CHESHIRE-L Archives

Archiver > CHESHIRE > 2010-05 > 1274813251


From: "Lesley Baxendale" <>
Subject: Re: [CHS] Reply from Macclesfield Registrar
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 19:47:31 +0100
References: <4BFADCF0.1080302@jps.net> <74AB3FC7C3EC44FBB59108D765BFB99A@MUM><DD495C6248434E52AFDED97EFC366BE8@UserPC1>
In-Reply-To: <DD495C6248434E52AFDED97EFC366BE8@UserPC1>


Hi Andy,

I agree with nost of your comments, however, whether we like it or not, the
various councils do have an input into what they let us look at, even if the
legislation seems to say differently. It is usually so vague as to allow
different councils to put their own slant on what they do. Hence the sudden
about turn with the Macclesfield records.

I wasn't inferring that we should actually go en mass to the register office
- just making a point, that the legislation could be interpreted in that
manner when parts of it are taken slightly out of context - just as the
response quoted one particular line of legislation without any of the
surrounding material, which would have put a different slant on what they
were trying to tell us was written in stone.

Even allowing for the structure of the Registration Service, Macclesfield is
still no longer their own master - a layer of authority has been removed and
what was Macclesfield Borough responsibility has now moved to Cheshire East,
which is replacing both the Borough and the former County Council.
Unfortunately, the regime which now seems to be in place, is that formerly
followed by Crewe - no mothers maiden name or date of death allowed.

As Graham has stated, we can lay the blame for the general shambles squarely
at the feet of the legislation - not clear enough.

Hopefully it will sort itself out soon.

Regards

Lesley

-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Candlish [mailto:]
Sent: 24 May 2010 23:55
To: Lesley Baxendale; 'Marleen Van Horne';
Subject: Re: [CHS] Reply from Macclesfield Registrar

Hi


> If you go to a Register Office in person, they are obliged under the
> Marriage Act to let you search the marriage register books if you ask, not
> just the index they provide. This is also open to interpretation - do
> they
> let you search in person or do the search for you? The Act doesn't make
> that part clear. The only mention of a fee is for providing a certified
> copy of that information in the form of a certificate. Again, not very
> clear.

My understanding on this is that each Registration District consists of a
Superintendant Registrar and several Registrars, the Registrars are
responsible for one or more sub-districts. The registers held by the
Registrars may I believe be checked but they only hold the current register
which may be just a few months worth. Once a register is full its passed on
to the Superintendant Registrar and there is no provision for access to
registers held by the Superintendant Registrar. I'm sure that if you could
actually go and search old registers it would be known and out there in the
genealogy world.

>
> Food for thought - perhaps we should all be heading to Macclesfield to
> demand to search their books!? Might make someone sit up and take notice.
> 8>) I have to make clear that it is not the staff in Macclesfield who are
> at the bottom of this, it's the new regime in the Cheshire East Council.

I also understand the way the act is worded you can't just march in and
demand to search the Indexes but basically make an appointment at a suitable

time presumably to both parties.

I'm puzzled as to how this can be the responsibility of the new regime at
Cheshire East if the Macclesfield Registrar implemented similar rules at
their previous Registration District. We should also remember we are lucky
to have what we have as in many parts of the country Registrars won't allow
any online index at all in fact there was an epetition some time ago to try
to compel all Registrars to allow access to volunteers to transcribe the
indexes for UKBMD.

Andy

This thread: