Author Topic: Birth registration enigma  (Read 1994 times)

Offline janesuffolk

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 41
    • View Profile
Birth registration enigma
« on: Thursday 28 September 06 10:03 BST (UK) »
With the help of a fellow Rootswebber (thanks again Sheila  :) ) I finally have a baptism date in July 1838 for one of my ancestors but have been unable to find the registration of his birth.   The censuses all give his birth year as c1839 which fits with the baptism being of a baby and not an older child.
Some confusion had arisen over the fact his mother was married to someone else at the time of his birth, she was widowed 3 years later and remarried to my ancestors father.   On all the censuses he carries the name of his natural father which was his middle name at his baptism.
I've searched and searched for his registration in the name of his natural father and the name at his baptism with as many variations on spelling as I can come up with and found nothing.
Is it possible the birth was never registered?    Was this a common occurence especially if there was some scandal surrounding the birth?   Or is it more likely that the registrar may have mis-spelt the name totally?
Also I'm wondering about how a person can be baptised with one surname and then using another name for the rest of his life.    Would the names have to be changed 'officially' on his mother's remarriage or did people not bother too much with that sort of thing back then?
So many questions.....

Jane
Kitchener, Rose, Odell, Gilman, Dodson, Wright, Coles, Whitby, Greaves, Bone, Callaby, Wolsey, Hart, White, Lines, Damms, Burrows, Cross, Orridge, Ayre, Wass, Stafford, Savage, Trussell, Garford, Taylor, Gunn, Green, Hornsby, Pauley, Norwood, Savile, Coates, Adam

Offline Garethboxing

  • --
  • RootsChat Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 710
  • Grampy Wyndham Jones (Wales v Ireland 1905)
    • View Profile
Re: Birth registration enigma
« Reply #1 on: Thursday 28 September 06 10:21 BST (UK) »
I don't think people are actually baptised with a surname - they are only given Christian names. (It's a few years since it happened to me and I must confess I wasn't paying that much attention at the time!)

Although  the parish clerk would include the surname in the register, I wouldn't have thought it would have any legal significance, so changing it later wouldn't be a problem.

   Gareth
Scott, Dowdeswell (Merthyr Tydfil), Jones (Loughor and Merthyr Vale), Roberts (Nelson), Prichard (Collenna and Cefn Fforest); Evan Roberts (Corwen and Amlwch); Scott (Pentre); Scott (Ancrum); Thomas (Pantywaun and Bedlinog); Morgan Jones (Ystradfellte); Bowen (Loughor); Jenkins (Bridgend); Thomas Dowdeswell (b. Gloucester, 1829).

Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Gardener

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,242
    • View Profile
Re: Birth registration enigma
« Reply #2 on: Thursday 28 September 06 11:52 BST (UK) »
Gareth's right about the surname, nothing to stop you calling yourself want you want as long as you tell all the officials for tax purposes etc. If you have been baptised then you can't change that name so easily!
Most likley the birth was just not registered. 1838 was early days for the registration process and I think the onus was on the Registrar to record a birth rather than it being the responsibility of the child. Lucky you to have the baptism :)
Rose (Black Country),Downs (Black Country),Wolloxall (any and all),Bark (Derbyshire),Wright (Derbyshire),Marsden (Derbyshire), Wallace (Black Country)

All census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk