Our Database has ALL McLea/MacLea/MacOnlea/Livingston(e) until Dec 1854

[Kyle2 MacLea]

marriages livingston*

[D.W.Livingston]

Livingston* marriage

[D.W.Livingston]

Completed!!

[D.W.Livingston]

Looking at the SR Births from 1855 - 1906 I don't like the lack of information it gives. I did the M'Lea/McLea/MacLea/MacOnlea (haven't done McLay yet) the only information it gives is: Year (no real dates) | Surname | Forename | Sex | District | City/County/MR | GROS Data There is no birth dates and no listing for the parents names. So it is good for statistics (ie. There was no listing for McLea in ARGYLL from 1855 through 1906 and we had 10 Mclea's born in Rothesay/Bute between 1859 and 1892, But after 1886 most (not all) where listed born in Glasgow City/Lanark.) but bad for finding specific information. I will still work through it but might take a break from todays findings and compile it all. David

[Kyle2 MacLea]

Let's revisit after we compile pre-1855, I say.

[Kyle2 MacLea]

It's ironic that the INDEX of the SR records is not as good, because in general the RECORDS THEMSELVES are so much better!

[Andrew Lancaster4]

Maybe one approach you could consider depending upon your aims, is to switch over to using census information for 1851 to 1901. These are indexed with ages etc. Also several are now available on ancestry.com for no pay-per-view to normal subscribers to that service. Regards Andrew