The Guild 2026 Conference: ‘Navigating the Future’

 I returned home on Monday, after another, very enjoyable, weekend at the annual conference of the Guild of One-Name Studies, this year entitled, “Navigating the Future”. As usual, the combination of quality talks and good company has left me feeling enthusiastic about the PARRY study, and the potential for future progress.

There wasn’t a single talk that didn’t leave me with ‘something’ to think about.

The weekend started well, when I actually managed to set off on time, and it was a good journey to Portsmouth, despite a slight detour, which I assume the sat nav added just to avoid some traffic, since I ended up further down the same road! 

I arrived just in time for the first session on Friday afternoon, about the history of Portsmouth. Having recently written about the PARRYs who fought in the Battle of Trafalgar, I’d learnt a bit about the navy, but Brian’s talk covered wider issues, resources, and events I either didn’t know, or had forgotten about, such as the fact that, in 1667, the Dutch fleet had managed to sail all the way to Chatham, where they either burnt, or captured, some English warships,¹ or that there was a “Spanish Armada” in 1779.²

The second session, about some of the “hidden after-effects of the Great War” left me wondering about my mother’s recollections of family “sing-a-alongs”.  I gather these had invariable ended with a song involving “more beer”.  

It seems slightly ironic that, although this song wasn’t published until 1948, it was based on an old German melody, published in 1898.³ My grandfather and his two brothers all fought in the first World War, and I have since heard, from a second cousin, that at least one of the family had problems with alcohol. Maybe all three did, although, since my grandfather died when I was eight, and we didn’t see them very often, due to our own service life, I have no direct experience of that. 

I found the third session, about “envisioning the hidden history of the Portsmouth Suffragist movement”, and how the “Re-presenting the People” project is communicating that history, fascinating. It wasn’t just the research and historical details. (I imagine I wasn’t the only one who had not been aware of the “Pilgrims March” from Portsmouth to London in 1913, that people deliberately hid from the census takers in 1911, as opposed to just spoiling their papers, or who hadn’t appreciated the difference between the Suffragists and the Suffragettes.) But it was also the way in which the story is being communicated, through the recreation of some of the banners, and the use of animation.⁴

I was also reminded that, throughout history, there have been women who used their creative ‘domestic’ skills, such as sewing, in subversive ways!

I decided not to join in with the quiz that followed Friday night’s buffet dinner and, instead, spent a pleasant evening chatting to other Guild members and, hopefully, encouraging at least one of them to take another look at their DNA results.

Saturday dawned bright and sunny – so bright, it was a bit of a shock when I opened the curtains! 

I admire those who got up and went for a run, or even just a stroll to obtain a newspaper from the nearby supermarket. Late nights at conference mean I was just glad to be organised enough for the official opening of the Conference, at 9am, by the President of the Guild, Howard Benbrook.  

This was followed by Marie Byatt’s talk entitled “Starting a One-name Study Now.” I was looking forward to this – Marie had posted recently, in one of the Guild groups, about collecting information towards a large one-name study, and so I was interested to learn about her methods. The talk did not disappoint and, as a result, later in the day, I went to a demonstration of some of the Excel tools that had been designed to help her.  

Marie’s talk was followed, very appropriately, by Paul Carter’s on “Making your Research Manageable: practical ways to structure a One-name Study” – an essential topic, but particularly for those dealing with larger studies. Although Paul is the creator of the Name & Place software,⁵ that wasn’t the focus of his presentation, which dealt more with the structure and principles underlying how we deal with records. 

Paul emphasised the difference between the data we collect, and the interpretations we derive from it. I particularly liked his cautions regarding entering information into family trees, and the point that, although a gedcom file has structure, it is “structured around conclusions.” As I have said previously, if you’re not careful, an entirely false ‘life story’ can be created through incorrectly linking records and, once the information appears in a pedigree, people rarely consider the reliability of the connections that have been made between the facts, in order to construct that tree. 

I also liked Paul’s comment about Artificial Intelligence (AI) – that it is “useful as a clerk, but dangerous as a judge.” It is our job to make the interpretative decisions; we shouldn’t expect AI to do that. 

As someone who has not yet tried many of the AI tools, these are the type of ‘snippets’ I am collecting, to bear in mind once I do start. The six steps in Paul’s “structured data workflow” were also helpful, in that they reminded me about slowing down and really looking at a document, before drawing any conclusions from it, and about considering not just everything that is recorded on the document, but also what is missing. Another comment of his, that every record contains five things – people, places, events, facts, and sources – will be useful in this regard, as will his downloads about structuring data.

The final talk of the morning was a demonstration of using AI for genealogical research, but this was the session I missed, since it coincided with the demonstration of the macros written to help Marie with her research. I opted to attend that instead of the main talk, since the main talks were being recorded and I’d be able to catch up later with any I missed. (As usual, thanks to Bob Cumberbatch, who dealt with the audio-visual equipment and the recordings, which are already available to Guild members on the website.)

The afternoon sessions began with a parade of vintage Guild bags, of which I have a few: 

This was followed by a talk by Dr Nick Barratt about sources for research into the medieval and early modern periods. Perhaps unsurprisingly, considering that I have spent much of the last eight years researching certain aspects of the Coventry Charterhouse, particularly through the 1500s, there wasn’t much in this that was ‘new’ to me – which was reassuring. 

Unfortunately, there wasn’t time afterwards, during the questions, for me to warn people about my experience of trying to purchase a second-hand copy of one of Dr Barratt’s recommended books, Eileen Gooder’s “Latin for Local History”. 

My first two attempts to purchase this through eBay resulted in me being sent the wrong book (“A Lincolnshire Village. The parish of Corby Glen in its historical context.”)  This was probably due to that book having an advert for Gooder’s work on the back, and the wrong ISBN being picked up by the automated catalogue creation used by larger resellers. I eventually obtained a copy of the right book through an independent bookseller, but I also contacted them first, to check it was going to be the correct one.

“Who was Ann Elizabeth Epitaux?”, a talk about how a Victorian sampler inspired the Woking Area u3a group to research the life story of the girl who embroidered it, came next. The research resulted in an interesting story, showing the contrasting lives of members of the family.

The final session of the day was a panel discussion, with three of the weekend’s speakers, Janet Few, Darris Williams, and Paul Carter, responding to questions put by members. AI obviously featured highly, and again, it was reassuring to find I’m not ‘adrift’ in my own thinking – in fact, a couple of times, I wrote an “added thought” down, only to have the same thing promptly said by one of the panel! 

It was a good discussion, with some very notable points, a key one for me being my personal responsibility with regard to the issues raised, such as having an AI policy, and the need to educate others regarding ‘proper’ research.

I also noted a comment by Janet regarding potential risks with using the “Know Your Customer” facial recognition verification, which is now being rolled out by many financial organisations, especially for those people who feature in numerous video presentations that are easily available online.

Saturday evening’s banquet was followed by an interesting talk about the Mary Rose and, of course, more opportunity to catch up with other Guild members (and another late night, although not as late for me as for some!)

Sunday’s sessions kicked off with Janet Few’s talk about “Preserving the Past for the Future.” Anyone who has read a particular post on one of my other blogs will already know that Janet is someone who inspires me⁶, and this talk was no different – I wrote in my notes, “Brilliant talk, so many ‘reminders’ of things that can be included when we write the stories of our ancestors.” Janet included a reminder to think about what is missing from the family archive, as well. I also noted my gratitude to my mother, when Janet was talking about timelines – thanks to my mother’s habit of writing addresses, and exact dates, in her WRAF bible, we are one service family who knows exactly when we moved where!

Next came a talk by Darris Williams, about AI – for me, very timely, and with a balance between the problems and the possibilities. I’ve highlighted several points in my notes, either to act on in the coming months, or to remember, once I start specifically trying to use any of the AI tools.

Another ‘story’, rather than ‘techniques’, talk next, with Howard Benbrook presenting research about the Hampshire Swing Riots. I was interested to hear of the parallels between these and other periods of discontent, and unrest, in the years following wars, or the development of new technology. There was clearly a lot going on during the 1830s, and it is recent enough that most of us will probably have been able to trace ancestors who were living at the time, and who may have been affected in some way. 

So that’s something to bear in mind, when researching and writing their stories.

The final two talks both concerned DNA, with Donna Rutherford presenting on “Future Proofing Your DNA Research” and Dr Sophia Kay, on “Analysing Genetic Networks with Gephi.”  Having taken an active interest in DNA since about 2007, as well as having attended Donna’s talks at the Guild seminar last October, not a lot of Donna's talk was new to me, although there were a couple of apps mentioned that I still need to check out. 

But it was the last talk that really made my day – I have written elsewhere about my initial forays into using networks to explore my DNA matches.⁷ But progress had ground to a halt, partly because the number of matches increased too much for me to deal with, given my limited understanding of the program I’d started with, but also, when I tried an alternative, that only seemed to work the first time I used it and I never found time to work out what had gone wrong. 

So, although I have wanted to do more with networking programs, they’ve always seemed a bit too complicated for me to even make a start. 

However, Dr Kay’s introduction to Gephi, and her practical demonstration, have made me think it will be worth trying again.

Following this final talk, the Conference was closed by Howard and, after a cup of tea (and a few more snacks), we all made our various ways home. 

Or, in my case, a short distance to visit a relative in nearby Southampton, where I enjoyed an evening walk.

So, to sum up “my” conference with a few highlights: I was reminded several times of how the Guild’s greatest resource really is the other members - there is such a variety of talents, and a willingness to share their skills and knowledge, that we all then benefit from them. I found many of the talks were “just what I need”, at this moment. In addition, on one occasion, I found myself sitting at the same table as the member who conducts the one-name study into another of my surnames - and I also met one of my DNA matches, who is now a Guild member!

We had corresponded about six years ago, when they first appeared on my match list. So it was a lovely surprise to suddenly spot their name on a badge at the Conference. We will, no doubt, be sharing further information now, since I imagine we have both discovered more about our shared ancestors.

That is worth some celebratory fireworks!

Notes and Sources

1. The Dutch fleet at Chatham in 1667: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raid_on_the_Medway

2. The "Spanish Armada” in 1779: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armada_of_1779

3. The song "More Beer" based on an earlier German melody: https://secondhandsongs.com/work/210978/all 

4. The Re-presenting the People Project: 
Webpage: https://new.express.adobe.com/webpage/69kFaeNMf4BSs 
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/representingthepeople/ 

5. Name and Place software: https://www.nameandplace.com/

6. My blog post about some people who inspire me: https://talentsfromtherestoflife.blogspot.com/2025/02/inspiration-from-others.html 

7. My blog posts about simple networks: 
2017: https://notjusttheparrys.blogspot.com/2017/08/ancestry-shared-matches-and-new.html

2020: https://notjusttheparrys.blogspot.com/2020/01/genetic-networks-simple-ones.html

Howard Lewis PARRY - one of the PARRYs at the Battle of Trafalgar

 Howard Lewis PARRY is listed in both the "Battle Of Trafalgar Prize Book" (as "Howd L") and in the "British Royal Navy, Battle Of Trafalgar 1805" databases on FindMyPast (FMP) but, as I mentioned in my post about the PARRYs at the Battle of Trafalgar, I decided to write a separate post about him, since I have been able to find a reasonable quantity of additional information.   Fortunately, because "Howard" isn't a very common PARRY first name, and he also has a second forename, it is relatively easy to identify many of the entries for him in the records (although care is needed for any entries just identified by rank - there were several PARRYs who were Lieutenants in the navy around the same time as Howard.)

An initial puzzle - I'm often intrigued by 'anomalies' on the genealogical websites.  There are currently five family trees on Ancestry showing Howard, four of which are 'public'. In the public trees, the index page shows Howard's birth as "1792 Finsbury, Middlesex, England" in all four public trees - whereas, when you click through to the profiles, they show the birth details as "abt 1792 • Finsbury, Kent, England"

So why does the site recognise the correct county (Kent) on the profiles, but not in the index entries?  

A puzzle that I am not going to sidetrack to investigate, but am just highlighting, because issues like this could be misleading, and potentially result in researchers ignoring family trees that might prove helpful to them.

On with Howard's story - According to the TNA "Trafalgar Ancestors" project¹, at the time of the battle, Howard was aged 14, and serving as a boy on HMS Tonnant.  His birthplace is recorded as "Chatham, in Kent."

Since I was initially using FMP, it was only after I'd collected the results from there, that I then searched on Ancestry, where I found him listed in the "British Naval Biographical Dictionary, 1849".  This gives a good summary of his naval career, so I've transcribed the entry:

PARRY, (COMMANDER, 1832. F-P., 15: H-P., 29.)REF

Howard Lewis Parry entered the Navy, 23 Aug. 1803, on board the NIOBE 40, Capt. Matthew Henry Scott, stationed in the Channel. He removed, in Dec. 1804, to the HIBERNIA 110; and he next, from Feb. 1805 until March 1806, served on the Home and Mediterranean stations in the TONNANT 80, Capt. Chas. Tyler. In Nov. 1809 he became Midshipman of the DOLPHIN 44, armee-en-flute, Capts. Christopher Watson and Alex. Milner, with whom he served until transferred, in Feb. 1811, to the GRASSHOPPER 18, Capt. Henry Fanshawe. In the following Dec. he was on board the latter vessel when, in order to avoid sharing the fate of the unfortunate HERO, she was under the necessity of surrendering to the Dutch fleet in the Texel.  He was in consequence taken prisoner and detained in captivity until the peace of 1814. He then successively joined the AMPHION 32, Capt. Jas. Pattison Stewart, and PANDORA 16, Capts. Jas. Kearny White, Sam. Malbon, Wm. Popham, and Hon. Fred. Noel; and in those vessels we find him employed on the North American, West India, and Home stations, until presented, in Oct. 1815, with a commission bearing date 10 of the preceding March. His next appointments were - 10 Sept. 1825, to the RAMILLES 74, Coast Blockade ship, Capts. Wm. M'Culloch and Hugh Pigot - and, 22 July, 1831, to the Coast Guard. "For gallant conduct and severe wounds" received in the latter service he was advanced to his present rank 10 Feb. 1832. He has since been on half-pay.

In consideration of his wounds Commander Parry was awarded, 19 April 1833, a pension of 91l. 5s. per annum. He is the senior Commander on the list of 1832. AGENTS- Hallett and Robinson

The reference to the "Tonnant" helps to confirm that this is the same man as is in the Trafalgar records. 

Starting at the beginning - Howard's birth
The TNA site gave Chatham, in Kent, as Howard's birthplace, but, since he appears in the 1851 and 1861 censuses, a potentially more precise location is listed in them - "Finsbury, Kent", in the 1851 census, and "Frindsbury, Kent" in the 1861.²

A quick check of the Kent parishes on Genuki confirms that "Frindsbury" is a parish in that county, on the other side of the River Medway from Chatham, the site of the Royal Dockyard.³

Entries on FindMyPast confirm that Howard Lewis PARRY was baptised on the 18th March 1792, in Frindsbury, All Saints Church.  His parents were another Howard, and Ann. Although there are no images for this on the FMP site, there is a link to the parish records on the Medway City Ark site, from which it appears Howard was born on the 22nd February.⁴

When Howard joined the navy, in 1803, he would have been aged just eleven - which I gather was reasonably typical for the period.⁵

By the time of the battle of Trafalgar, Howard was on his third ship, the Tonnant, which is one of those listed in the Trafalgar prize books. So we know that he received £1 17s 6d from the prize money on the 25 June 1807.  He also received £4 12s 6d as his share of the Parliamentary Grant - although FMP have the date for the Grant money as 5 Sep 1807, the image shows 8 September 1806, and online sources do indicate that the Grant was awarded first, in September 1806, whereas the Prize money was announced in March 1807.

As mentioned in the biography, the ship Howard was on in 1811 was forced to surrender and there are two entries for him in the "Register of British POWs Prisons L-V, France, 1787-1820" on FMP, one being a French list, the other a British list.  Between these, we learn that Howard was then an "aspirant" (midshipman), his birthplace was given as Upnor, Kent, which is a village in the parish of Frindsbury⁶, he was captured on the 24th December 1811, and arrived at the Verdun depot on 7th February 1812. The list supplied by the French covered prisoners arriving at Verdun between 1st January 1812 - 31st March inclusive, so I imagine that his family would not have had long to wait for news of his incarceration.

The next records Howard appears in are the "British Royal Navy Allotment Declarations 1795-1852" on FMP.  There are two entries, the first transcribed with the date as 1811-1812, the second as 1814, but the entries relate to the same image - in which Howard, as a midshipman on the Amphion, allots part of his wages to his mother, Ann, from the 1st August 1814.  This is shown as ceasing when he transfers to the Pandora, on the 13th November 1814 - but the book only covers ships with names between A-G, so it is possible the payments continued, but were listed somewhere else.

 

His commission, as a Lieutenant, on the 10th March 1815, is shown in "The Commissioned Sea Officers Of The Royal Navy 1660-1815 Volume 3" on Ancestry.

On the 19th April 1820, Howard married Elizabeth WILLIAMS, in Stoke Damerel, Devon, by licence. 

At least five children followed:

Howard Lewis PARRY, born on the 19th May 1821, baptised in Stoke Damerel, on the 26th March 1822

Elizabeth Ellen PARRY, born on the 12th July 1823, baptised in Stoke Damerel, on the 19th August 1823.

[Note - I haven't found a death for this Elizabeth Ellen. However, there are two other baptisms for an Elizabeth Ellen, daughter of Howard Lewis and Elizabeth, one on the 21st May 1829, in Lydd, Kent, the other in Folkestone, Kent, on the 22nd May 1833, the same day that her sister, Evelina Ann, was baptised. In the 1851 census, Elizabeth Ellen is shown as 21, and born in Lydd, whereas Evelina Ann is shown as 19, and born in Rye, Sussex. So I suspect that the daughter baptised in 1823 died, the 1829 entry is the baptism for a second Elizabeth Ellen soon after she was born and that, having moved, the family had perhaps forgotten that she had already been baptised, and so she was baptised again, at the same time as her sister was baptised.] 

John Horndon PARRY, baptised in St. Peters on the Isle of Thanet, Kent, England, on the 22nd October 1826, when the family's address was "Kings Gate."

Elizabeth Ellen PARRY, baptised in Lydd, Kent, on the 21st May 1829, when the family were living in Jurys Gap Watch House, Lydd. [see note above]

Elizabeth Ellen PARRY, baptised in Folkestone, Kent, on the 22nd May 1833 [see note above]  

Evelina Ann Agnes PARRY, baptised in Folkestone, Kent, on the 22nd May 1833

Francis Joseph PARRY, baptised in Portsea, Hampshire, on the 29th May 1835 (and appearing under several entries, with the church variously identified as "Portsea St Mary", "Southsea St Paul" and "Portsea, St John"!)

There are several "Navy Lists" available on FMP. These tend to have multiple entries for each individual, for example, in 1827, when Howard appears on p24 with the date he became a Lieutenant (10th March 1815), and on p63, where he is listed as one of the "Sup. Lts" on the Ramillies, with a date of 16 February 1826. Later editions include the date Howard became a Commander (10th Feb 1832), as well as when he received a pension for wounds (19th April 1833). All of which fit in with the details given in the Biographical Dictionary. 

In view of the number of entries in the Navy Lists on FMP, and the fact that many pages seem to be identical, I have not checked them all, although it is possible some of them might contain additional information about Howard.

The biography indicates that, after 1826, Howard served on the Ramilles, before transferring to the coast guard in 1831. However, there is an entry on FMP for a Lieut. Howard Lewis PARRY being discharged from the "Talavera" on the 28th April 1831, having entered that ship on the 22nd December 1830. Following up entries online, it appears that Captain Hugh PIGOT, who was Superintendent of the Coast Blockade, had initially been in command of Ramillies, but had then transferred to the Talavera, in September 1829.⁷

So it seems possible that Howard had also transferred between the two ships, in 1830. 

The "Coast Blockade" was the Royal Navy's attempt to control the smuggling that was occurring, particularly along the coasts of Kent and Sussex.  According to an article on the TNA⁸ the blockade merged with the coast guard in 1831. This potentially explains Howard Lewis PARRY being appointed to the coast guard. Several newspapers report his appointment (along with others), in July and August 1831.

There is an undated entry for "Lt. H.L. PARRY" in the record set "Coastguards 1801-1952", on FMP,  which are described as "Nominal indexes to Registers of Nominations for Appointments" (ADM 175/97), indicating that he was nominated from Folkestone, and appointed to Camber Station. 

More detail is found in the actual "Registers of Nomination for Appointments" (ADM 175/77), which shows a "Date of Order for Nomination" of 20th July 1831, followed by a "Date of Letter of Nomination" of 22nd July 1831, for Lt Howard Lewis PARRY. He was nominated from Folkestone, for the rank of Chief officer. He joined on the 27th July 1831, and was appointed to Camber.  There are then two other dates - 29th August 1831 (under "Date of Report of Qualifications"), and 12th October 1831 ("Date of Board's Order for Establishment"), and finally the port was listed as Rye. 

The "Establishment Books" (ADM 175/5) for the "Camber" station show that Howard replaced a Lt E C EARLE, when he was appointed in July 1831. Howard was then discharged on the 9th February 1832, and was replaced by a Lieut. Richard MORGAN.

While reading around about the coastal blockade, and the coast guard, I came across sites that explain the address for one of the baptisms of Elizabeth Ellen PARRY - Jury's Gap Watch House, Lydd, was one of the Blockade stations.⁹

According to a book about smuggling, the place was previously called "Jew's Gut Watch-house", a fact supported by proceedings at the Old Bailey in 1821.¹⁰

(The case has nothing to do with PARRYs though - just a 'rabbit-hole' I went down!)

As I mentioned above, one has to be careful about assuming that all references to a "Lieutenant PARRY" around this time relate to Howard. 

Having come across the book about smuggling, I did a search in it for any references to "PARRY" and found two:

On page 111, relating to 1826: 

'A General Order issued at this time contains the following significant warning : "In consequence of the system adopted by the smugglers of appearing in armed bodies, the officers of stations are admonished to be present at these attacks, and are therefore to be on the alert from 9 p.m. to 4 a.m." Whereupon we find a Lieutenant Parry requesting to be superseded, "as his health will not admit of it." There was no room for valetudinarians in such a service.'

Do any other one-namers feel 'protective' of those with the surname, and a bit 'miffed' when someone describes them in a derogatory way?

Having looked up the description, [valetudinarian: a person of a weak or sickly constitution especially : one whose chief concern is their own poor health,¹¹] I didn't want it to be referring to Howard - but I suspect it did.

However, he was not replaced, and I think subsequent events demonstrated that his own health, and safety, was not his primary concern.

The second reference to a PARRY in the book is definitely him. On page 19, relating to 1832: 

"...in December a General Order is issued to the coastguard notifying that the crew of the Camber Station has been awarded £10 each, besides the seizure share, and were to be promoted, for courageously supporting their officer, Lieutenant Parry (since promoted to Commander), during a desperate affray with armed smugglers on the night of February 1st last."

But first, a backtrack to 1831, and a report from Rye, which appeared in the Lloyds List, on the 22nd November:

21st. - "The Amie, a Fishing Vessel belonging to St. Valery, was driven on shore tbis morning about a mile from this harbor, and is full of water. The Crew (30 in number) were saved by assistance of Lieut. Parry, of the Coast Guard (Who went off four times in his Galley) the Surveyor of the Customs, his Men, and others."

As result of this incident, Howard was presented with a gold medal, by the Royal Humane Society:

"A gold medal was the awarded to Lieut. Parry, of the coast guard, for saving the lives of 30 men, the crew of the French vessel L'Aimée, which ran on shore off Rye on the 21st November last. The ship had struck, and the sea rolling over her, when Lieut. Parry put off with some men, and by his continued exertions in four trips to the vessel brought 21 of the men on board. The sea ran then so high that further attempts were impracticable. By a running line, however, got on board, nine others were saved, after three hours' exertion." [Morning Advertiser 13th January 1832, as well as several other newspapers]

And so to the event which led to his final promotion and subsequent retirement, reported in numerous papers during the first week of February 1832:

"RYE, Feb. 2.--(From a Correspondent.) —A desperate affray took place this morning, about one o'clock, between a party of smugglers, armed with guns, bludgeons, &c. consisting of nearly 200 men, and  Lieut. Parry, Royal Navy, with a few of his men, near the Camber Station, about two miles from Rye harbour. Lieut. Parry received two slugs in his shoulder, and the head of a large nail, and one of his fingers was nearly shot off; three of his men were also badly wounded; one has two balls in his leg, which is to be amputated tomorrow. After they fell they were cruelly beaten by the smugglers about the head with the butts of their muskets. One of the smugglers was shot through the heart, but they carried away all their wounded; also all the tubs, except 26, which were taken, and also the boat. The slugs and the nail have been extracted, and it is hoped Lieut. Parry will do well." [Morning Herald (London) 06 February 1832]

Other reports of the same incident vary, from the short "Lieut. Parry, R.N. was severely wounded in a conflict with a gang of smugglers near Rye, on Thursday morning. Three of the Coast Guard were also badly wounded."  [Limerick Chronicle 8th February 1832, Kerry Evening Post 11th February 1832], to the much more detailed entry in the Hampshire Telegraph, 13th February 1832, which indicated what the expected cargo was, and how so few coast guard men suddenly found themselves tackling a much larger group of smugglers:

"Desperate affray with the loss of lives.—On the 1st instant, the Coast Guard Station at Camber, near Rye, was a scene of the most desperate description.- Early in the evening, Lieut. Parry, commanding the station, received information that an attempt would be made to land a valuable cargo of spirits, silks, tea &c, on that night. Lieut. Parry arranged his crew in the most effective and judicious manner, and on the time approaching (high water) undauntedly, with two of his men, took the guard on the place where it was supposed the boat would land. At twelve o'clock he observed a large boat, deeply laden, pulling in through the surf which was then very heavy ; on the boat touching the beach the men jumped out, when she filled, and her cargo became a prey to the heavy sea which was then running. Lieut. Parry's whole aim being to secure the persons of the smugglcrs (six in number), he made a signal for his crew; finding themselves likely to be overpowered, the six men commenced a tremendous yell, crying out to their party,- "Are you going to leave us here to be taken?" when instantly between two and three hundred men sprung to the fall of the beach, between thirty and forty of whom were armed with long duck guns; two of the most daring approached Lieut. P., menaced him, and called on their party to fire, when one of them was instantly laid a corpse at Lieut. Parry's feet. A heavy firing now commenced on both sides, and the scene became truly terrific. Lieut. Parry fell, having received six balls in his shoulder, one in his arm and finger, and three of his men severely wounded in their thighs and head. Lieut. Parry rallied, and coming with his crew to the charge, compelled the desperate band to retreat, taking with them (as is usual) their dead and wounded, excepting one, who was left a corpse, with the boat and twenty-six tubs of foreign spirits, in possession of the Coast Guard men. Lieut. Parry, with his wounded men, were conveyed to a small cottage near, when Lieut. Morgan, of the adjoining station hastened to the spot, and had the wounded conveyed to their several homes, and the immediate attendance of Drs. Wilson and Night, of Rye, was procured, who, we are happy to say, have pronounced the wounds not fatal. Too much praise cannot be bestowed on Lieut. Parry, for his cool and courageous conduct, with that of his men.

Six smugglers have since died, one of whom carried a bayonet off the field, run directly through his bowels; and we are informed, from undoubted authority, that between fifteen and twenty now lay in a precarious state, many having undergone amputation. An inquest was held the following day, on the body of the unfortunate smuggler who was shot, and a verdict accordingly returned. The Coroner, in summing up the evidence, expatiated in the most humane and feeling manner on the serious consequences attending such disgraceful and unlawful practices, and concluded by offering his best thanks for the prompt assistance rendered on the occasion by Lieut. Morgan, and we feel it due to this Officer, and Lieut. Harris, R.N. to say their attention to the wounded ever since, has been unremitting. The Honourable Board of Customs on receiving the intelligence, dispatched the Deputy Comptroller General and Solicitor for the Crown, round the neighbourhood of Rye and Hastings, to offer liberal rewards for the apprehension of the offenders, and to convey to Lieut. Parry and crew, the Hon. Boards high opinion of their meritorious conduct on the occasion. Lieut. Parry has been promoted to the rank of Commander for his gallantry on the occasion." 

 

Howard's promotion for his "praiseworthy and gallant conduct" is also noted in many newspapers later in the month, with the Brighton Guardian, on the 22nd February, including the statement that "This promotion will afford satisfaction to all who are acqainted with that officer. He is highly respected, and has on several occasions received medals and testimonials for his exertions in endeavouring to save the crews of wrecked vessels," as well as trusting that "the Government, in bestowing their rewards, will not overlook the other poor men who were wounded, whose behaviour was equally gallant, and whose poverty makes them proper objects of commiseration."

By April 1832, seven of the smugglers believed to have been involved in this incident, and two other incidents, during which two of the coast guard had been killed, as well as several severely injured, had been captured and were put on trial. But, despite various people admitting to having been involved in the smuggling, only the case against one of the smugglers seems to have reached the Old Bailey, and he was found not guilty.¹²

Captain Howard Lewis PARRY gave evidence at the trial, during which he said that five shots had been extracted from him, and that he was now quite disabled.  I assume that it was this disability that resulted in Howard being awarded a pension, and retiring from the service.

I haven't found the family in the 1841 census but, by 1851, Howard and his wife, Elizabeth, are living in Newent, Gloucestershire, where their eldest son, another Howard Lewis, is the curate. Howard Lewis junior, is with them, as are their two daughters, Elizabeth Ellen and Evelina Ann, and their third son, Francis Joseph.

  

Howard Lewis PARRY junior marries in 1857 and, in the 1861 census, he is now the head of the household, the perpetual curate of St Peter's, Clearwell, in the parish of Newland, with his wife and two children.  His mother and father are living with him.

The final entries for Howard Lewis PARRY senior in the Navy Lists are in 1868.  On the list of "Officers in receipt of Naval Pensions, Late on the Out-Pension of Greenwich Hospital", a date of 19th September 1868 is listed.  This date doesn't seem to have any connection to a particular life event for Howard, and may just relate to a change in which organisation was paying the pension.

Howard Lewis PARRY died on the 1st January 1969, aged 76, at Clearwell Vicarage, in Gloucestershire, the home of his son.  He was buried on the 7th January, the service being performed by Thomas HOLBROW, the perpetual curate of Coleford, a parish close to Clearwell.

His Will was proved by his widow, Elizabeth, daughter, Elizabeth Ellen, son, Howard Lewis, and another minister, the Reverend Robert Herbert COOKE, husband of Evelina Ann.

Howard's widow, Elizabeth, was still living with her son's family in the Vicarage in Clearwell, in the 1871 census.  She died on the 27th February 1874, aged 73, and was buried at Clearwell on the 5th March.  Again, the service was performed by Thomas HOLBROW.  Her son, Howard Lewis PARRY junior was granted the administration of her estate on the 26th March 1874.

It is tempting, having included the details of Howard's family, rather than just his career, to "tidy up" all the loose ends, and include more details about his children, and their lives.

However, even a brief search revealed that, that would not be a good idea, if I ever want to get this posted.  I think they are the sort of family one could easily find sufficient records for to fill a book.  

In fact, now that so much information is available online, through the genealogy sites and the newspapers, having attempted it with the Potton PARRYs, and now this Trafalgar PARRY, I am seriously beginning to reconsider the feasibility of attempting to write 'family stories' for PARRYs in the study! 

Notes & Sources

1. Trafalgar Ancestors entry for Howard Lewis: PARRY:  https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/trafalgarancestors/details.asp?id=17107

2. 1851 & 1861 Census entries:

1851: HO107/1960/150/7

1861: RG9/3980/97/8

3. Frindsbury on Genuki:  https://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/KEN/Frindsbury

4. Medway City Ark: https://cityark.medway.gov.uk/wwwopacx/wwwopac.ashx?command=getcontent&server=files&value=P150-01-02.pdf

5. Age at which boys joined the Royal Navy:
https://www.thebluejackets.co.uk/video/WhenJoinNavyBoySailorsRoyalNavy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_gentlemen

6. Upnor in Frindsbury: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upnor  

7. Hugh PIGOT and the Coast Blockade ships: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Ramillies_(1785) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Talavera_(1818) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Pigot_(Royal_Navy_officer,_born_1775) 

And the entry for Hugh Pigot in "A Naval Biographical Dictionary: Every Living Officer in Her Majestys Navy"

8. TNA article about the Coastal Blockade:

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/explore-the-collection/stories/smuggling-gangs-and-coastal-policing-in-19th-century-england/

9. Jury's Gap Watch House: https://www.hastingshistory.net/features/hastings-coastguards-and-smugglers-chronicle

10. Change of name for Jury's Gap: Page 83 of a book called "The Smugglers. Picturesque Chapters in the History of Contraband", by Lord Teignmouth, Commander R.N. and Charled G Harper

https://ia601605.us.archive.org/31/items/smugglerspicture02teiguoft/smugglerspicture02teiguoft.pdf
"Jew's Gut" is also mentioned in an Old Bailey case, at https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/record/t18210411-64, so it's not a fiction

11. Definition of valetudinarian: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/valetudinarian

12. Smuggling case at the Old Bailey: Old Bailey Proceedings Online (www.oldbaileyonline.org, version 9.0) May 1832. Trial of WILLIAM NOAKES (t18320517-21). Available at: https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/record/t18320517-21 (Accessed: 5th April 2026).