WESSEX-PLUS-L Archives

From: Paul Benyon <>
Subject: Re: [WSX] Extraordinary ? GRO birth certificate. marriage twixt birth and registration
Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2001 22:02:52 +0100
References: <000201c0c05c$ba9931a0$64a926d4@A3408745>
In-Reply-To: <000201c0c05c$ba9931a0$64a926d4@A3408745>

Hi Graham

1 Yes, the details given regarding the birth were those for the
situation as it existed in March 1884, so they appear correct, but see 2
below.

2No. The registrar can only fill in the name of the father if the
father is present at the time of registering of the birth, which would
appear not to be the case. This doesn't imply anything.

3The practice or custom of including the father's name where he
wasn't married to the mother has been continued so she would have been
Evelina Annie Chaffey WILKINS at the time of the birth.

So the registrar has gone according to the book as far as I can see ie
he has recorded the information as it stood at the time of the birth,
but has recorded the mother's details as they were at the time she
reported them. I bet that lot made him sit up and think :-))

It is not unusual to find a child who has been registered under one name
called something different either at the baptism or at a later date and
the parents are allowed a year in which to report the change of name as
recorded in Column 2 of the birth certificate, in which case column 10
of the birth certificate should be completed.

However, in my experience this change is invariably not reported and the
child continues to be registered under one name, but is known by
another. I have a similar problem with my grandmother, born in 1879 and
it took ages to find her: she was married and buried under different
names to those with which she was registered.

This isn't illegal as long as its not done for fraudulent purposes ie
you can call your self what you want. The problem arises when you need
to register yourself for a something which requires your birth
certificate, when you may need to change your name by deed poll, but a
birth certificate isn't required for a marriage so you can call yourself
what you like.

I hope thats a little clearer than mud :-))

Regards

Paul
Portland

On Sun, 8 Apr 2001 18:53:02 +0100, you wrote:

>My grandmother was born in March 1884. Her mother married in April 1884, and the birth was registered in May 1884
>On the certificate
>The father column is blank
>The mother is listed as Rose WILKINS now married to Harry CHAFFEY The child's forenames are listed as Evelina Annie Chaffey. i.e. the third forename is the surname of the husband
>
>Is there anyone with knowledge of registration procedure at that time who could tell me.
>1 Is there any legal reason why the father's column is blank since Harry seems to be the father.
>2 Does the blank column mean he did not accept paternity
>3 What is the child's technical surname, is it Chaffey or Wilkins. (if the former, we have Evelina Annie Chaffey CHAFFEY)
>
>Some points that may be relevant
>a The mother was barely 16 at the birth
>b The birth was registered by the mother
>c at her marriage, my grandmother was recorded as being Evelina Annie Wilkins CHAFFEY
>
>If anyone can shed light I would be grateful
>
>
>
>---
>Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.225 / Virus Database: 107 - Release Date: 22/12/00
>
>
>==== WESSEX-PLUS Mailing List ====
>Do you know about the Free BMD Project and Free Census? Have a look at:
>http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/
>http://www.john.lerwill.btinternet.co.uk/census/censproc.htm
>
>

For 19th Century Newspaper Extracts see:
http://members.netscapeonline.co.uk/pbtyc/News_Extracts/News_Extracts_Index.html

This thread:

• [WSX] Extraordinary ? GRO birth certificate. marriage twixt birth and registration by "graham jones" <>

  • Re: [WSX] Extraordinary ? GRO birth certificate. marriage twixt birth and registration by Paul Benyon <>