many researchers do not realise just how bad some of the computerised indexes are. Thank goodness that in the heart of the West Midlands, where most Whitehouses are to be found, I have been able to use locally-generated name indexes for much of the 1851, 1861 and 1871 census databases on this website. It is my aim to produce the very best indexes that encompass all Whitehouses in the 1841 to 1871 censuses, using as many sources as I can. So, if you out there think I have missed one (it has been known), please, please tell me.
Alas, not every local index is reliable. I was delighted to come upon the "Sheffield Indexers" website, as
they have indexed the 1841 census and it showed two Whitehouse families. Alas, they turned out to be Whitman and Whitham on the best reading. There is only one Whitehouse in my database for the 1841 census of Sheffield and that one is doubtful (Origins, Ancestry). This is quite a surprising result, considering that the Whitehouses were typical of the urban poor, who would go to large towns in search of work.
1841 Scotland
I'm pleased to report a positive development in Scotland, where Ancestry have produced an index to the 1841 census. This is not yet linked to any images. I have used this index, together with some "trawlings" of my own plus a search in "FreeCEN" to construct a draft database for the whole of Scotland. Among the Scottish counties, Whitehouse is found mainly in Ayrshire and Lanarkshire and the furthest north of the entries is of a farm just outside Perth, i.e. central Scotland. The draft will be finalised when images are available free of charge (which could take a long time). If any readers in Scotland could help me, please do so.
Developments at the Family Records Centre, London
Things are stirring at the Family Records Centre in London. It's an odd place, with The National Archives (TNA) hosting census and some probate records on the first floor and the Office of National Statistics (General Register Office) occupying the ground floor for the births, marriages and deaths indexes. The government has cunningly cut the budget of TNA, knowing very well that it can save money by moving the census facilities to Kew. (For overseas readers, the TNA building at Kew is some 8 miles out of the centre of London and accessible by a rather slow tube or train journey, followed by about 7 to 12 minutes walk). The move will take place by the end of 2008.
It's likely that the ONS will also leave the FRC building, given the project to digitise the indexes (not before time). The birth, marriage and death indexes will be completely revised, working from the original records. Marriages will be cross-indexed for 1837 to 1911, a huge boon. Thus, some of the work done on the Whitehouse Marriage Index on this website will be overtaken by the official records. Also, the maiden name of the mother will be given in the birth index for all years. What the ONS ought to be doing, of course, is linking the index to images of the certificates and making them available on-line, but I'm afraid that isn't planned to happen.
Indexing of correspondents' interests
I want to update you all on the situation. In March 2006, I opened the door to newcomers for the first time since October 2001. In all, there were 30 new trees to tackle, with the reference numbers 112, 118, 159, 169, 230 and 415 to 439. (The lower numbers are earlier numbers that have been vacated because the information provided by the original correspondent was inadequate). All these new trees should have been indexed for GRO marriages. If you think that yours hasn't been indexed completely, please tell me !
I have progressed to a second stage in which I am going through the new trees in numerical order and indexing them:
(a) in the1841 to 1871 census of England & Wales,
(b) in the 1881 census of England & Wales and
(c) in "pre-GRO marriages" (church marriages before 1st September 1837) in England & Wales.
You will see (a) on the website, but databases for (b) and (c) are still under construction. I still have 431 to 439 to do and wish to apologise to those concerned for the delay. This task is being given priority.
As I go through the files, I am ensuring that every new correspondent has a tree which is recorded digitally and printed out. The printed trees are being stored tidily and will ultimately be archived
(printed to archive quality paper). The long-term storage of family trees is an on-going problem, but my intention is to create an archive in paper or digital form or both and deposit the trees in an appropriate library. That is some years away.
Some correspondents are producing very nice tidy trees, well researched. Others are not and it is taking me many hours to process each one, particularly if their genealogy is linked to that of an existing correspondent. Some are absolutely clueless about how to produce a nice tidy tree that prints to A4 paper (297 x 210 mm) - not exactly difficult. A few have submitted pedigrees of many pages containing extraneous information relating to other ancestral lines than Whitehouse. I shall have to take a firmer line about this and refuse them. Genealogical programs don't help a lot, unless they are printed in text form. Unfortunately, many people use these programs to make "drop line" charts - that's the name for the ones that start with the oldest ancestor at the top and have the youngest ranging across the bottom of many landscape pages connected by huge horizontal lines that extend so far that one has to tape, say, 10 pages together to make any sense of them. There's an awful lot to be said in favour of the "tall tree", in which the oldest ancestor appears at the left hand side of a portrait page. It's just a drop line chart turned through 90 degrees with the names re-arranged to the new horizontal, saving loads of space.
Another problem is that many trees are under-researched. Using just my own website and FreeBMD, I can often make progress. That shouldn't happen.
If correspondent 435 of "Witchend", or her cousin Jo, is reading this, your tree from William Whitehouse and Louisa Grainger who married 27 March 1831 at Sedgley All Saints, does not contain all the names on the census returns and so will have to be re-drawn. If you want the re-drawn tree and my comments, please provide a stamped addressed envelope or an e-mail address.
I have been re-thinking my policy about the 1891 and 1901 census. Without help, there's no way I am going to have time to check references supplied, still less begin another database. Of course, trees should continue to show everyone born up to and including 1901, but that is as far as I can go.
Work in progress
As mentioned above, I am giving priority to indexing correspondents' trees, starting with 421 to 439. I shall be working on the 1871 census of areas other than London and the West Midlands, so as to bring that to "theoretical completion". This is an urgent task, to enable me to proceed with further indexing of the census returns with correspondent reference numbers. The 1871 work will be interspersed with further checking of the 1861 census of the West Midlands.
I know that progress here is slow, but there is only one of me and I do try to lead a normal life as well ! . If anyone would like to help, I have a checking job that needs doing at the FRC in London. All who contribute are publicly thanked on the website.
Best wishes, Keith
WHITEHOUSE FAMILY HISTORY CENTRE
2nd July 2006
QUARTERLY UPDATE
The major visible events this quarter are:
- completion of the 1841 census database with the aid of the "Ancestry" index
- getting 1861 other (other = everywhere except London and the West Midlands) well under way
- moving to a new website.
However, I have failed to make significant progress in adding WFHC reference numbers to the census databases and I apologise to those who registered in March that I have been unable to do this yet for their trees. Please bear with me.
Here in the south east of England where I live, we have had an exceptionally dry and sunny June. I have therefore been busy painting the outside of the house and so genealogy has been at a standstill. Today it was 35.5 degrees Celsius (96 degrees Fahrenheit) in the sun. I started painting with undercoat at 5.25 a.m. and put a coat of gloss on at 9.30 a.m. I am pleased to report that the family is all well and my son has just distinguished himself by completing his exams to qualify as an actuary. He did about half the exams some years ago, gave up the idea of qualifying and became an IT project manager. Seeing so many bright people younger than him entering the IT field, he took the other half of the actuarial exams. Despite the distractions of looking after 4 children, he managed to get his head down and do the work. I am very proud of him.
Those new to the WFHC will find much information in the April newsletter, still available to download.
Best wishes, Keith
WHITEHOUSE FAMILY HISTORY CENTRE
4th April 2006
SUCCESSFUL RE-OPENING DURING MARCH 2006
NEXT RE-OPENING JANUARY 2007
The WFHC re-opened for the month of March 2006, which resulted in 28 new genealogies, referenced as 112, 118, 159, 169, 230 and 415 to 437. Many had seen the article in the December issue of "The Midland Ancestor", a few had come upon the website and some others were invited by me to register after they had listed a Whitehouse interest in "The Midland Ancestor". Correspondents did very well, all making a good effort to comply with the rules for registration, overall with very few items omitted.
The WFHC is now closed for new registrations, but will remain open to all registered correspondents for enquiries, updates etc. The next opportunity for registration will be for the month of January 2007. The same rules will apply. Make a note in your calendar or diary for 31st December 2006.
FUTURE PLANS OF THE WFHC
- to continue with quarterly newsletters on or about 1st January, April, July and October
- to maintain the probate indexes, which are potentially of enormous value
- to complete the 1841, 1851, 1861 and 1871 census indexes for England & Wales to a high standard of accuracy and improve coverage of Scotland
- to annotate further the census, marriage and probate indexes with the references of correspondents
- to improve the GRO index files, especially for marriages, and to extend births and deaths.
- to index the marriages of correspondents which took place before civil registration
- to index the 1881 census references of correspondents
- to create an on-web register of the names of correspondents and an off-web register of their contact details
- to index some of the US censuses
QUARTERLY UPDATE
This has been the most energetic quarter in the history of my efforts to co-ordinate Whitehouse genealogy. From the website viewpoint, the most notable achievements are:
- the new GRO marriage index, with many more matches of spouses to Whitehouses
- overhaul of all the indexes to get rid of the code system for variants, v7, v12, v24 etc. and the abbreviations for Registration Districts in the West Midlands
- successful checks of the 1841 census for the West Midlands
- addition of Northamptonshire to the 1841 census of other areas
- opening of the WFHC to new correspondents after 4½ years
- a clear way forward for the WFHC
- decision to change my e-mail address and semi-encrypt it to deter spammers
Away from the web, other things have been going on. At last, I have digitised the Register of Correspondents. The public part of this (names, but no contact details) will be put on the website later this year.
Work has been steaming ahead on the 1861 and 1871 census. I have now completed the whole of London for both years, as draft paper slips. For 1861, I have used the "Ancestry" interface to read the scans, while checking the results from the "Ancestry" index against the 1837online index. Needless to say, each index gave results that the other did not.
The 1851 census has also made good progress on paper, with the result that the whole of England & Wales has been covered. It gave me great pleasure to find that the Manchester & Lancashire FHS have re-transcribed the flood-damaged parts of the 1851 census of Manchester and a few other towns in Lancashire. Some books were damaged by a flood in the Public Record Office before they could be filmed. A UV light technique was used to enhance the writing in the books. Several Whitehouse entries were found.
Interesting things are happening with the 1841 census. British Origins has been filming and indexing it, but their progress latterly has been very slow. I have been keeping pace with it. Meanwhile "Ancestry" have filmed it and have talked about going on-line with it in a couple of months. Poor though the "Ancestry" indexes are, they are a great deal better than none at all, so I am hopeful that it will not be too long before I can complete the London area.
All this means, of course, a great deal of keyboarding to put these paper transcripts onto Excel spreadsheets.
Some moments of interest occurred in enhancing the GRO Marriage Index. There are five marriages where the page numbers for the groom and bride did not agree, differing by one digit. Protracted correspondence with the GRO in Southport, Lancashire, failed to move the mean so-and-sos to investigate and tell me which reference was wrong. They would rather waste time thinking of ways to say "no" than spend a few minutes doing it ! So I did my Sherlock act and sorted it out for them.
The GRO Marriage Index on the website now contains only the correct numbers. However, I did manage to persuade them to agree to a correct a homosexual marriage in the 4th quarter of 1903, where Harry or Henry Whitehouse married James Wakelam. The Whitehouse was Amy. So my website shows only the correct version.
Regular readers of this website will notice the new file of Non-GRO marriages, a sort of dustbin for any marriage that I could not find in the GRO indexes. There used to be many more, but with the aid of FreeBMD and a bit more imagination on my part, they have been reduced to 21. It has been quite a revelation to me to discover that many marriages which I thought had never reached the GRO did in fact arrive, but have been lying there mis-indexed. Take, for example, the marriage of Mary Whitehouse to Thomas Cartmail which is in the parish register of Walsall St. Matthew for 8th July 1838. There was no difficulty in identifying Mary in the GRO index, but Thomas ? I tried Cartmale, Cartwail, Carpmail, Carpmael, Gartmail, Cortmail…. As a final act of desperation I tried Curtmail and there it was.
Even more diligent readers will notice the mysterious file "FREQUENCY…" on the annex website. This contains a slightly revised version of a paper that I had published in 1998 and shows the frequency of the name Whitehouse and various ways of measuring it. I have been telling correspondents for some years that in the Dudley, Tipton and West Bromwich areas it has the same frequency as does Williams in the whole of England & Wales, Williams being the 3rd commonest surname. In the Cheslyn Hay and Great Wyrley areas, it is on a par with Smith and Jones.
Writing of surname frequency, I wonder if anyone can explain to me the mysterious website www.taliesin-arlein.net/names . It is said to be a 1998 database of 270,000 surnames in England & Wales, the entry qualification for which is that there must be at least 5 entries of the name. It enables one to obtain a ranking for any given surname. Whitehouse was ranked 459, with 15,893 entries. According to the Nottinghamshire FHS Journal, Vol. 11 No. 5, October 2004, the database comes from names of people registered with the National Health Service, but the website does not say this. Births are continually added, but deaths are not weeded out. Multiplying by 0.93 gives an estimate of the population having the name. I'll be returning to this topic in a later newsletter.
I am afraid that all this bread-and-butter stuff (censuses, GRO marriages) will disappoint those who are stuck around 1800 and hope that I will conjure up some obscure records that will help them. I do have it mind, but very few records identify Whitehouses in enough detail to be interesting. I have downloaded the few Whitehouses, all in London, in the newly created indexes to the Sun Fire Office registers for the period 1816 to 1834 and will be adding these to the Annex website.
The semi-encryption of my new e-mail address has caused some comment. One defeated person sent a letter by post, another, sensibly, did a Google search for the supermarket and worked it out. Of course, I am sorry for any irritation and anyone who can offer me a nice free encryption program that they have tested with Windows XP and can recommend will be welcome. I have asked the Guild of One-name Studies to cancel my previous address ending in "one-name.org". Putting it on the website has caused me no end of spam. I hope for better things from my new address (see link on Index page).
I have been thinking of putting my telephone number on the website, again in a semi-encrypted form, having discovered that it is the product of two large prime numbers. However, I rather like my telephone number and do not want to resort to elaborate arrangements to filter annoying calls. So, I'll park that one, but any registered correspondent who would like a telephone discussion can always e-mail me to request one.
Following the successful influx of new correspondents, I now have a big indexing task ahead of me and I hope that all such of you reading this will be patient. Viv Turner (435) will have to be very patient, as she didn't enclose a stamped addressed envelope or give an e-mail address with her letter. I have registered her genealogy and indexed the marriages and will write when I have completed the indexing.
Existing correspondents who want to be very helpful should please make a nice clear chart of their family history in the Whitehouse name, which is NOT in a Gedcom format (send text or print and scan) and which is printable to A4 in a neat and tidy presentation. Also wanted are census references, including the 1881 census. References to family stories and the 1891 and 1901 censuses should please be added as footnotes on the chart. This is part of the "clear way forward". I shall be storing such charts in digital and printed-out form. Correspondence will not be kept. Paper files will be disposed of.
Some will recall having sent in "Word pedigrees", an idea that I was pursuing in my January 2002 paper in Journal of One-name Studies. It was unsuccessful. Not many people responded. Many mistakes were made, including several by me ! At that time, I saw it as a temporary solution to a huge indexing problem. I always knew that indexing marriages was the key to identifying genealogies and now that my GRO marriage index has improved so much, it is even more true. I shall be proceeding with the pre-civil registration marriages of correspondents as soon as I can find the time. It would enable me to dispose of two shoe-boxes of index cards, devoted entirely to spouses.
By the way, it is amazing just how many people do not produce charts - some, it seems, find the task beyond them. I'll be returning to this theme in a future newsletter.
I'm pleased to say that my wife and I are well and that the grandchildren suffer from only the usual passing colds and tummy bugs. Robert, the only male, has been playing the organ and trombone at school, in public, a terrific advance for a nervous child. Science is his thing. Best wishes
Keith
WHITEHOUSE FAMILY HISTORY CENTRE
27th December 2005
Updated 6th & 24th January 2006
Happy New Year Everyone,
THE CENTRE IS OPENING AGAIN !
The Centre is opening again on a limited basis, as explained below.
Firstly, it will re-open to admit new registrations of Whitehouse genealogies for a period of one month only, from 1st to 31st March 2006. As many of you know, the Centre has been closed for over 4 years, since October 2001. The purpose of registering is this, that you will then be given a WFHC number, which will be entered in the census, marriage and probate indexes available on the web. This will allow others with the same or a related genealogy to contact you, without your being bothered by irrelevant enquirers.
Secondly, the Centre will open on 1st March and remain open indefinitely thereafter, for the purpose of making contacts. It has been decided NOT to put addresses in an on-line directory on the website, but that all contacts will be arranged through the Centre. (This is a change from the arrangement set out in my 1st October 2005 newsletter). It is expected that most of the contacts will be made in March or April 2006, because existing correspondents have already been "matched" to each other. These contacts will be between a new correspondent who registers in March and either another such new correspondent or an existing one. However, some existing correspondents will probably have changed their contact details, so there might well be a time lag of several months before some of the contacts can be arranged. It is for this reason that the Centre will remain open for arranging contacts for a long time after March 2006.
After 31st March 2006, the Centre will be closed for new registrations. When I have coped with the expected flood of new registrations, I will consider whether to open again for additional new registrations.
The Centre will remain closed for casual enquiries.
The rules for new registrations will be as follows:
[This section has been omitted, as it is superseded by the Registrations FAQs file]
FUTURE PLANS OF THE WFHC
- to continue with quarterly newsletters on or about 1st January, April, July and October
- to maintain the probate indexes, which are potentially of enormous value
- to complete the 1841, 1851, 1861 and 1871 census indexes for England & Wales to a high standard of accuracy and improve coverage of Scotland
- to annotate further the census, marriage and probate indexes with the references of correspondents
- to improve the GRO index files, especially for marriages and to extend births and deaths.
- to index the marriages of correspondents which took place before civil registration
- to index the 1881 census references of correspondents
- to create an on-web register of the names of correspondents and an off-web register of their contact details
- to index some of the US censuses
OTHER RECENT NEWS
It has been a tumultuous year in genealogy, owing to a big increase in indexing on-line. There is so much that I would like to do to improve my Whitehouse records, so little spare time in which to do it.
During much of 2005, I have been concentrating on expanding my sortable indexed transcripts of the 1841 to 1871 censuses. I have re-written the file CEN EXPLANATIONS, which shows the state of affairs to date. There is one very important message that I want to get across. It is that the "Ancestry" indexing of Whitehouses is of a very poor standard. If you have failed to find your Whitehouse ancestor in "Ancestry", it's quite likely that he or she has been mis-indexed. It's well worth trying my indexes on this website.
When using the "Ancestry" indexes, I am now routinely searching Whit*, where * is a "wild card" representing one or more characters. This search therefore picks up Whitacre, Whitcombe, White, Whitehair, Whitehead, Whitehorne etc. along with Whitehouse. The most worrying names are those which commonsense says are very unlikely, such as "Whitchoun" and "Whitchouse". Of course, I can't check every entry thrown up by the Whit* search, but I do look at the image for all those names which have been known to be mis-readings of Whitehouse or which are highly improbable names of about the same length.
It would be nice to think that the Whit* search, although very tedious, will guarantee my picking up all the Whitehouses. Alas, some of the mis-readings do not begin with these four letters. A few are so strange that no reasonable search in "Ancestry" would ever find them. I am so glad, therefore, that a significant proportion of my census records has come from local name indexes or trawling (reading through films, unaided by any index).
Another strength of my indexes lies in the place of birth. I try hard to read this sensibly, frequently looking up the names of villages and hamlets. Correspondent 097 will see what I mean, when I mention that "Ancestry" have indexed her Alfred Whitehouse on the 1871 census as born in Waberthwaite, Surrey. Waberthwaite, if it existed at all, would be a Lake District name. He was actually born in Walworth, now an area of south east London, near the Elephant & Castle and this is reasonably clearly written in the census return.
This does not mean that the "Ancestry" indexes are useless. After all, they cover areas for which no local name indexes exist. Trawling is never a reliable method and I am using on-line indexes to check the accuracy of the trawls.
Some people must wonder whether transcribing the whole household, servants and all, is worthwhile. You just never know, as correspondent 070 will testify, because the future wife of Robert Stephen Whitehouse, the cotton mercer, can be found listed among the very many apprentices and servants in the 1871 census of his establishment in Leamington Spa.
In the immediate future, a priority is to continue keeping pace with the "British Origins" indexing of the 1841 census. This has been proceeding slowly, working roughly diagonally across southern and middle England, from Cornwall to Lincolnshire, with new counties being added every month or two. The quality of the "British Origins" indexing is high. They have covered the three counties of the West Midlands, where most Whitehouses are found. The WFHC index to the 1841 census of the West Midlands was compiled partly from local indexes and partly from trawling. I have started using the "British Origins" index to check the trawled parts for omissions and have so far completed Dudley and Sedgley parishes. (There were several omissions, as expected).
The WFHC index to the 1851 census has benefited from published paper or fiche surname indexes, with only a very little trawling. However, the CEN OTHER file (covering everywhere except the West Midlands and London) is weak in places, so I have made a start on supplementing that by using the "Ancestry" indexes. The worst areas are probably Yorkshire and Kent, so I have started there and will be up-grading that file in the first quarter of 2006.
Another priority is to improve the GRO Marriage Index. This is a big task, for the idea is to include
churches where the marriage took place and the date. Also, there are many more spouse names to add.
This improved index will be an immensely powerful tool, for it will enable searchers either to find the marriage or to eliminate a large number of possibilities from their list of candidates. Currently, 1837 to 1881 has been completed. 1902 to 1911 is also available in this form, but some additions are in the pipeline.
You'll have seen WFHC references in the last column of the census transcripts. Only a small portion of these has resulted from any systematic attempt at entering them. I intend to start going through the paper files in an organised way, marking up the digital files with references. This will be an ongoing project during 2006, but it is a huge task. Therefore, any registered correspondent who wants to help by pointing out where his or her reference is missing and needs to be inserted in the digital files (census, marriage, probate) will be very well received. Please also contribute 1881 census references, as I shall shortly be establishing a file for those. I need at least the piece and folio number.
Best wishes
Keith