LONDON-L Archives

Archiver > LONDON > 2002-11 > 1036245162


From: Liz <>
Subject: Re: [Lon] Evidence on birth certificate
Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2002 13:52:42 +0000
References: <008201c28252$fc65e2e0$4a0d7ad5@Mojflo>


Maureen Avery wrote:
>
> I know I've asked this question before but was there anything apart from conscience to prevent someone saying they were married to the child's father on a child's birth certificate?
>
> Maureen

When?

Up to a date which escapes me, but around the 1860s/70s, there was
nothing to prevent lying to the registrar as the mother could name the
father and even claim to be married to him. He did not need to be
present at the registration.

My 3gt grandmother turned up at the Registry office in 1839 saying she
was Susannah Dean and that her husband was Edward Dean. Son William duly
registered as their son.

Which he was. But Susannah was a widow called Susannah Drew and Edward
Dean was her employer who happened to have a living wife!

She had done the same once before ... when her first child Richard was
born in the 1820s she turned up at the Church (with or without the
father) and had him baptised as their legitimate son.

In both cases she eventually married the men she had named but there is
no doubt that she lied to both authorities at the time of baptism and
registration .....

This wouldn't have worked in a village ..but seems to have been easy in
London.....

Liz (Greenwich UK)
Co-owner
LONDON-L

This thread: