SUFFOLK-L Archives

Archiver > SUFFOLK > 2004-07 > 1088882029


From: "Janice Aitkens1" <>
Subject: Re: [SFK-UK] (SFK-UK) PREVIOUSLY REGISTERED BIRTHS
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2004 20:13:49 +0100
References: <002c01c4612a$35c462c0$05156651@pavilion>


The formerly part of the mother's name could mean she was either married or
know as.
My daughter on her marriage certificate has her surname but as this was
changed from her birth surname it has formerly giving her birth surname.
Also I don't now if they allowed it then but the change can be that the
father's name had been added where it was missing before as I know that if
your not married the man has to be present to have his name on the
certificate, You find a lot of things come up & even more when you have
names like Smith I know
Regards Janice
----- Original Message -----
From: "Heather Smith" <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2004 7:18 PM
Subject: [SFK-UK] (SFK-UK) PREVIOUSLY REGISTERED BIRTHS


> Good evening folks, It seems every time I receive a certificate it
throws up an unexpected problem.
> I have a few ideas on this one but would like to sound out you good folks
too.
>
> I have a birth certificate for a birth in 1947.
> In the When Registered column it states - 24th April, 1951 on the
authority of the Registrar General.
> In the right hand margin (outside the normal cert. boundaries) is typed -
Previously registered on 6th June, 1947 at Entry No. 49 in York East Sub
District W.H.P.
> It was also signed by the Registrar and his deputy.
>
> The mother's column also reads differently from most as it gives the
mothers name followed by formerly Smith - now the wife of (and here it shows
another name)
>
> Sorry if I am not being very open but I am thinking of possible
descendants here. Happy to talk off list though.
>
> I would appreciate some ideas on this one.
>
> TIA, Heather
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


This thread: