|
Pages: [1]
|
 |
|
Author
|
Topic: Impact of illegitimacy - early 20th century (Read 220 times)
|
trish251
RootsChat Marquessate
 Offline
Posts: 8618
|
I've been searching for details on the impact of being illegitimate on people in the early 20th century. My dad mentioned to me some time ago that illegitimate folks could not work for the public service - but I didn't ever follow up with him how he knew this, or if it was true.
I would also like to know if children could be made legitimate if their parents married after they were born. I have found some birth records from 1910-1915 - two children have about 5 entries each in the NSW register, in the surname of both parents, who married 1912, presumably after both children were born. Some corrections appear to have been entered in 1915. (I can't for a few more years, get the certificates to check).
I'm googling without a lot of success - any suggestions or links would be very welcome
thanks
Trish
PS I have learned from my googling, that the word illegitimate was outlawed in the 1970s (with maybe the exception of WA). In NSW today, if you apply for a certificate the words illegitimate and spinster cannot be on the certificate, even if on the original (I wonder about the transcription agents - must ask)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
willow154
RootsChat Aristocrat
Offline
Posts: 1424
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Hi trish,
Hope this is right (from book by Ruth Paley):
* Under english law:
Until 1926:
Under common law, a child was legitimate if:
conceived and born in a valid marriage
conceived before marriage and parents entered into valid marriage before it was born
conceived during valid marriage but born after marriage had been ended
Not legitimate if:
parents marriage was not valid
if father could be proved to be someone other than husband
A child conceived in one marriage but born during a subsequent marriage was deemed to be the legitimate offspring of earlier marriage
1926:
Parliament brought English law in line with Scots law, legitimising children born before their parents' marriage as long as both were free to marry at time of birth
1959:
Legitimised even if parents were not free at time of bith
* Possible since 1858 for an individual to petition for a decree of legitimacy, which is binding against all future legal actions
Also says:
Legitimisation of a child by subsequent marriage of it's parents does not confer inheritence rights for all kinds of property: entailed estates and titles still descend by the common law rules.
Hope this helps, Trish.
Kind regards,
Paulene
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
trish251
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 8618
|
Hi Paulene
many thanks for the reply, I think I had read before about the 1926 rule. From what you have quoted here, they would not be legitimate - but I wonder if Australian law was different. I would think it was the same as English law to 1901, but I am unsure after that. I am finding many records of folks who definitely hid the truth by changing birth or marriage dates on some official records, so the law here may well be similar.
Does the book reference Australia? or is it for English law only?
Trish
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
willow154
RootsChat Aristocrat
Offline
Posts: 1424
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Hi Trish,
No, unfortunately it doesn't.
Only reference to Australia is with regard to shipping off to places like Australia, New Zealand, Canada and South Africa - parts of the Empire - to alleviate costs here, and provide much needed workers in those countries.
But, your dad was right:
Bastards were barred as children from orphanages  (meant for the care of children of the respectable) and as adults from the professions and from holding military commissions or joining the priesthood.
Paulene 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
trish251
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 8618
|
That would indicate it may have stood until 1931 - although I think we could have our own laws as well. Given that there were many Scots in Australia, they may have objected, as Scottish laws were very different (amazing liberal in some areas, I love their irregular marriages )
Bastards were barred as children from orphanages (meant for the care of children of the respectable) and as adults from the professions and from holding military commissions or joining the priesthood.
This is truly another example of man's inhumanity to man - to treat a child in such a fashion - wonder if this is where schoolyard bullying began .
Thankyou for the help - it seems my folks may have had some problems and good reasons to change dates.
Trish
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
willow154
RootsChat Aristocrat
Offline
Posts: 1424
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Pleasure, Trish - glad to be of help
This is truly another example of man's inhumanity to man - to treat a child in such a fashion - wonder if this is where schoolyard bullying began
It does say that that some schools would not admit illegitimate children - so, I suspect you may be right, Trish.
Thank goodness it's different today!
Paulene
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
|
|
|
