You are here: Desborough > Surnames > Palmer > Charles Palmer (1868 - )

Desborough People
Charles Palmer

 

Notes about the page layout and content are at the end. Change the display type here:

Display


   17644 1.0 Charles Palmermale
Charles and his brother Dixon married sisters
17637 Father: William Wyles Palmer   b. about 1844 at Kings Cliffe, Northamptonshire
17639 Mother: Emma Green   b. about 1844 at Kings Cliffe, Northamptonshire
Birth: about 1868, at Kings Cliffe, NorthamptonshireCensus

Pedigree
   17642
Married: Elizabeth Lyon  1886BMD
b. about 1864, at Crowland, Lincolnshire  d. 20 May 1899, at Desborough

   176472.1 Charles Palmermale
Birth: about 1886, at Crowland, LincolnshireCensus

   176482.2 Harry Palmermale
Birth: about 1890, at Crowland, LincolnshireCensus

   176462.3 Dixon Palmermale
Birth: about 1895BMD
Death: 20 May 1899, at Desborough, age: 5y. Emp Records

Additional Information: Inquest

Additional information: Fatal accident

 


Notes

The numbers at the right of the page are unique reference numbers.

The source follows each piece of information. If the source is underlined a full citation will be shown when you hover over it. Click on any link to switch to that person's details page.

Estimated dates of birth (treat with caution - they could be decades out!)
:- where there is a marriage or children recorded, the date is estimated at 16-18 years before the earliest date;
:- where there is only a burial known, if the person or their spouse is described as "old", the birth is estimated at 50 years earlier; if they are described as "very old", the birth is estimated at 60 years earlier; if neither, the birth is estimated at 18 years earlier.

Estimated dates of death are given as a visual aid to point up whether or not they survived their spouse.

Before 1752 the calendar year started on 25th March; dates where the year appears as, eg: "1650/51" show the year as it would have been given at the time (in this example 1650), and the year by the modern calendar (1651). Jan-Mar dates before 1752 which don't show this "double-dating" are from secondary sources which haven't made clear which dating system has been used.


Source Codes

top of page