Mere Boy (or is he?) But Dies Like Man

As a new family history researcher or genealogist we often take certain records and bits of information as gospel. We very quickly discover that the spelling of names varies, ages can easily differ by several years, and the locations of events may be called by different places depending on the time.

Yet two sources are still commonly treated as if they must always be correct: grave markers and newspaper articles. In my post from 2013, "Zombie in the census?" I dispelled the notion that grave markers are always correct and that the dates chiselled on them need to be verified through other documents. However, what about newspaper articles? I'm not talking about death notices or obituaries¹ but articles written by journalists to highlight a newsworthy event that affected our ancestor.

Let's look into this article about the death of Private Walter J. Hayes from the November 9th, 1916 edition of The Ottawa Citizen:

"Mere Boy But Dies Like Man," The Ottawa Citizen, 9 Nov 1916, p. 10, col. 2; digital images, Newspapers.com (www.newspapers.com : accessed 19 Jul 2019).

The headline would definitely get a reader's attention, especially the part under the all capital letters, "Sixteen Year Old Walter Hayes Ready to Do Duty. Ottawans in Casualties." The article starts off with:

"Pte. Walter J. Hayes, sixteen years of age, youngest member of his battalion and one of the youngest members of the Canadian forces serving in the ranks overseas, has made the supreme sacrifice on the field of action, "somewhere in France."

That is quite the claim and would mean that Walter was born about 1900 and probably would have lied about his age when he joined the Canadian Expeditionary Force. Not unheard of but we really need to do our due diligence in our research to confirm this very important detail in the article.

For attestation papers from the First World War for those that served in the Canadian Expeditionary Force my go to site is the Library and Archives Canada page "Personnel Record of the First World War". On that site one cannot only see the attestation papers but also download a PDF copy of the surviving service file. Searching for Walter Hayes returns 8 entries but in the article they say his name is "Walter J. Hayes" and there is a Walter Joseph Hayes, regiment number 177799, listed in the search results. A quick check of the other "Walter Hayes" listed show that they either enlisted too late to be our Walter J. Hayes or they lived and enlisted in the wrong place. So seem that Walter Joseph Hayes is the one we want. It helps that the next of kin address on his attestation matches that of his mother, Mrs. Margaret Hayes of 391 Cooper Street, that was provided in the article. Only one "minor" issue...he stated in his attestation that he was born "Aug. 4th.,1896." when he enlisted in Ottawa on November 19th, 1915.

Library and Archives Canada, "Personnel Records of the First World War," database, Library and Archives Canada (www.bac-lac.gc.ca : accessed 29 Jun 2019), Attestation Paper; citing the service file for Walter Joseph Hayes, regimental number 177799, RG 150, Accession 1992-93/166, Box 4188 - 51.

That makes him 19 years and 3 months old when he enlisted. Definitely not the 16 years old when he died between the 21st and 22nd of October, 1916². But did he lie about his age to serve? Where else can we look? How about the census enumerations of Canada? If he was born in 1900 then in the 1901 census he would be recorded as being 0 or 1 years of age. Fortunately the article goes on to list the names of several siblings of Walter: Edward J., John P., and Miss Margaret P., along with his mother Margaret. This can help with our searching.

Using Ancestry.ca we find the family with the surname recorded as "Hays"³ living in the Wellington Ward census sub-district of Ottawa:

1901 census of Canada, Ontario, district 100, sub-district G-4, Ottawa, p. 12, dwelling 106, family 106, Household of John Hays; RG 31; digital images, Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., Ancestry.com (www.ancestry.com : accessed 29 Jun 2019); citing Library and Archive Canada microfilm T-6488.

There in that census it is recorded that he was born on August 5th, 1897 in Ontario. Hmmm...5th instead of the 4th and 1897 and not 1896. Well at least he isn't listed as being born in 1900. That means that he isn't 16 years old when he died or even enlisted. One thing to keep in mind that the birth date listed in the census isn't always right. It all depended on who answered the questions and if they remembered the details correctly. I've personally found that the birthday has been wrong more times than right in the 1901 census of Canada.

Can we find a birth registration or baptism record for Walter James Hayes to clear up the mystery of when he was born since we have two possible birth dates for him?

I couldn't find an Ontario birth registration record for him but I did find a baptism record for him in the records for St. Patrick Roman Catholic Church in Fallowfield:

Saint Patrick Roman Catholic Church (Fallowfield, Ontario, Canada), p. 61, B. 15,  baptism of Walter Joseph Hayes, 22 Aug 1897; FHL microfilm 1,302,152, item 5.

"On the twenty second day of August in the year of Our Lord one thousand eight hundred and ninety seven We the undersigned Parish Priest of this parish baptized Walter Joseph born on the 4th inst of the lawful marriage of John Hayes and Margaret Weathers of this parish. The godfather was James Hayes and the godmother was Ann Wallace who have declared that they cannot sign
   J A Sloan Pt"

With the baptism taking place on August 22nd, 1897, a few weeks after he was born on the "4th instant⁴" it means that it is highly likely that he was born in August 4th, 1897. A combination of the dates recorded in the census and his attestation papers.

With all that information now in our possession we now know that he was 18 years and 3 months old when he enlisted in the C.E.F. and 19 years and 2 months old when he died in the Great War. Did someone stretch the truth when writing the article or providing the "facts" to the journalist? We will never know.


This means that even in newspaper articles, like with any document which provides information about our ancestors, we just can't take the "facts" at face value. We need to dig deeper to see if we can confirm what has been recorded.

---

1. Which can have their own challenges.

2. Library and Archives Canada, "Personnel Records of the First World War," database, Library and Archives Canada (www.bac-lac.gc.ca : accessed 29 Jun 2019), Casualty Form - Active Service; citing the service file for Walter Joseph Hayes, regimental number 177799, RG 150, Accession 1992-93/166, Box 4188 - 51.

3. Remember what I said at the start that the spelling of names can vary?

4. See https://blog.genealogybank.com/understanding-terms-found-in-historical-newspapers.html for a great explanation of terms you may find in newspapers, and in our case a baptism, such as "instant" and "ultimo".

An Unexpected Hint Unveils...What?

How many of you have come across a set of record hints from Ancestry for someone in your tree and they just don't make any sense? This was the case for me with a second cousin twice removed by the name of William John Gunnee.

But first I need to set the stage and lay out what I thought I knew about him.

I originally came across him in the 1891 census of England living with his father Samuel I Gunnee, his mother Rosa, and sister Florence R in London.

1891 census of England, London, Civil Parish of St John Zachary, Cripplegate Ward, folio 77, page 5, William J Gunnee; digital images, Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., Ancestry.com (www.ancestry.com : accessed 4 Jul 2012); citing PRO RG 12/239.

From various other records I had learned that his father was Samuel Ingmire Gunnee (1850-1897), a carpenter, and his mother was Rosa Cleaver. It appears he was taken on by Robert James Snell according to the transcription from Findmypast in the "Thames Watermen & Lightermen 1688-2010" record set from their "Binding Records 1692-1949"¹. It was from those records that I learned that he was most likely born on 28 Jan 1882 in Hammersmith².

I also learned that on 8 May 1904 he married Maud Louisa Mansfield, the daughter of Harry Mansfield, a lighterman.

"London, England, Marriages and Banns, 1754-1921," database, Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., Ancestry.com (www.ancestry.com : accessed 4 Jul 2012), William John Gunnee and Maud Louisa Mansfield, married 8 May 1904; citing London Metropolitan Archives, Saint Michael And All Angels, Bromley, Register of marriages, P88/MIC, Item 024.

He had a son, Harold Shiel Gunnee, on 6 Jan 1906⁴. At that time William John Gunnee was no longer a lighterman but was a member of the Metropolitan Fire Brigade.

However, in the 1911 census he is no longer with the family and his wife, "Maude Louise Gunnee" is recorded as a widow and living in the household of Henry George Pocock. Unfortunate there are a number of corrections made in pencil to this page that are very hard to decipher, especially when it comes to the relationships to the head of the household.

1911 census of England, London, 8 Woollett Street, Poplar, Household of Henry George Pocock; digital images, Ancestry,com Operations, Inc., Ancestry.com (www.ancestry.com : accessed 4 Jul 2012); citing  RG 78 PN 60, RG 14 PN 1718, registration district (RD) 22, sub district (SD) 3, enumeration district (ED) 2, schedule number (SN) 66.

I had assumed that William John Gunnee had died between 1901 and 1911 but I couldn't find any records of him in the civil registration death index. So I left him in 2012 and continued on working on other family members and branches of my tree. That was until I recently started reviewing the 1939 Register of England and Wales. I was looking for his son Harold in that registration and figured I'd also see if anything had popped up on Ancestry for his father William John.

A hint for a "William J Gunnee" marrying Ethel M Millen in 1907 in New South Wales showed up in the list of possible hints on Ancestry. I really do try to avoid only using indexes since often, as in this case, there just isn't enough information to make an informed decision. Fortunately, with very little effort, I found the marriage registration in the "Sydney, Australia, Anglican Parish Registers, 1814-2011" collection on Ancestry.

What do I find but a William John Gunnee, a bachelor, born in London, England about 1882 working as fireman with the Castlereagh Fire Brigade, and his parents are Samuel Gunnee (deceased), a carpenter, and Rosa Cleaver. This really does look like this is the William John Gunnee that married Maud Louisa Mansfield. So it appears that he left his wife and son in England, moved to Australia, and remarried. I'd hazard a guess that the odds of two distinct William John Gunnees with the exact same parents and other identifying details are pretty darn slim!
 
As I carried on in my research into William John Gunnee I see that he appears to have settled down in New South Wales and had a family of at least five children, three of which survived to adulthood. He outlived his first Australian wife, Ethel May Millen (~1887-1938), and married the widow Caroline Edith (nee Jackson) Ireland in 1939⁵. He and his second (or is that third) wife, Caroline, sailed from Sydney in early 1953 and arrived in Tilbury, Essex, England on 13 Apr 1953 on board the Strathmore⁶. However, he never made it back to Australia. On 20 May 1953 he died while in England⁷.

From a family history point of view, this make for one "interesting" story to follow⁸. As we all should know, there is always more than one perspective on a story. With these events taking place over a century ago, most likely only the immediate family members might actually know what occurred.

The story isn't quite over yet. I'm still researching what happened to his first wife, Maud Louisa Mansfield. Maybe I'll have a follow up post about her.

This just goes to show that you need to follow up on each and every hint that Ancestry provides by viewing the record and not just the transcription or index. Sometimes those unexpected and unusual hints can make the story of your family even more interesting.

---

1. "Thames watermen and lightermen 1688-2010," database, Findmypast (www.findmypast.com : accessed 4 Jul 2012), William John Gunnee, bound 8 Mar 1898; citing Binding Records 1692-1949, Thames watermen and lightermen.

2. Yes, I have a to-do item to order his birth registration³ but there is only so much money in the budget for genealogy research.

3. FreeBMD, "England & Wales, FreeBMD Birth Index, 1837-1915," database, Ancestry.com (www.ancestry.com : accessed 4 Jul 2012), entry for William John Gunnee, volume 1a, page 245, Mar quarter 1882, Fulham district; citing the General Register Office's England and Wales Civil Registration Indexes.

4. England and Wales, birth certificate for Harold Shiel Gunnee, born 6 Jan 1906; citing 1c/375/201, Mar quarter 1906, Stepney registration district, Shadwell and Ratchiff sub-district; General Register Office, Southport.

5. St. John (Rockdale, New South Wales, Australia), Sydney, Australia, Anglican Parish Registers, 1814-2011, "Rockdale St John 1938-1942,"  marriage of William John Gunnee and Caroline Edith Ireland (nee Jackson), 12 Oct 1939; digital images, Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., Ancestry.com (www.ancestry.com : accessed 6 Jul 2019).

6. Ancestry.com, "UK Incoming Passenger Lists, 1878-1960," database, Ancestry.com (www.ancestry.com : accessed 6 Jul 2019), entry for William Gunnee, arriving Tilbury, 13 Apr 1953; citing The National Archives of the UK; Kew, Surrey, England; Board of Trade: Commercial and Statistical Department and successors: Inwards Passenger Lists; Class: BT26; Piece: 1297; Original data: Board of Trade: Commercial and Statistical Department and successors: Inwards Passenger Lists. Kew, Surrey, England: The National Archives of the UK (TNA). Series BT26, 1,472 pieces.

7. "Death notice for William John Gunnee," The Sydney Morning Herald, 25 May 1953, p. 14, col. 2; digital images, Trove (trove.nla.gov.au : accessed 7 Jul 2019).

8. Come on, who among you don't like to have a black sheep or two in the family to keep things interesting?

Assumptions and Theories

Often in our own genealogy and family history research we often don't have much to go on once we get back to the time when only church records are typically available for hint and clues as to our family connections. Such is the case for the parents of my 4th great-grandmother Sarah Howell.

Sarah Fraser and Eight of Her Children

As always you need to start with what you know. In terms of documentation for Sarah I've been able to locate her and her family in a number of records in Canada, United States of America, and England but only starting from the time she was married to Alexander Fraser:

• Transcription of baptism records for St. Andrew's Presbyterian Church, Perth, Lanark County, Ontario where her surname is transcribed as "Nowell"
• 1852 census of Canada West in Drummond Township, Lanark County
• 1861 census of Canada West in Drummond Township, Lanark County
• 1871 census of Canada in Drummond Township, Lanark County, Ontario
• Death notice in the Perth Courier (Perth, Lanark County, Ontario)
• Grave marker in the Old Burying Ground, Perth, Lanark County, Ontario
• Ontario registration of death for her daughter Mary McIntosh where her mother is recorded as "Sarah Howell" born in London, England
• Minnesota certificate of death for her daughter Elizabeth McVeety where her mother is recorded as "Sarah Howell" born in England.

What I could piece together or confirm is from those records is:

• Her name is Sarah Howell
• She was born about 1795 in England, possibly in or near London
• She was married to Alexander Fraser, late corporal in the 49th Regiment of Foot, on August 17, 1815 in the parish of St. Pancras, Middlesex, England.

I also had another resource I used as a source of clues and that is the book "Fraser · A Short History of The Fraser Clan and our own Branch of Frasers in Canada and The United States" compiled by L. A. Milne (brown cover). As with any family history compilation there are omissions and errors but they make for a good starting place. In that book it is said that Alexander met his future wife while recruiting for the 49th regiment of Foot in Barnet. In the records of the 49th Regiment of Foot I have found a Corporal Alexander Fraser recruiting in Barnet in 1815 so that tale just might be true. Can you imagine the tall young Alexander in his best red scarlet coat and white breeches, speaking with a Highland accent as he went about Barnet recruiting young, unsuspecting men to serve in the British Army?

Overall, not a bad collection of records but what about her parents?

This is where the assumptions, and theories come into play.

Assuming that Sarah was indeed born in Barnet, also known as Chipping Barnet, then a search of the baptism records might point me in the right direction. Of course, I am assuming that the baptism of my Sarah Howell has been transcribed or even recorded.

On Ancestry in the "England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975" collection a search for Sarah Howell, born or baptized in 1795 ± 2 years, in Barnet, Hertfordshire, England (or nearby counties) returns 102 people. However the first name in the list is a Sarah Howell baptized on December 11, 1796 in Barnet with parents listed as William and Lydia.

Ancestry.com. England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2014.

The known children of Alexander and Sarah are: Ann, Lydia, Alexander, Sarah, Mary, Simon, Ellen, Esther, John, Elizabeth, Rebecca, Thomas, and Jane. Since Alexander was Scottish it might be assumed that the traditional Scottish naming pattern was used in his family:

The traditional patterns used when naming boys were as follows:

• The first son would be named after the father's father (variation is after the mother's father)
• The second after the mother's father (variation is the father's father)
• The third son would be named after the father
• The fourth son would be named after the father's oldest brother (variation is after the father's paternal grandfather)
• The fifth son would be named after the mother's oldest brother (variation is after the mother's paternal grandfather)

and for girls:

• First daughter named after the mother's mother (variation is after the father's mother)
• Second daughter named after the father's mother
• Third daughter named after the mother
• Fourth daughter named after the mother's oldest sister (variation is after the mother's maternal grandmother)
• Fifth daughter named after the father's oldest sister (variation is after the father's maternal grandmother)

I don't see any William listed in the children but I do see a Lydia. Might this be the right person? Maybe viewing the digitized microfilm for the Parish Registers for Barnet available from the local Family History Centre can tell us more.

Parish Church of Barnet (Barnet, Hertfordshire, England), "Baptisms and burials, 1724-1812," baptism of Sarah Howell, 11 Dec 1796; FHL microfilm 991,409.

Unfortunately there isn't any more information in the record book than what was transcribed for the index. But a search for other possible children of William and Lydia baptized in Barnet result in finding Mary (19 Jul 1801), George (1 Apr 1805), and James (29 Mar 1807). I also come across a Lydia Howel baptized 11 Jan 1795 in Shenley, Hertfordshire which is fairly near Barnet. Unfortunately their baptism records don't shed any additional light on the issue either.

For now, I'm going with the theory that this is my Sarah Howell. What about the maiden surname of her mother? For many of us working on our Canadian, American, Irish, and United Kingdom family lines the mother's maiden surname is one of our challenges.

Yet another assumption has to be made and that is William Howell and Lydia were married in or near the county of Hertfordshire. Of course they don't have to be married in that region but it does set a reasonable scope to search at this time. I initially looked through the digitized microfilm of the parish of Barnet for about 10 years before Sarah's baptism and also checked the parish of Shenley for any Lydia getting married but with no positive results. Since I found the baptism of Sarah on Ancestry I decided to start my search for her parents' marriage there. I asked Ancestry to find any marriages for a William Howell to a Lydia in 1793 ± 5 years in Hertfordshire and adjacent counties in England. Why 1793 ± 5 years? This covers the years of their possible daughter Lydia and also Sarah's baptism. I'm assuming that the record I'm looking for has been indexed, and yes this is a big assumption.

What appeared surprised me. An entry for William Howell and Liddy Blackgrove married on 23 Jun 1793 in the Parish of St. Pancras. The same church that my Sarah Howell married her husband Alexander Fraser! I also checked on Findmypast and it looks like it points to the same entry on FamilySearch.

Ancestry.com. England, Select Marriages, 1538–1973 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2014.

And here is the entry for the parish register of St. Pancras, London from the "Parish registers of St. Pancras Old Church, 1660-1916" collection on FamilySearch.org.

St. Pancras Old Church (London, England), "The Register of Marriages 1787-1793," marriage of William Howell and Liddy Blackgrove, 23 Jun 1793; FHL microfilm 598,178. 

Have I proven that William Howell and Lydia "Liddy" Blackgrove are my 5th great-grandparents? No, not really but until I come across additional records to point me in a different direction I'm going to stay with this working theory.

Genealogy SMART

Are you genealogy SMART?

No, I'm not talking about if you are a beginner or have taken courses on genealogy and family history. I'm talking about having S.M.A.R.T. goals, objectives, and tasks when it comes to your research.

What is this S.M.A.R.T. thing I'm talking about? It first came about in the November 1981 issue of Management Review where George T. Doran wrote a paper called "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". I know we aren't dealing with corporate management when we are doing our own genealogy research but we are often working with goals, objectives, and tasks to help keep us focused.

However, I'm not using Mr. Doran's original definition for S.M.A.R.T. but a variation I was given when I was taking one of my time and project management courses.

How does this apply to our genealogy and family history research? One of the many challenges new genealogy researchers face is that they get so overwhelmed and end up bounce around between people in their tree. Setting goals, objectives and tasks can help a researcher, new or experienced, to stay focused. Yet what do I mean by those terms above?

Specific	Is the goal, objective, or task I've set out to do answer a specific question?
Measurable	Is there a point I can say I’ve answered the question?
Achievable	Do I have the knowledge (or can I gain the knowledge) and/or access to the records to answer the question?
Relevant	Does it matter to me?
Timely	Can I do it in my lifetime?

For example, here's a task I've recently set out for myself in my own research:

"Over the next two months I want to document those in my master tree that could have appeared in the 1939 Register of England and Wales."

Does this look like a S.M.A.R.T. task? Let's look at it:

Specific	I think so since I specified exactly what I want to do.
Measurable	I can create a spreadsheet out of a list from my Legacy Family Tree software of those people in my tree that may have been alive on September 29, 1939 and may have resided in England and Wales at the time. In addition to recording the details in my database and I can also record in the spreadsheet if I have found the person in the register or not.
Achievable	The 1939 Register is available on Ancestry and Findmypast and I have accounts on both sites. This means that the information should be accessible to me and I do have the knowledge on how to search for records on those sites.
Relevant	This will fill in gaps in my research and may provide me with additional people for my tree that might connect me with cousins I didn't know I had.
Timely	I believe I can achieve this task within the time frame I've specified.

Other S.M.A.R.T. goals, objectives, and tasks might include:

• finding the first non-First Nations person in your family that came to the Americas
• submitting an application to establish that you are descended from an United Empire Loyalist, or a Mayflower passenger, or someone that contribute to or fought in the United States War of Independence
• confirming or refuting a specific family tale you heard as a child
• identifying your biological parents if you are an adoptee

By using S.M.A.R.T. we can hopefully set ourselves some goals, objectives, and tasks to help keep us from constantly following Alice's White Rabbit down the proverbial hole. Being S.M.A.R.T. helps keep us focused and can guide us in our research journey.

Researching in the 1939 Register of England and Wales

The most recent task I set for myself in researching my own family tree was to look for people in my tree that might have been recorded in the 1939 Register of England and Wales.

You might be asking, just what is this 1939 Register?

From The National Archives research guide they state:

"The 1939 Register provides a snapshot of the civilian population of England and Wales just after the outbreak of the Second World War.

As the 1931 census for England and Wales was destroyed by fire during the Second World War and no census was taken in 1941, the Register provides the most complete survey of the population of England and Wales between 1921 and 1951, making it an invaluable resource for family, social and local historians."

The 1939 Register was taken on September 29, 1939. It is important to note that it only recorded civilians on that date. Anyone in the military were not recorded. It also only covered England and Wales and not the Channel Islands, Isle of Man, Scotland, or Northern Ireland. Additionally, people that are born less than 100 years ago and whose deaths have not been recorded in the register will have the dreaded black line "This record is officially closed."

So where can I find the 1939 Register online?

If you have a subscription to the UK sites of Ancestry or Findmypast or a subscription that has access to the UK records on those sites then you have the records at your finger tips. You might have already been given hints that the records exist for people in your online trees on both of those sites.

So what is great about this registration? Basic details of a person have been recorded such as name, gender, date of birth (not just the year but the full date!), marital status, occupation, and their address. However, it is important to note that it does not state the relationship to the first person recorded for the household. This means that you need to be very careful about your assumptions as to spouses, parents or children.

Sometimes you will come across an entry for a woman where her surname has been crossed out and another name written above:

1939 Register, Durham, England, RG 101, piece 2742E, image 015, line 21, 17 Sunnybrow Avenue, Billingham, Durham, Margaret G Mitchell (Armstrong).

This might be a clue that she married. There might even be what looks to be a date in the first column of the date of the marriage. That is when you what to take pop over to the FreeBMD site to look for a marriage recorded in that quarter or the following quarter.

FreeBMD.org.uk search results for marriage of Margaret Armstrong to a "Mitchell" between Mar 1946 and Mar 1947 quarters

Could Margaret Armstrong's future husband be John Mitchell and were they married on July 29, 1946? In order to confirm this assumption the next step would be to order the marriage registration document from the General Register Office of England and Wales for a cost of £11 and wait a few weeks for it to be delivered via postal mail.

About that black line I mentioned when you find "This record is officially closed." That too can provide you with clues. Could it be that under the black line is a name of a child? Well if you found the record on Ancestry then you might want to check for the same page on Findmypast. I've personally found that Findmypast is more current when it comes for closed records opening up. However, if it is also closed on Findmypast then this is where piecing together several searches can provide you with possible answers.

If you don't already have the maiden surname of the mother then you will need to see if you can identify it via a similar search on FreeBMD that I did for Margaret Armstrong above. After that you can make use of the extra field that was added to the GRO birth index from September 1911 onward, that of the mother's maiden surname.

1939 Register, Glamorganshire, Wales, RG 101, piece 7260E, image 002, line 6, 118 Caerphilly Road, Cardiff, Glamorganshire, Harry Warrener.

For example, here is the household of Harry Warrener (my 1st cousin, twice removed), a master butcher, residing in Cardiff, Wales. Residing in the same residence are:

• Marcia Warrener: most likely his wife since I know he married a Marcia Andrew from other records
• Florence Andrew: quite possibly Marcia's mother
• Anne Warrener: most likely his daughter since I already have her in a baptism document. With her surname crossed out and Hanks written above it would seem that she married a "Hanks".
• Unknown 1
• Unknown 2

The question is, could these two lines that are still sealed be additional children of Harry and Marcia? Or could they be lodgers?

For that we can use any of the sites that have a copy of the GRO birth index. In this case, I'm using FreeBMD. Here is the screen shot of the search I used. I'm not even restricting the location where the birth was registered or the date range.

Screen capture of FreeBMD.org.uk birth search for children of Warrener-Andrew

As you can see only three children were returned from that query.

Screen capture of FreeBMD.org.uk birth search results for the children of Warrener-Andrew

I already know about Anne Warrener but it appears that Harry Warrener and Marcia Andrew might have had two other children. And there are two lines that haven't been revealed in the 1939 Register. Could that be them? The next steps for me, at least, is to create a to do item for both Mary and Harry A. to order their civil birth registrations from the General Register Office of England and Wales. Then I will know if they are the children of Harry and Marcia. Even the fact that the line for Anne is viewable indicates that she has died. Is there a death registration for Anne Hanks available through the GRO that matches what I know about her? I might even explore possible marriages and look for online obituaries or death notices that can shed more light on this family.

As you can see there is quite a bit of information and clues held within the 1939 Register of England and Wales. Not all of it is visible but with a bit of research you can look forward to adding even more people to your family tree.