Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Boards

Quick Search

Single word search

Tools

Findmypast DNA Banner

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Marriage record decipher what do you get out of th

Login to Add Reply Watch This
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Richard in Perth

Richard in Perth Report 30 Aug 2005 02:41

Because the cert has been officially amended, it seems that he was actually a Vatter, not a Foote - though was evidently using the surname Foote at the time. Also it would seem that Samuel Foote was not his natural father, as his name has been deleted. Maybe Samuel was his step-father, hence why William was using his surname at the time? Possibly he mistakenly gave his step-father's name when asked for his father's name?

Crista

Crista Report 30 Aug 2005 02:35

Leslie, Sounds to me as though William discovered Samuel wasn't really his father after he married: How about this couple: Marriages Dec 1896 FOOT Samuel Christchurch 2b 1458 Vatter Emily Mary Christchurch 2b 1458 Births Sep 1896 Vatter William Christchurch 2b 639 1901 census: Name Estimated Birth Year Birthplace Relationship Civil Parish County/Island Annie Foot abt 1898 Bournemouth, Hampshire, England Daughter Bournemouth Hampshire Elsie Foot abt 1901 Bournemouth, Hampshire, England Daughter Bournemouth Hampshire Emily Foot abt 1872 Holdenhurst, Hampshire, England Wife Bournemouth Hampshire Samuel Foot abt 1871 Brockenhurst, Hampshire, England Head Bournemouth Hampshire William Foot abt 1896 Bournemouth, Hampshire, England Son Bournemouth Hampshire Living on Malmesbury Rd! Crista

Leslie

Leslie Report 30 Aug 2005 02:09

I have a question I got a marriage record fro a family member. The record is dated Decmebr 26th 1918, it goes as follows. Couple: William Foote age 22 Bachelor, soldier, 21 Muscliffe Rd.wirton father Samuel Foote. Roadsweeper Ethel Annie Ada Vallis 21 Spinster, 190a Malmesbury Park Rd. Father Frank Vallis. Civil Pensioneer. in the Margin on the side is what I question. This is what it says: In Entry No. 222 Col.2 for 'Foote' read 'Vatter' otherwise 'Foote' Col. 7 Omit 'Samuel Foote' Col. 8 omit 'Roadsweeper' Corrected on the 18th April 1921 by me W.J. Lyon Vicar in the prescence of Wm. Vatter , E.A.A. Vatter The parties married. Did my relative marry a Foote or a Vatter?