Find Ancestors

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.

Quick Search

Single word search


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

uk arrivals -the last thread

Page 6 + 1 of 12

  1. «
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. »
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date


Colin Report 11 Dec 2009 14:35

Tracey - Just had a rush of blood to the head IF alice batten is shown with her husband in the 1911 census its not her and you will be right and I need to find another Alice Batten.\Regards ..................colin


Colin Report 11 Dec 2009 13:51

Hi nice to have you back. Yes I know that they are both married and that their partners are still alive but that doesn't stop a lot of people entering illegal de facto relationships. What I've learnt so far is Walt is no gentleman.
Does this make sense now or am I right off the planet?
The second part of your questions echo my concerns. The evidence for him being in Aus is the birth cert. which lists a property in chelmsford rd north perth, Sarah being on the electoral roll for perth or swan division Ive forgotten the electorate and then his name as the father on the birth certificate and a couple of return shipping leads which I have to follow up. If I confirm either one then he was here. Sarah may have had some family here but I haven't followed that up.She did have at least one relative here her mums sister an aunt I think who died in an accident on what is know called great eastern highway. There may have been visits by others I just don't know.The strongest factor for me is his resemblance to the first 2 surviving children that Sarah bore.Chas and madge. both very similar to the height weight hair and eye colour of the description given in his enlistment papers. This forced supposition is confusing and is driving me crazy. Perhaps he was working for a shipping line and travelling between the 2 countries. I just do not know. ......................colin
PS Thanks for the download- great stuff.


WayneTracey Report 11 Dec 2009 09:53

It also has to be said, we have NO evidence Walter actually left at all???

It's highly possible she left him, took an opportunity to move away....she could have caught pregnant on the trip over (it would have been a considerable time)

It's also possible she has family there!! Have you checked for Aunts & Uncles leaving for Aus?

I think you've hit the nail on the head when you said it's possible the pregnancy had nothing to do with Walter.... I wonder if he ever knew??

Tracey x


WayneTracey Report 11 Dec 2009 09:48


Am i missing something??

She became Alice Batten in 1909....but is on the 1911 census as Alice Walden...and her BATTEN husband doesn't die until 1918??

You need to find another Alice and also have a timeline on the desk!!!

Tracey xx


Colin Report 11 Dec 2009 05:43

Tracey - Yes but its the other family that was shown at the samei time thats important. All the particulars for Walt match up and who is Alice?
I have just finished trawling the BMD's and Alice Batten was probably Alice maud Phillips b. in Kingston in Mar. Q 1885. See 2a 354 She became Alice m Batten in Sep Q 1909 at hampstead see 1a 1590.
The husband was Robert Woods Batten b. Sep Q 1881 in St Germans see 5c 42. He died in the Dec Q 1918, at age 37 in E. Stonehouse . see 5b 628.
There was an infant death recorded in the Jun Q of 1912 for a Robert W Batten in southampton IF walter arr. back via Southampton could this be some link.
I hope I haven't given Lindsey apoplexy with these comments but its all grist for the mill.
The bottom line is what part if any does she play in the walden families future?


WayneTracey Report 10 Dec 2009 20:58

Did we give this data before...

17 Chelmsford Street, Fulham

Reg. District: Fulham Sub District: North West Fulham
Parish: Fulham Enum. District: 30

Address: 17 Chelmsford St Fulham County: London

WALDEN, Walter Head Married 27 years M 45 1866 Wood Sawyer Parish Fulham
WALDEN, Ealain Wife Married F 45 1866 Parish Fulham
WALDEN, James Son M 14 1897 Parish Fulham
WALDEN, Alfred Son M 12 1899 Parish Fulham

Tracey x


Colin Report 10 Dec 2009 10:07

In the short time since my last post I noticed a very important point that I raised earlier.
The 1911 census information that was posted showed Walter with the rest of his family and an Alice shown as Walters wife.It was disregarded on the basis that there are a lot of waldens and they were from a different adress. However the birthdate is accurate his employment is accurate and he is in the same general area as hi mother father and 2 brothers. The discrepancy is Alice who is shown as his wife of 6 years After the info we have found on my family, and this statement is now becoming more questionable, this should not surprise anyone.
A check on the 1911 census shows that it was completed on Sun 2nd Apr 1911,
Here now are known facts. Sarah arrived Fremantle about Feb 1911 Chas wm walden was born on the 18th Oct 1911. On my poor male reckoning the pregnancy would have to have occured around that time i.e. Feb..Did sarah lie about walters parentage and was it some-one else. It was not tom weeks' child. Was Walter working on the ship and would there be time to complete a round trip to be back in blighty by April. Very doubtful. Was he here when she arrived, don't know but doubtful. As for the evidence of his stay the electoral roll could have been entered by sarah for both of them. I have no other evidence at this time of his presence other than a return via southampton in 1914 of a Walter Walden.Was it him?
Further corroboration of the link to Walter is the info provided by L that his army papers showed the next of kin was ALICE batton This was during 1914 I believe.As I said at an earlier time I can't find a batton but there is a batten that might be the person in the 1911 census. That led to a tenuous connection with the Cox family.
I now understand with much greater clarity than ever the truth in the old rhyme that goes something like "Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive"
I am now more confused than when I started this quest.
Come on experts show me where I am wrong. I hope you can
PS still waiting waiting waiting for that certificate.


Colin Report 10 Dec 2009 04:58

I visit my mail box the one outside my house eagerly every day eagerly waiting...waiting.
I now believe Lindsey is right about Annie Cox and Walt the Senior yet I still hope that the information is skewed somehow and that young Walt is the husband. Waiting...waiting.
Returning to the matter of the certificates. How many time do I have to flagellate myself. Yes I do understand and I thank all of you for reinforcing the need to do this. You are all correct.
I also agree with you about the thrill you get when you find a little bit more about any of your ancestors and it doesn't surprise me that you tracked down your grand- uncle despite the difficulties he created. Well done. I don't aspire to be an expert researcher although I respect those that are and those trying to get there.
Using L's info my Walter has only lived half his life so there must be a lot more to find out. This info will probably come from GR family contacts if they exist so that is my next plan of attack
Well thats gone a lot further than I anticipated so thanks again for your help.
The certificate is coming. Waiting...waiting.
Strongest regards to all.................colin


rootgatherer Report 6 Dec 2009 08:00

Good Morning Colin

I am looking forward to the outcome of the certificate that you have ordered and am pleased that you will share it with us.

I do agree with Lindsey that having the certificates for the ultimate proof is so important. That doesn't stop me from having a huge file labelled "yet to be proved". I have recently been working on my husband's English side and find it much more expensive as the certificates are £7 a time - much more expensive that finding our Scottish relatives! Irish ones are about the same price as the English ones and I have purchased a few of those recently. The good thing is that the information is not going anywhere and I can allocate a fixed amount each month for certificates to fill in the gaps in our trees. That's what makes this such a good hobby - it's never ending and you can put it down or pick it up again when time and finances permit.

The other thing, of course, is that really the certificates are just the start. It is amazing what information about our ancestors can be found using free sources to build up a more complete picture of their lives.

It is interesting that your ancestor left his wife and family in Australia and returned to England to continue his life. I have a granduncle who abandond his wife and young family in Glasgow to begin a new life in Australian using a different surname and pretending for many years to be married to another lady. I was still able to track him down!

Good luck with your search.


Lindsey* Report 6 Dec 2009 04:40

I think your grandmother started the false illusion with good reason !
After being deserted on the other side of the world and left in a fix,without the support of her family ,no doubt she didn't ever want to be reminded of Walter.
The only thing she couldn't change was Charles birth cert.
Walter also lied at this end about his marital status and took no part in your father's raising, so in modern parlance he was the biological father.
So full respect to Mr Weeks for doing a grand job.

That doesnt alter the fact that you are Walter's grandchild ,but whatever your reason for tracing him , let's get the facts you can tell your family the correct story. Then you can attempt to find any living relatives armed with the right information.


Colin Report 6 Dec 2009 00:48

L. Thats put a doubt in my mind but because of the way this has unfolded it gives the false illusion that Walters line has petered out. We know that this is not true as I am proof of that.
There are a number of relatives in England who I don't know and to see some of them and make contact not only for me but for my childrens sake is a very personal matter. I am coming to the realisation that this is the real reason for the search. In the total scheme of the things we have covered I guess the change of name for me and my immediate family is not of that much significance. This is the quandry I face.


Lindsey* Report 5 Dec 2009 16:55

Oh great, change your name to Walden, then future generations of Weeks will never find you !


Colin Report 5 Dec 2009 15:41

Lindsey Nice to have you back - well sort of. Gee that was both barrels fired simultaneously.Having picked myself up off the floor I can say yes I do see the folly of not getting cert's and census material but I also add respectfully, about the money issue, dont judge others too quickly without walking a few miles in their shoes.
I am not going to say much about Janey- such a pretty name- because it is with others in GR to sort out.
Let me tell you I received unsolicitored support for my reply.
Returning to the real topic given the information you have gleaned you must be right about the marriage.I've been advised the marriage certificate is in the post so that will be the clincher one way or the other.
In relation to changing and or deleting the names in my tree I think this can be done without the need to involve GR.
Finally I am not sure why you say I am not a Walden when I have my fathers birth certificate to prove that I am. If the point is that I have carried the weeks name for my entire life then surely
all that is required is a change of name.
Oh well lots of unwanted drama to finalise what has been a really enjoyable experience for me. I've learned a lot and thought that I had developed friendships along the way.
When I get the certificate I will still report on it and say my goodbyes at that time.
Once again thanks for all your help and advice. ..............colin


Lindsey* Report 5 Dec 2009 14:26

Well Colin, I hope you now see the folly of doing research without buying certificates.

Alarm bells first rang when I asked you where you got the story from, and you didn't answer, but started yet another new thread instead.
Janey was absolutely right to point out that you were compounding the issue by having 4 threads , which is not conducive to joined-up thought.
You gave her a snippy answer.

You began with knowing nothing more than your father being a Walden, then found his mother,s marriage, added a few dead children and your own version of events , and told us all Walter junior had remarried back in England and this was what had actually happened.

You probably wont be able to delete Walter junior's 2nd fictitious wife from your tree without writing to GR , and until you buy the 3 childrens records, I recommend that you remove them too. Then correct your notes dealing with the FACTS only.
Annie Cox from Wandsworth ? Who she, another wild guess and completely wrong.

So for the benefit of everyone who has spent much time on Walter, as I suspected the 1916 marriage was of Walter Levi Walden{ senior } to Annie Amelia Cox aged 30 , daughter of William George Cox police Constable, {you can find them together on the 1901 census.]
The lucky old devil got himself a much younger woman and that makes her Walter junior,s step-mother, nothing more.

I think you need to read Jonesy,s notes on Tips board, re always checking the original images and accuracy , in fact all her tips are relevant and well worth visiting. Then go back over your tree and verify all your entries.
Lastly ,as for your name being Walden, I don't think so, If your father was brought up as Weeks, married as Weeks and had you registered as Weeks, then Weeks it is.


Colin Report 5 Dec 2009 09:41

A cryptic puzzle "little said sooner mended"


Colin Report 2 Dec 2009 00:54

There are a Joseph and Dora Walden on the same ship.
L's teachings suggest to err on the side of caution so there may be no connection at all.
There was a Joseph Harry W born Wellingbro' in Dec Q 1874 - 3b 159 and Dora W born same location in Dec 1905. see 3b 145 Possible (not Probable) father and daughter.No other Dora's recorded as being born to Waldens at that location. This info is merely incidental as it does not appear to be important at this time to fit into the jigsaw puzzle were close to finishing.


Colin Report 1 Dec 2009 23:37

Lindsey, Your message to me to curb my impetuousity shows up again. I really believed that Sally had the right information yet she was able to find what I now know to be the correct information.
Sally located a second entry which gave the date of travel ex london to fremantle on the 11th Nov 1910.
She (Sarah) is shown as married and she is travelling with her son Sidney.
The ship was from the Orient line named "Omrah" Unfortunately this doesn't fit any of the initials..
There are 3 numerical references on the info sheet which I dont understand . They are 8382 - 4419 - 534

If Walter has not previously departed and he was not on board this ship then the window of opportunity for him to travel to fremantle has to be in the following couple of weeks because Charles Walden is born in Perth on the 18th oct 1911


Colin Report 1 Dec 2009 14:39

Its truly amazing that after all this time the very first question on this thread has been answered in part. Sally has kindly confirmed that she has located Mrs Sarah Walden departing London 7th Jan 1910 destination Fremantle on the oriontes.
The time frame give or take a couple of weeks is what we thought it would be. Interestingly she is recorded as as Mrs but declares herself as single. At the same time she is classifed as a housewife. Thats curious.
Sally made no mention of the infant son Sidney b. late 1909 who is believed to have also travelled and died en-route to Fremantle.
No mention of Walter - still its a little more progress.
Thanks a millionfold sally.


Colin Report 29 Nov 2009 15:13

I hope I'm not getting paranoid about the money issue which seems to concern you, but it was the last thing on my mind when I made the comment about "being devastated". I was referring to all of the assumptions made by me and the logic and intuition used to make judgements about who fits where within the family tree. As I said earlier I didn't give walt the senior any thought and you could be right about him but I still think it must be walt the junior 1884.Its the judgenent aspect that worries me. It may be that your genealogical experience has taught you to be more reserved and cautious than I could ever be.This is a real strength of yours and you certainly taught me a valuable lesson about methodology when we looked at the Annie Cox children in wokingham.
I am sure we have different temperaments and I am merely pointing out that you completely misunderstood the reasoning behind my comment.
Well its good to get that off my chest. By the way a genealogist who could easily have been you once said "misers are no fun to live with but they sure make good ancestors".
Now to the younger Walter; Hooray, it seems to me you have found him. Once again I appreciate your sage advice about being careful with assumptions but my gut feel is you have got him.I'll follow that lead
Moving on to walt in prison in 1901. I cant find his record but his future bro in law one of the wilson clan who was in jail at the same time was done for breaking and entering and stealing an alarm clock. I suspect Walter who was years younger may have been the lookout or the one sent inside to open the door.
Finally "EW" was the grandmother not his mum.
Well, what a day, more progress as we get closer to the final chapter. Thanks everone.


WayneTracey Report 29 Nov 2009 13:55

Yeah it's the same account!!

Tracey x