Neil without "Girls" their is no son, nevertheless my article claims 6 sons........
Printable View
Well one of them is evidently wrong, Martin! I have re-read my source at least twice, and can only make nine kids out - but I am a bit tired...
I took some of my info from the Fox/Norris family tree, compiled by Mr, T. Ince from the family bible in 1844, so it must have been quite up to date. That gives nine children in all - three boys and three girls died in infancy:
Attachment 115042
Regards,
Neil
PS: I would amend your quote to "without girls there is no sun..."
Thats fine Neil i totally understand, im finding recently with so many publication that many entries about people or children or dates, are somewhat close but a lot of them are different like in this case. Just going with 2 sources and we allready have different information.
Yes, that's true.
In this case it makes no odds though, as the surviving children are correctly identified in both sources - the discrepancy only arises in the amount of children that died in infancy, which although sad was commonplace at the time and doesn't really concern the issue at hand.
Regards,
Neil
Thanks all for informations !!! :bow
Great information and collaboration guys. Keep up the great work, it is appreciated.
http://straightrazorpalace.com/razor...el-norris.html
Hello guys
sorry to dig up a old thread but i have a samuel norris just thought it would be intresting to show my restored razor. and thanks ffor some great info above
Attachment 182352
Could it be then that the mark "S: Norris" dates before aprox. 1787, when Samuel Norris operated on his own?
Most kindest regards
Maybe something interesting:
Attachment 182709Attachment 182710Attachment 182711
Could this be a *P John Fox BEFORE "Fox and Norris" ?