Findmypast.ie launched today!

pinkypinky

I'm crossposting this with Rootschat but I think Shane is the only one reading both!!

Find My Past has launched an Irish subsidiary today.

A cursory look shows that Eneclann is involved and most of the material is theirs, and a repeat of what's on Origins.
Very little new, apart from Landed Estate rental records and probably not worth an annual subscription of €59 at this stage, especially if you already have one for Origins.
But it's all good in terms of progress and they acknowledge the LDS and link to all the major Irish genealogy sites so it may improve.

Waitsian

Findmypast.ie have Irish prison records on the website now. Links below:

http://www.findmypast.ie/content/launch_of_the_Irish_prison_registers_1790_1924

http://www.findmypast.ie/content/Irish_prison_registers_1790_1924

Jellybaby1

Do these records only give information on the prisoners, or is there any information on the people who worked in the prisons?

carolinej

They record the prisoners, their relatives, and in many cases their victims. No mention of prison employees. Last weekend, I found an 1889 prison record for two of my grandfather's uncles, they were on remand for "causing injury to a man" :eek: The record also gave their height, weight, eye colour etc, which was quite interesting.

The brothers spent one night in prison & were bailed the next day. My next step now is to check the local newspapers at the library & fingers crossed, the case might have been reported. Hopefully I will find out if they were found guilty or not

Jellybaby1

Some 'skeletons' are interesting, but others we may not be happy about. Still you got some interesting personal information about your ancestors.

CeannRua

Kind of off-topic... I've bought small amounts of credit (around €10 or so) twice from findmypast in the last few months. Both time it has prompted Bank of Ireland Credit Card Security to contact me to verify the transaction. They say that there are some credit card fraud issues. Has anyone else experienced this? My real bugbear is that BOI send texts out of hours to alert you... last one sent around midnight woke me up. Grrr!!

P. Breathnach

Herself went on a genealogy binge one night, and paid small amounts to a couple of online services (Rootsireland was one; I can't remember what the other was). No texts from BoI, but next say her card was blocked. She phoned for an explanation, and was told that making small subscriptions to such sites was a method used by thieves to check that a card was still "live".

So trying to find genealogical records is a suspicious activity, on a par with buying furniture in Shanghai on the same day that you visit a restaurant in the west of Ireland.

CeannRua

Thanks P. Breathnach. I was told the same thing about small transactions but also that there was a particular problem with fraud on the findmypast website.

carolinej

I haven't had any problems with purchasing credit on findmypast.ie, if I remember correctly, they're signed up to the verified by visa program, whereby you have to key in another password as an extra layer of security.

CeannRua

Interestingly, I bought something from the UK National Archives website where they also use the new ID number and BOI also questioned this transaction. I can't quite figure out if BOI are just trying to give themselves something to do or if there really is a problem with any of these sites.

carolinej

CeannRua wrote: »

Interestingly, I bought something from the UK National Archives website where they also use the new ID number and BOI also questioned this transaction. I can't quite figure out if BOI are just trying to give themselves something to do or if there really is a problem with any of these sites.

I'm an AIB customer (or am I'm the owner now:p) so maybe BOI have different policies.

carolinej

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

Some 'skeletons' are interesting, but others we may not be happy about. Still you got some interesting personal information about your ancestors.

Called into the library this morning & checked the local newspapers for the court report and sure enough I found it. An odd case to say the least! To make a long winded court report short, basically a group of young men, incl my great uncles, were passing a Sunday evening chatting on the side of the road & a pipe was been passed around between them.

Mr Thos Griffin was the first to light the pipe as he was the only one with a match, however, it blew up in his face & he was temporarily blinded. There was gunpowder in it :eek: He accused my ancesters & a 3rd man of putting gunpowder in the pipe. The case was dismissed in court due to lack of evidence as other men had the pipe that evening aswell & it couldn't be proved.

Jellybaby1

Couldn't it also be that in 1889 they used real gunpowder to make matches anyway and maybe a few extra grams got onto the odd one or two? Anyway, its good to know it wasn't anything more sinister although the pipe smoker wouldn't have agreed. Proves that smoking is really bad for your health.:p

Waitsian

Are there any subscribers to this website other than me and if so could you check whether you have problems accessing their site, it would be much appreciated? I can sign in and get the home page but can't search their records.
When I try I get this message: "Whoops! Something's gone wrong..."

pinkypinky

It was down yesterday - back now though

Jellybaby1

Can anyone give me some clue as to how I can print a complete page of a document from this site, and also how to download. When I print, my printer only prints the top left part of the page I want. When I download document to my desktop I can't re-open it. I'm getting very frustrated, mainly because I'm not tech savvy. I have found some info on the site which brings me another generation back - yippee!!

odds_on

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

Can anyone give me some clue as to how I can print a complete page of a document from this site, and also how to download. When I print, my printer only prints the top left part of the page I want. When I download document to my desktop I can't re-open it. I'm getting very frustrated, mainly because I'm not tech savvy. I have found some info on the site which brings me another generation back - yippee!!

Sometimes, when I want something off a page on the internet and there is a problem copying, downloading or printing, I just hit the "screen print" button (not sure what it is on the UK keyboard - mine's a Spanish keyboard), the open my imaging program and paste as new image. At least, I've now got a copy of what I wanted.

Some site I was looking at some months ago allowed you (unregistered user) just a few seconds to see the information, then the screen changed with a message similar to: "You are not authorised to view this page".
Just screen printing quickly got o0ver the problem!

Jellybaby1

Thanks odds_on, I'll give that a try.

P. Breathnach

I don't have any reason to think that my ancestors might have been imprisoned, but I am puzzled by the fact that my great-grandfather did not marry until he was about 42 years old (first marriage). Further, I have found no documentation on him prior to his marriage in 1876. Then I found a namesake on familysearch charged with desertion. That made for an interesting possibility: that he had been in the army, and that might be why he did not get the chance to find a wife.

So I subscribed to findmypast and went trawling.

The army deserter seemed not to be my man. But I found the right man recorded as a witness in a case in 1874. A small thing, but now I know with more confidence that he worked in Wicklow town, rather than the less precise address I had before: "Wicklow", which might have been a reference to the county.

I also found his father as a complainant against two neighbours in an assault case (they were convicted).

A small, but interesting, return so far on my investment. But if you are into low-budget genealogy, findmypast might not be the first port of call.

Jellybaby1

I recently signed up to Findmypast as a friend was singing its praises. I did find some interesting titbits but not enough worth what I paid as yet, fingers crossed though. Some of the records I have got free elsewhere anyway. I couldn't find out on the site but is the subscription all you pay, am worried I am paying for viewing each record as well but the site doesn't say.

Brennans Row

genie wrote: »

Is it worth looking at the images on Find My Past? Do they contain more information than on Family Search?

Coolnabacky1873 wrote: »

For the Prison Registers there is extra information on the image via FMP such as a description of the person (height, hair, eyes, complexion, marks on person), next of kin, sentence length etc.. If possible it is always worth having a copy of the primary document. Transcription errors can occur and other notations or pertinent marks on the original document might not be transcribed.Plus, it's cool as hell to have it IMO.

I'm really interested in those prision records since viewing them on family search.

Below is an example from family search, but as you can see in the field Residence: it just states Limerick.

I would therefore need a street name to clarify if this record is valid for me or not.

So do they really reveal more details on find my past?



"Ireland, Prison Registers, 1790-1924," Xxxxx Xxxxxx , 18XX

Name: Xxxxx Xxxxxx
Also Known As:
Role of Individual: Prisoner
Event: Prison
Event Date: 18XX
Event Place: Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
Residence: Limerick
Age: XX
Birthplace: Limerick
Estimated Birth Year: 18XX
Prison: Limerick
Offence: Debt £24.6.0
Victim:
Victim's Address:
Where Convicted:
Item: X
Book: X/XX/XX
County: Limerick
Film Number: XXXXXXX
Digital Folder Number: XXXXXXXXX
Image Number: XXXXX

P. Breathnach

Te records wary in how much information is included. None that I have seen gives a full address, and most give scant or even no information.

If you PM me the full name and date (or date range) I can do a lookup and tell you how much information is in the record.

genie

I bought some pay as you go credits to look up the Prison Records on Find My Past. The amount of info on each record varied. One record contained a lot of additional interesting info such as height/eye colour/where born/current address etc., while one frustratingly had only the same info as on Family Search. It was very disappointing as I was hoping for an address/occupation in order to determine whether the person recorded was actually the person I was searching for. So, it is a bit hit and miss.

ETA that the record with very little info was actually A Registry of Drunkards from Richmond Bridewell - I'm not sure whether this accounts for the lack of info compared to actual Prison Records.

There was also no next of kin listed on any of the five records I looked at. One record contained a reference to bail being paid but it didn't say how much it was or who paid it.

Brennans Row

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Te records wary in how much information is included. None that I have seen gives a full address, and most give scant or even no information.

If you PM me the full name and date (or date range) I can do a lookup and tell you how much information is in the record.

Thanks a million, I might take you up on that offer yet. :cool: Actually I'm trying to make up my mind on taking a 6 month subscription. What details do the court records reveal?

Subscriptions
12 months subscription €59.95
6 months subscription €37.95


Pay as you go credits
300 credits €24.95 (Credits are valid for 365 days)
100 credits €9.95 (Credits are valid for 90 days)

• Vital records (BMDs): 10 credits
• Census and substitutes: 10 credits
• Land and estates: 10 credits
• Directories: 5 credits
• Military & Rebellion: 10 credits
• Prison registers: 20 credits
• Court records: 20 credits
• Estate records (1850-1885) 30 credits

P. Breathnach

I have subscribed, and I'm a bit disappointed.

The court records are those of the Petty Sessions (precursor of the District Court). You get date of hearing, where the court was held, name of complainant and name of defendant, usually with limited address information (often just town or parish), names of witnesses called, and the decision of the court.

I found a nine-year old who might be a sister of my great-grandmother (there was insufficient data to be sure) being sentenced to a week's imprisonment for "malicious damage to reeds". It probably wasn't an entirely trivial matter, as she lived on a town street where all the houses were thatched; I picture her perhaps setting fire to thatching materials. I was able to link to a prison record, and saw that she was 4'4", just a little titch of a thing.

RGM

I found charges against my great-great-grandfather and his brother for assaulting each other, and the same charges between that brother and another brother. All on the same day.

I've heard rumors of some kind of rift in the family, this might be part of that, with two brothers fighting their other brother. And that's only what made it into the legal system!

Could be why descendants of the one brother are no longer in the townland.

Then again, that brother was still there 20 years later. Maybe it was just a good family brawl.

pedroeibar1

I came across a late 19thC kinsman who was 'a.k.a. Cath X.' which suggests that there had been a crossdressing member in the family! I tried inputting ‘Cath’ on its own as a forename. That throws up several men aka ‘Cath’ and I infer that there is a regular/frequent confusion between ‘Cath’ and Patk’ – just on the first page (20 names) alone there are 4 occurrences.

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/KM7Q-DC7
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/KMQT-363
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/KM38-LCC
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/KM38-4YM

P. Breathnach

As a number of regulars here know, my genealogical efforts have thrown up a few cases where I needed to make a judgement call in the absence of some key piece of evidence. Here's another arising from the court records in findmypast: on the same day (1) Catherine Doyle of Arklow was charged with assaulting Mary Darcy of Arklow - case dismissed; (2) Julia Kenny of Tinnahask, Arklow was charged with assaulting Catherine Doyle of Arklow - no appearance (i.e. case not proceeded with by Catherine Doyle). The obvious interpretation is that Catherine Doyle got into a row with Mary Darcy and Julia Kenny; complaints were lodged, but not pursued when they came up at the petty sessions.

The person of interest to me is Julia Kenny. That was the name of my great-grandmother, and she lived in Tinahask (which comprised perhaps 200 dwellings). She was 20 years old on the date of the incident, and married. The other case, involving Catherine Doyle and Mary Darcy, has some bearing on my reading of things, because Julia Kenny's maiden name was Darcy.

Adding up the bits, it looks to me as if Catherine Doyle got into a row with Mary Darcy and her married sister Julia. I'd rate the likelihood of that being the correct interpretation as being quite high (but not beyond all reasonable doubt).

Her daughter, my grandmother, was the epitome of Edwardian respectability and would have been horrified by the thought of her mother (a fisherman's wife) acting like a fishwife.

RGM

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

I came across a late 19thC kinsman who was 'a.k.a. Cath X.' which suggests that there had been a crossdressing member in the family! I tried inputting ‘Cath’ on its own as a forename. That throws up several men aka ‘Cath’ and I infer that there is a regular/frequent confusion between ‘Cath’ and Patk’ – just on the first page (20 names) alone there are 4 occurrences.

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/KM7Q-DC7
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/KMQT-363
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/KM38-LCC
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/KM38-4YM

Jesus, how'd you like to find a record on your ancestor saying he went to prison for "carnally knowing aged 10 1/2 Yrs."

Did Cath used to be a popular nickname? Related to the name Cathal, maybe?

pedroeibar1

If Doyle was not present in court none of the cases could have proceeded. Assuming the police were the prosecutors, Doyle was the defendant in (1) and would be a witness in 2 (as the victim). The charge was assault (not battery so a minor offence?) and did not warrant further attention?

P. Breathnach

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

I came across a late 19thC kinsman who was 'a.k.a. Cath X.' which suggests that there had been a crossdressing member in the family! I tried inputting ‘Cath’ on its own as a forename. That throws up several men aka ‘Cath’ and I infer that there is a regular/frequent confusion between ‘Cath’ and Patk’ – just on the first page (20 names) alone there are 4 occurrences.

https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/KM7Q-DC7
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/KMQT-363
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/KM38-LCC
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/KM38-4YM

There is another possible explanation that I have come across: the "a.k.a." field was used in some (I suspect most) cases to record the name of the next of kin. So if your kinsman had a wife or mother with the first name Catherine, I'd drop the cross-dressing theory.

P. Breathnach

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

If Doyle was not present in court none of the cases could have proceeded. Assuming the police were the prosecutors, Doyle was the defendant in (1) and would be a witness in 2 (as the victim). The charge was assault (not battery so a minor offence?) and did not warrant further attention?

In the Doyle/Darcy case, a police officer was the complainant; I presume that Mary Darcy did not turn up to give evidence, so the case was dismissed. In the Doyle/Kenny case, Doyle was the complainant and it seems that she did not turn up to proceed with the case.

I imagine that some sort of truce was arranged between the women.

pedroeibar1

P. Breathnach wrote: »

There is another possible explanation that I have come across: the "a.k.a." field was used in some (I suspect most) cases to record the name of the next of kin. So if your kinsman had a wife or mother with the first name Catherine, I'd drop the cross-dressing theory.

Thanks, I will bear that in mind for future reference. However in this instance that does not fit – he never married, his father was dec'd at that date & mother was Margaret. His offence was ‘Committed An Act Of Gross Indecency’ which seems to be the same offence as Oscar Wilde’s one, which is why I did further searching on ‘Cath’.

Has anyone cross-referenced any of these trials with contemporaneous newspaper reports?

Brennans Row

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I have subscribed, and I'm a bit disappointed.

The court records are those of the Petty Sessions (precursor of the District Court). You get date of hearing, where the court was held, name of complainant and name of defendant, usually with limited address information (often just town or parish), names of witnesses called, and the decision of the court.

I've just taken the six-month subscription option and fortunately the court records / prison registers have turned out to be a small gold-mine for my family research.

Those over crowded lanes of 19th century Limerick were definitely no holiday camp! :rolleyes: