Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - AntonyMMM

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 62
The Common Room / Re: Changing name by deed poll
« on: Sunday 02 December 18 12:30 GMT (UK)  »
GRO has specific guidance on marriage registration for entering names which have been changed.

Where a person has used (or been known by) another name, other than in cases of adoption,  that name should be recorded in the name column as "formerly xxxx", but the person can choose not to have the previous name shown at all if they wish.

The previous name may also be omitted, and just the  phrase "name changed by deed poll"  shown, but only when the deed has been enrolled (registered with the courts).

the use of the "formerly xxx" option would suggest that either there was no deed poll, or if there was that it was never enrolled.

The Common Room / Re: Unmarried mother on birth registration
« on: Thursday 29 November 18 07:48 GMT (UK)  »
Re-registration to add an unmarried father to an entry where he wasn't originally named is done under s10A of the Births & Deaths Registration Act 1953. It doesn't add to the original registration, but creates a new register entry, which can be months/years later.

It is an option, and not legally required, but a very common thing to do. It was introduced as a specific process in the 1953 Act, although you do see cases that were allowed previous to that by application to the Registrar General (who can authorise any re-registration, for any reason they deem appropriate).

Re-registering after the later marriage of the parents is done under s14 of the B& D Act 1953. Again it creates a new entry, it doesn't change the original one (other than a marginal note).

The Schedule to the 1926 Legitimacy Act said it was the "duty" of  the parents to re-register the birth, but set no penalty for not doing so.

The current requirement for parents who marry to re-register is in s9(1) of the 1976 Legitimacy Act and states it should be done within 3 months of the marriage,  s9(4) sets a penalty on conviction for not doing so. However the Act also makes clear that it is the marriage that makes the child legitimate, not the re-registration, so failure to re-register doesn't affect that. Many couples don't realise it is required or just don't bother to do it, but there is no mechanism to enforce the provision so no action is going to happen.

Although it is required within 3 months, it can be much later - the longest example I have is of a child born in 1892, whose parents married in 1894. The "child" was 47 years old when the birth was eventually re-registered by the father in 1939.

Re-registration after marriage ( or civil partnership) can also now be done to add a "second female parent" and not just the father.

It is also not uncommon now for a birth to be registered 3 times over a period  - once with the just the mother named (unmarried), again to add the father's details (still unmarried) and again once they do marry.

Re-registrations can also be done for other reasons such as in some cases of surrogacy, or gender change, and are allowed by the relevant legislation.

The Common Room / Re: Help finding a birth registration
« on: Wednesday 28 November 18 12:50 GMT (UK)  »
Surprised nobody has pointed out the slightly unusual fact (for twins) of being born on different dates ?

Johanna ... 21 Mai
Daniel .... 22 Mai

On the subject of registration, I am currently researching another Catholic family living in the Westminster area at about the same time and very few of the children seem to have been registered.

The Common Room / Re: Birth registration 17 years late?
« on: Tuesday 27 November 18 15:44 GMT (UK)  »
My niece registered her 2 children at birth and then again after she married in the 2000's, can't see the point myself as they were already registered in her married name

It is  a legal requirement to re-register the birth of children after the later marriage of their parents, not an option (although many don't actually bother)  - they were probably reminded by the registrar when they got married.

..The children were born and registered in the late 1920s under their mother's married surname. He married the mother in 1938, after the death of her first estranged husband. The children were then re-registered under his surname.

Children aren't registered under any surname at all before 1969 - the entries are indexed by mother or father's surname (or both) according to their marital status.

Late registrations are quite a rare thing, although they do occur - nearly all the ones I've looked at turn out to be re-registrations for one reason or another.

The Common Room / Re: Birth registration 17 years late?
« on: Monday 26 November 18 19:16 GMT (UK)  »
Not late ... it will be a birth in 1911 and a re-registration after the parents later married, which became possible after the Legitimacy Act of 1926.

There will be a separate entry in the 1928 index.

The Common Room / Re: How would one get a coroner's inquest report from 1933?
« on: Friday 23 November 18 16:25 GMT (UK)  »
Not necessarily - it very much depends on the circumstances, some might have a proper file (if it survives), but many inquests are nothing more than a paper exercise that are done within a minute or two.

As the death was deemed natural causes there should have been some other reason why the coroner felt it necessary to hold an inquest  (most deaths that get referred to the coroner don't need one). If it was in a pub maybe there was some suggestion he was in a fight or a row before he collapsed, or something like that.

As already suggested a local newspaper is usually the best place to look for this type of stuff ( in local archives or the British Library if there is no online availability).

The Common Room / Re: Why no digitisation of birth, mariage and death vital records?
« on: Friday 23 November 18 08:31 GMT (UK)  »
I have the recollection, from some time ago, on one of the TV shows about genealogy and history, of a large repository of records which were held still by the local manor house. They were in books, and also rolls.

Just think of the information in them, and also the work required to digitise them, let alone transcribe them.

Manorial Court records exist in many places, and would mostly be found in county archives.

They are an extremely valuable source for family research - for instance they will record deaths of tenants and a property being taken over by an an heir.

Some have been transcribed, at least partially - where I live they are fully transcribed and run from 1308 to 1936.

TNA have a searchable index of holdings, but I would always check with the local archives as well to check what they have.

The Common Room / Re: Marriage Witness
« on: Thursday 22 November 18 08:52 GMT (UK)  »
There is nothing in the 1836 Marriage Act, which was in place at that time  - all it requires is the marriage be in the presence of "two credible witnesses".

It would be for the celebrant/registrar to determine if such witnesses were acceptable, and I would be surprised if an eight year old was deemed as such (but they could be).

There is no current minimum age requirement - only that they are old enough to understand what is taking place and be able to testify in future if necessary (although as no details of the witnesses other than the signatures are recorded, tracing them could be an issue.).

As a registrar the youngest witness I had was twelve, who was also the best man and was the son of the groom from his first marriage. If the registrar is in any doubt about such a witness, then they can allow them to sign anyway and just add an extra one (there is no limit on numbers).

The Common Room / Re: Ancestry gone very PC - not allocating sex of marriage partner
« on: Tuesday 20 November 18 09:02 GMT (UK)  »
Can't see that anything has changed - on-line trees on Ancestry automatically default to the opposite sex when adding a spouse (but you have the option to change), as does entering them via Family Tree Maker and so does Family Historian.

Seems to be standard functionality.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 62