Can you help me to read this entry of baptism please?

Not at all sorry to see one more tossed out of the mix, so don't apologise at all. Leaves a narrower corridor for investigation!!

I have on occasion found vital information on the very first attempt but that's just incredible luck. Can't happen all the time (but why I'll never know!!)

You made me laugh, Ann. That song was the reason I'd hoped for Ilkley as an ancestral "home". Wasn't going to mention it (people think I'm twitty enough as it is :confused:) but now that you have................... :p:D:p

His regiment was 80th Regiment of Foot. And yes, the information came from Charlotte's christening on 17th July 1836 at St. Mary's, Chatham.
 
When the 80th Regiment left Australia some soldiers stayed on. I have found a Thomas Kendall on the list of Garrison soldiers who stayed behind.
A bit of quick looking found the 80th left for India in 1844.
 
Last edited:
Then a Thomas Kendall appears on the Garrison soldiers from the 40th Regiment who elected to stay. Tour of duty 1852-1860. Looks like he may have transferred there when the 80th left.
It appears that the 40th went to SA, Vic and WA. Needs more research.
 
Which site did you find this on, AM? I found mention of Thomas Kendall from the Bengal Merchant assigned to garrison duty, but they say people listed with (or without, I can't remember off hand) an asterisk have absolutely no more mention in their records. Of course he fits into the "no more" category. I had picked 1844 as the last possible date for his service period and figured he'd taken his discharge around that time as he wanted to stay here rather than head for India. I couldn't find any mention of his absconding so took it for granted he'd found other work "somewhere" in NSW.
 
On the coastal vessel "Kingston" there is a passenger T Kendall and a Mrs Kendall and also wives and children of serving members of the army. If he were still in the military he wouldn't have been mentioned separately (unless he was one of the officers in command). As you say, more research required.

Thanks for keeping on, kiddo. I really appreciate this.

Now back to bed. See you all in the morning.
 
Just a thought - there is a free website - Wharfedale and Craven genealogical study. They might have some information about the birth of your Thomas.
 
Sorry Philippa, have been caught up in 'elderly people' dramas and only fleeting moments for genealogy.
Having said that, I found last night a baptism in Hobart in 1860 of a Thomas Kendall, father Thomas, mother Catherine, formerly Kelly. Father Thomas' occupation was Sgt 40th Regiment.
I immediately dismissed this as I thought the year of 1860 would be too late, but now I'm not so sure.
Will leave that with you but will get back with........
Philippa said:
Which site did you find this on, AM
Click to expand...
 
freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/-garter1/k80th
freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/-garter1/k40th
 
As far as I'm aware, AM, Thomas wasn't in Hobart and seems to have arrived in Adelaide in 1848 - Charlotte married Alexander Bowman in South Australia in 1852. Also, I think Charlotte was an only child - at least nothing in any of the information I've unearthed about her from her marriage onwards has ever mentioned brothers or sisters. The unfortunate thing is that, like so many other names, Thomas, Kendall, Catherine, either alone or in combination are far from rare.

Thank you for keeping on, though. It's lovely.
 
Following the first one, you come to a link which says "those who stayed" (or something similar) and Thomas Kendall is there, in the Garrison Duty group. The site "owner" also says "if the name appears on this page it means we have no more information". @$%!# - or Golly gosh!!!
 
Philippa said:
Following the first one, you come to a link which says "those who stayed" (or something similar) and Thomas Kendall is there, in the Garrison Duty group. The site "owner" also says "if the name appears on this page it means we have no more information". @$%!# - or Golly gosh!!!
Click to expand...
Which means, that there is no contributed (by family researcher or other) information on him.
 
Which means, I think AM, that there are no more official records covering his movements. Probably none of the others either, but I think this guy was primarily referring to official or regimental records.
 
A sudden family crisis has kept me away for a few days and I'm just skimming through posts and not really taking much in. So I haven't worked out if you really do have an interest in this chap from Ilkley.

Anyway, if you do and are in need of local knowledge, give me a shout some time as I spent my childhood there. However, said crisis is going to be keeping me busy, so it could be a few weeks before I can give much attention to this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top