RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: uk2003 on Tuesday 02 January 18 17:16 GMT (UK)
-
Bit rusty at this family research and I am scratching my head over some entries in the BMD index
Can two entries be made into the births index (Mother,District,Vol,Page) for the same person but with two different surnames?
this is not a one off, a sibling of the above person is exactly the same a few years later.
Cheers
Ken
-
Yes they can. The birth is indexed twice, under the father's and the mother's surnames as it is not known which surname the child will use. The parents were not married.
Stan
-
The index available on pay-sites, and on FreeBMD, indexes the entry under both parents surnames when they are not married, and they have registered the birth as joint informants.
-
Is one of the surnames the same as the mother's maiden name, by any chance?
I've found a few like this - they're registered under the mother's name (e.g. Smith mother Smith), a later entry is made with the father's surname (e.g. Jones mother Smith). FreeBMD helpfully shows that the entry is an amendment, I'm not sure how other sites do it. I'm guessing in some instances the parents married after the children were born and re-registered the child under the father's name at a later date.
-
My great nephew and nieces are on the register 3 times!
Not using the correct names, but as an example, parents are not married:
1. As John Brown (mother's surname)
2. As John Green (father's surname)
3. As John Brown-Green ( the name they are known as)
-
Yes they can. The birth is indexed twice, under the father's and the mother's surnames as it is not known which surname the child will use. The parents were not married.
Stan
See under Column 4 - Father's Name at http://www.dixons.clara.co.uk/Certificates/births.htm
Stan
-
One of my lot was born in 1914 before their parents married, and the baptism entry gives both names.
In 1928, when they were coming to start work, another registration under the father's surname appears, with a "See" pointer back to the 1914 entry.
More recent entries reflect the growing trend for changes in partner. Thus Mary Smith might have a child with someone called Brown, and the child is indexed under both names. Mary then sets up home with someone called Jones and there is a re-registration showing that surname too.
It seems that all requirements can be catered for.
-
I’m not sure that last example can happen unless Jones legally adopted the child, with the permission of the father shown on the certificate. Otherwise the poor child could have their name changed quite frequently! I think a new certificate would be issued as well.
-
One of my lot was born in 1914 before their parents married, and the baptism entry gives both names.
In 1928, when they were coming to start work, another registration under the father's surname appears, with a "See" pointer back to the 1914 entry.
That would be a re-registration after marriage - the Legitimacy Act 1926 made it legally possible for illegitimate children to be made legitimate by the later marriage of their parents, and so you get a lot of these in 1927/28 as people took advantage of the new law.
More recent entries reflect the growing trend for changes in partner. Thus Mary Smith might have a child with someone called Brown, and the child is indexed under both names. Mary then sets up home with someone called Jones and there is a re-registration showing that surname too.
Re-registrations can only happen under specific circumstances involving the actual parents, never to reflect a new partner, step-parent or adoption.
-
I have an instance where a woman is indexed twice Dec Qtr 1889 Marriages.
Gertrude Wynne Cole
Gertrude Wynne Dallas
In other words she is divorced.
Described on the marriage certificate as Gertrude Wynne Dallas, formerly Cole, spinster, the divorced wife of Seymour Dallas. Now had it been a man divorced would HE have had to go through all of that. I am thinking of writing to Queen Victoria to get things changed.
-
I am thinking of writing to Queen Victoria to get things changed.
I doubt she would be amused ...
Regards
Chas
-
barryd - that does make you think, doesn't it?
I have an instance of a marriage in 1850, divorce granted in 1872. She reverts to her maiden name and re-marries in 1873 as a "Divorced Woman". He also re-marries in 1873 and states he is a "Widower" :o He obviously wasn't averse to telling lies, even if he was a Policeman. :-X
-
Many thanks for all the replies. But still scratching my head ???
Example of what I have
Name of Child Mothers Maiden Name District etc
Green David Jones Black Bury 2B 344
Purple David Jones Black Bury 2B 344
and this repeats for a girl 2 years later (2 surnames for the child)
is this a "DoH" moment after Christmas ;D :P
-
Could it be that mother mmn Black was previously married to a Mr Green/Purple
ie
Jane Black marries Mr Purple - gets pregnant through Mr Green but as she is still 'married' to Mr Purple birth is registered under his surname. Birth then gets re-registered as Mr Greens
-
Do some of the entries refer to another year/quarter?
It was (and is) possible to re-register a birth under the surname of a lady's new husband after a later marriage.
-
Could it be that mother mmn Black was previously married to a Mr Green/Purple
Yep should have said Mother (Black was married to Green)
But the children were called Purple
With both names in the same register and same page they must have been registered on the same day I would assume.
-
Many thanks for all the replies. But still scratching my head ???
Example of what I have
Name of Child Mothers Maiden Name District etc
Green David Jones Black Bury 2B 344
Purple David Jones Black Bury 2B 344
and this repeats for a girl 2 years later (2 surnames for the child)
before or after 1969 ?
Do some of the entries refer to another year/quarter?
It was (and is) possible to re-register a birth under the surname of a lady's new husband after a later marriage.
Only if the "new" husband is the father of the children (not a step-parent).