Find Ancestors

Sorry, that was my mistake, I counted those Martin people in 1841, then revised my count to 5, lol.

ooooo! Thats rather intrigueing!!! Also, you mentioned 10 children? I've got 7 here.... George,Eliza,Harriet,William,Emma,James(although no DOB found), Albert... who are the others?

thanks

Emma

I am so bone idle I just can't give up and I asked Google to find me Michie, Shere, Surrey.

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/A2A/records.aspx?cat=176-qs_2-11&cid=-1&Gsm=2008-06-18#-1

Removal Order: Isabella, Catherine and John Michie, orphan children of Alexander and Mary Michie, Shere to All Saints, Newcastle upon Tyne QS2/6/1794/Mid/10 1794

This is very strange because they surely look like this couple:

ALEXANDER MICHIE
Spouse: MARY DIBBLE
Marriage: 22 SEP 1778 Shere, Surrey, England
Source Information:
Batch No.: M013773

but the explanation could be that Newcastle was the home parish of Alexander and his children had to be cared for in that parish, not the one where they were born.

Aha, these are the children the IGI shows for Alexander and Mary:

1. SARAH MICHIE Christening: 16 JUN 1780 Shere, Surrey, England
2. ISABELLA MICHIE Christening: 13 OCT 1784 Shere, Surrey, England
3. CATHERINE MICHIE Christening: MAR 1788 Shere, Surrey, England

So that is indeed them, with Sarah either deceased or independent and John not accounted for in births. Hannah was born c1798 so John may have been the youngest of the crew, possibly his mother died in childbirth and he didn't get baptised there or some such thing. Possibly someone else took him in if he was just a baby.

Or John could be of completely different parents.

The removal order can tell you things, I have one for one of my families from 1792 and it gives the children's ages. In your case it might give an explanation e.g. the death details of the parents.

Well there's something to celebrate indeed! You will be pouring me a glass I trust, lol.

And do please make a toast to poor Hannah who had no idea how to spell her deceased husband's surname and was a labourer and widow with 5 kids in 1841 (and maybe others older) and undoubtedly many other things to worry about. It is so sad to think of the ancestors' living conditions sometimes.

Deaths Mar 1840 (>99%)
MACKIE John Guildford 4 111

for good measure - George's father.

Hannah had a longer and we hope eventually happier life.

Deaths Sep 1868 (>99%)
Mackey Hannah 70 Guildford 2a 35

in 1861 she was living with sons James and William and had acquired another son after her husband's death!

Hannah Michie 62
James Michie 28
William Michie 25
Albert Michie 17
Ann Shepherd 20
George Shepherd 4



If you look here

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hughwallis/IGIBatchNumbers/CountySurrey.htm#S

you can see what records are available for Shere in the IGI. Unfortunately there is a gap in births from 1603 to 1813, so George's father is not there.

But there is a marriage of an Alexander to a Mary Dibble in 1778 the only Michie in the marriage batch M013773, possibly his parents. And every Alexander Michie in the records there born in the mid-1700s was indeed born in Scotland.

(Jumping up and down in excitement... excuse for an extra champagne tonight I think. :)...)

I've just pulled Emma's birth certificate out ..... Forey fits!!! after 2 years of trying to decipher that bad handwriting Forey is a match...

it looked to us as:
_ovey
or
_orey
or
_osey
_=J/F/S

you've solved the mystery thankyou so much.

Happy new year to you. You've made my day!!!

:)

Emma Jane Clifton

oops I'm sorry you asked about the baptism records which are from the International Genealogy Index the Mormon compilation of parish records BUT it is by no means complete

http://www.familysearch.org/eng/search/igi/search_igi.asp

They are not likely mistranscribed given that they are some years apart in the parish records and are spelled that way consistently.

If you use the batch numbers I gave in the search form at the above web address you can search within that time range in that place but there simply are no MICHIE records in that vicinity around that time.

HOWEVER - search for surname MICHIE in British Isles, England, Surrey and surprise. There are scads in Shere in an earlier generation.

2. ARCHABALD MICHIE - International Genealogical Index
Gender: Male Christening: 15 FEB 1824 Saint Saviour, Southwark, Surrey, England
3. SARAH MICHIE - International Genealogical Index
Gender: Female Christening: 16 JUN 1780 Shere, Surrey, England
4. ISABELLA MICHIE - International Genealogical Index
Gender: Female Christening: 13 OCT 1784 Shere, Surrey, England
5. CATHERINE MICHIE - International Genealogical Index
Gender: Female Christening: MAR 1788 Shere, Surrey, England
14. ALEXANDER MICHIE - International Genealogical Index
Gender: Male Marriage: 22 SEP 1778 Shere, Surrey, England

So I take back my earlier theory that MACHIE was the original. It was probably the perversion by people who were illiterate.

And lo and behold

9. LOUISA MICHIE - International Genealogical Index
Gender: Female Christening: 29 SEP 1867 Shere, Surrey, England
10. EMILY MICHIE - International Genealogical Index
Gender: Female Christening: 31 JAN 1864 Shere, Surrey, England
11. EMMA JANE MICHIE - International Genealogical Index
Gender: Female Christening: 11 NOV 1861 Shere, Surrey, England

but of course it gives the mother only as Mary, lol.


Oh, and now that you have given the actual pronounciation, yes of course, it might have been spelled any old way by whoever was recording it in England!

George presumably found out the right way before his children were registered, lol. Someone may have looked in the parish records when he went to register the first child.

Fantastic. yeah we believed them to be originally from scotland "so the story goes.... from my grandma"... from a place called "bonar bridge" so with a possible scottish basis the pronunciation of a scottish surname would be problematic... we pronounce it now... MEE-HEE

Any chance you could let me know what website you find christenings on as that would be fantastic in order to further my research.

Thanks

Emma

FreeBMD, I had been looking at Mary Forey in 1841 and 1851 after searching for Marys her age in those two places, so I just searched for George marrying Mary in Guildford district 1851 to 1861 and there weren't very many.

I don't think it is a spelling mistake, I think the name is probably MACHIE and people were illiterate and spelled it as they said it, which was probably MACKEY as in the 1841. The speling may then have morphed to fit a new pronunciation if it started to be pronounced with the 'ch' as in 'chew'.

There just is no other Mary who matches Mary George's wife in 1841 and 1851 for birthplace. And there is no other George and Mary marriage that looks at all possible.

Yes I added the postem to Emily's birth entry.

I'm glad you agree with George's death date as that was my guess too.

Interesting about there being a James though as I didn't have that record.

Thankyou so much for this. I've drawn so many blanks I never thought to look for mis-spellings.

Emma was my great grandmother so hence why I know her surname to be correct as I have record of her marriage, death and birth.

oh.... I don't think I have a subscription at ancestry. I view all my census results and BMD results either on here or via FreeBMD (Its pricey to join up to everything as I'm paying with Aussie currency)

Bruce what index did you find the entries for Machie in? That could be an easy typo (only one letter)

I'd love to look those up and have a look at the originals if they're online.

Thanks

Emma

Emma Ancestry is full of mistranscriptions.

Someone has CORRECTED the surname at Ancestry already, I assumed since you had him in that census you knew this but maybe you were reading it somewhere else.

You can contact the person who made that correction who is an Ancestry user like ourselves by clicking on the 'view alternate names' link on the census record page and sending a private message.

Well Emma you are very welcome I'm sure.

If you find a record with surname Michie somewhere before the births of the children, let us know.

You might want to recall that people were usually not literate particularly the children of labourers and that pronounciation may have been different at the time.

Also how do I contact someone at ancestry to tell them they've got the names wrong. Its definitely Michie not Michel!

Thanks in advance guys

I do have Emma Jane's birth certificate but the mother's maiden name is completely illegible. I've tried with numerous people to decipher it but we can't make it out.

The surname is definitely Michie

GEORGE MACHIE
Christening: 07 APR 1826 Shere, Surrey, England
Father: JOHN MACHIE
Mother: HANNAH
Source Information:
Batch No.: C013774

ELIZA MACKIE Christening:
07 SEP 1828 Shere, Surrey, England
Father: JOHN MACKIE
Mother: HANNAH
Source Information:
Batch No.: C013774

the only births to the couple in that batch.

One more to those parents

EMMA MACHIE
Christening: 20 MAY 1838 Shere, Surrey, England
Father: JOHN MACHIE
Mother: HANNAH
Source Information:
Batch No.: C013772

I will go out on a limb here


Marriages Sep 1860 (>99%)
>> Forsy Mary Guildford 2a 71
Jackson Elizabeth Sarah Guildford 2a 71
Jones James Guildford 2a 71
>> MACKIE George Guildford 2a 71


1841

Name: Mary Forey
Age: 13
Estimated birth year: abt 1828
Gender: Female
Where born: Surrey, England

Civil parish: Abinger
Hundred: Wotton (First Division)
County/Island: Surrey

Thomas Forey 45 - agricultural labourer
Mary Forey 40
Mary Forey 13
Sarah Forey 9
Elizabeth Forey 5
Jane Forey 2
Eliza Forey 2


1851

Name: Mary Forey
Age: 23
Estimated birth year: abt 1828
Relation: Servant
Gender: Female
Where born: Abinger, Surrey, England
Civil parish: Shere
County/Island: Surrey


1841

Name: George Mackey
Age: 15
Estimated birth year: abt 1826
Gender: Male
Where born: Surrey, England

Civil parish: Shere
Hundred: Blackheath (Second Division)
County/Island: Surrey

Hannah Mackey 40 - labourer
George Mackey 15
Harriot Mackey 10
James Mackey 9
William Mackey 6
Amma Mackey 3
Ann Martin 35
Francis Martin 10
Emeilear Martin 7
William Martin 5
James Martin 3


For Mary I suspect Forey is correct even though the marriage is Forsy in the original, perhaps a mistranscription into the index.

1851

Name: George Mickie
Age: 23
Estimated birth year: abt 1828
Relation: Lodger
Gender: Male
Where born: Shere, Surrey, England

Civil parish: Shere
County/Island: Surrey

Henry Munday 47
Louisa Munday 40
George Munday 15
Mary Munday 12
Abraham Munday 9
James Munday 7
Emma Munday 2
George Mickie 23
Thomas Cheesman 10



Births Dec 1861 (>99%)
MICHIE Emma Jane Guildford 2a 49

Births Mar 1864 (>99%)
MICHIE Emily Guildford 2a 53
(did you add the postem there?)
MICHIE Emily Guildford 2a 55

Births Mar 1866 (>99%)
Michie James Guildford 2a 48
Deaths Mar 1866 (>99%)
Michie James 0 Guildford 2a 37

Births Sep 1867 (>99%)
Michie Louisa Guildford 2a 53


Deaths Sep 1897 (>99%)
Michie George 71 Guildford 2a 47

certainly that would be George's death.

I think that is a different person asking for that TelegramSam.

http://www.genesreunited.com.au/boards.asp?wci=thread&tk=1195647

(And by the way posting details publicly of a marriage in the 50s is not advisable)

1871


Name: Emma J Michel
[Emma J Michie]
Age: 9
Estimated birth year: abt 1862
Relation: Daughter
Father's Name: George
Mother's Name: Mary
Gender: Female
Where born: Shere, Surrey, England

Civil parish: Shere
County/Island: Surrey
Country: England
Registration district: Guildford

George Michel 45
Mary Michel 43
Emma J Michel 9
Emily Michel 7
Louisa Michel 3
William Harriger 20

Are you in contact with the person who has corrected the names at Ancestry?


1861 in the same place

George Michie 35
Mary Michie 33

Name: Mary Michie
Age: 33
Estimated birth year: abt 1828
Relation: Wife
Spouse's name: George
Gender: Female
Where born: Abinger, Surrey, England