RootsChat.Com
Research in Other Countries => Australia => Topic started by: Matthew Charles on Tuesday 30 November 21 08:49 GMT (UK)
-
Hi,
I'm hoping someone can help me.
I'm in NSW Australia. My dad was born in 1920, he is 101 years old and still living. His parents where born in 1897 (My granddad) and 1899 (My grandmother).
Last year I needed to find his birth certificate to apply for some government assistance and no matter how hard we tried we couldn't find it.
We then did find it, but not under the name we expected. It was under his mother's married name.
Family history has always had it that Grandma was married at 16 but seperated when the husband went overseas to serve in WW1, this is when she met Grandad and had his children over the next 10 years. My Dad being the third child.
As you can imagine we were quite shocked to see that my Grandad's biological children were registered under my Grandma's husbands name and not his.
To ease our concerns we checked her legal husband's war records and he was not in Australia during 3 year period in which the period 2 of the first 3 kids were born and when he returned Nan and Granddad moved to Victoria and had my dad.
Anyway my question is, is this common to see a legally married woman register the births of her children a new partner under the name of her legal husband?
On all my dads and uncles married, death certificates my granddad is listed as the father, they also did not use their registered birth name throughout life. Only on their birth registration.
Thoughts?
-
Welcome to rootschat Matthew.
As I understand it, if your grandmother was not married to your grandfather, any children of that union would be registered under her name. That could be her maiden name if she had never married, or her married name if she had been previously married. I am not sure if it is the same in Australia, but in the UK, if a couple are not married, the man needs to present at the registration if he wants his name registered as the father.
There are plenty of NSW experts who will be along soon to correct me if I am wrong. :)
I don’t think your situation is unusual.
Added: As marriage and death certificates are informant driven, you might find that your father and his siblings didn’t know that their births were not registered under their father’s surname.
-
Yes, that is the correct way, nothing odd at all. Welcome.
I am NSW centric, birth registered in NSW in 1947. Both my parents born NSW, all 4 of my grandparents born NSW, and back several more generations too.
Civil registration commenced on 1856 in NSW, and until the late 1960s in fact NO surnames were required for any NSW born baby.
Simply put, the babys surname in the 1920s would usually match their mums surname, regardless of who their father was. So if babys mum was a married woman, then in NSW in 1920s she would be known by her married surname. This was the conventional way. So if she had children by her husband and then later had more children by a diffetent partner, i.e. outside of her formal marriage, she may have continued to be known by that married name, and thus her children were all also known by the one surname, ADDING ..... (my oops, sorry) .... on the official record.
Hope that makes good sense. My living ancient rellies include retired senior NSW bdm officers.
JM
-
Appreciate the response.
That is what we thought aswell.
Given she was still legally married to her husband overseas, does that mean his name (her legal husband) is placed as father on the birth record, despite him not being?
(My Grandma and Pa didn't marry but their first 2 kids occurred while she was still married to her husband who was overseas). It quite well known that this is the case and no-one has ever claimed different so was quite shocked to see her legal husband listed as father?
I also have another case in my tree where the mother is still legally married but her estranged husband is living in Western Australia post 1907... and her last 2 kids ( 1910, 1912) were to her new partner who lived with her until his death... She gives them his last name as a middle name, but her legal husband is listed as father on their birth record when he clearly is not!
Is this normal for the period? What is the reason for it?
-
I have just added 'on the official record" ...
So we need to remember that until the 1970s and 1980s there was very little need for anyone to actually order a copy of their own NSW birth cert.
::) ::)
And it was not until 1990s that the concept of many documents needed and 100 points of ID, before you could 'prove' you were NSW born. .... Quintex scandal involving the late Christopher Skate fleeing Australua on fake passport etc... prompted those changes. Now you need digital certification etc...
JM.. ... my finger cannot spell when I one finger type....
-
In your second example, women often gave clues in their children’s names as to who the father was.
The woman might not have wanted to admit to the registrar that she and her husband were estranged, she had taken up with another man, and these babies were his and not her husbands. Or perhaps the registrar asked what her husband’s name was, and wrote that name on the form erroneously assuming that he was the father.
-
Yes.... remember that this was an era where not everyone could read and write, and often the deputy registrar could only just read and write, but .... could not always spell.... and worse still.... the bdm officer was often a part time position, sometimes in the court house.... and that's where the counter was 4 ft high and 4 ft deep. (1200 x 1200 mm).
Picture the scene.... Mum with several children and a baby go to the court house counter. Clerk in attendance gets his ledger book out, .... huge book, leather bound, faces it to himself, and asks ALL the questions in a loud voice.... In front of a queue of people including general public, clergymen, sheriffs staff, a magistrates clerk etc.
If you were the Mum and your children are restless and your baby has some colic, would you rush your answer or get into a debate with the bdm officer about your known by name .... and then the big ledger is swung around and that bdm chap says SIGN HERE ... and points ... So his arm blocks your view of what he wrote down ....
;D
JM.
-
I don't know what the law would have been in NSW, but at that time (not sure about currently) in England and Wales, children born to a married woman were legally considered to be children of the marriage, regardless of what was actually known to be the case.
So if NSW law was similar, it would have been quite proper to record your grandfather's birth as you have found it to be.
-
I don't know what the law would have been in NSW, but at that time (not sure about currently) in England and Wales, children born to a married woman were legally considered to be children of the marriage, regardless of what was actually known to be the case.
So if NSW law was similar, it would have been quite proper to record your grandfather's birth as you have found it to be.
I have a family, UK. Lady leaves her husband to live with another man. Five children born to new partner. All registered with the husbands surname, they then nipped up the road to a different registration district and registered the children again with their birth fathers surname.
-
NSW law was similar. :)
BUT ..... importantly, until 1969, birth rregistrations in NSW did not give any baby any surname. By convention baby was known by their mother's surname. If their mother was a married woman, she was, in that era, known by her husband's surname.
The online INDEX for NSW bdm has a column heading for surname. The 1920 birth is likely indexed there. The reference number can be indexed more than ONCE, and you can check that at that online index as thete is an option.
JM
-
So, if the births of the children are INDEXED under her married surname, you should be able to say ... Their Mum told the truth. And because the children were raised using the surname of their actual Dad you should be abke to say ... Their Dad told the truth.
Our 21st century conventions can be tricky too.
JM.
-
This situation is not normal but not uncommon. I have found two family situations that paralell you original query. In Victoria my Johnston line had a wife with 4 children to original husband and a further 4 with the alternative partner all registered as Johnston. Another situation where a thrice married woman ]not Johnston] had a number of children in family unit that involved the Husband and live in 'provider' with the children registered under the husband but known locally with the 'provider' name. Very confusing and also had a long term family disconnect. 'We don't talk about that!'.
Cheers Jack Gee
-
It was quite normal and was fairly common.
It was also usual for children to be enrolled at their local government schools. The surname there would match the surname of the actual head of their then current household. The info was given verbally, no need to produce ID. The surname could be amended by the class teacher striking it out and adding new surname in the appropriate space in strict alpha order.
So if say John was born 1921 to Mary and if Mary was Mrs Bill JONES, but Bill had not yet Returned to Australia after WWI, John's mum, Mary, would likely have 'become known as (a legal term) : Mrs Fred SMITH .... assuming she was cohabitating with Fred SMITH. So when John born 1921 was old enough to be enrolled at Infants School, 1926-7 In NSW the school headmistress would have asked his mum .... what's his full name, and date of birth. Mary would reply John SMITH .... and head mistress would not need ANY proof. No one has provided any fib or mislead anyone.
I am sure It was quite normal, usual. Today's system is highly regulated, bureaucratic and many cross checking occurs. But the system in NSW BEFORE the 1980s was very very different.
Back to school enrollment as an example ... The marital status of a child's parents was of NO importance to the status of the child. That tradition (no importance to the childs status) actually comes from the clergy and baptisms ... which also do not give a child any SURNAME..... only gives them their Christian names. NSW BDM regulations only moved away from that in 1869.... So births till then NO SURNAME for baby. My original NSW birth rego (1947) has NO column for MY surname. Same for all my siblings, my parents, their patents, all the way back through my NSW ancestors... All very normal documentation.
I should note that Illegitimacy was a civil concern regarding inheritance where NO valid will was proven by the probate division of NSW Suoreme Court system.
JM
-
Thanks everyone for the responses.
I guess my main query is whether their was some rule which stated children born to a still legally married woman are the children of her legal spouse even though they were long separated or in my family's case overseas during WW1?
It seems quite surreal to me that my dad and his siblings were known by X last name, yet where born with Y and have Y listed as their father, when he 100% isnt and know one has ever suggested he was?
Also my second example, she even gives the son his biological father 's last name as a middle name, yet lists her estranged husband as the father? Why didnt/couldnt she list his biological dad as the father?
-
Thanks everyone for the responses.
I guess my main query is whether their was some rule which stated children born to a still legally married woman are the children of her legal spouse even though they were long separated or in my family's case overseas during WW1?
It seems quite surreal to me that my dad and his siblings were known by X last name, yet where born with Y and have Y listed as their father, when he 100% isnt and know one has ever suggested he was?
Also my second example, she even gives the son his biological father 's last name as a middle name, yet lists her estranged husband as the father? Why didnt/couldnt she list his biological dad as the father?
Please, please recognise that the information was NOT recorded by your Dad's mum. The information was recorded by someone else. They based their recording on the questions they asked of the informant. These questions were asked orally. Depending on how that clerk employed either part or full time by the NSW Registrar General's Office actually spoke with your Gran, and depending on that clerk's accent, mood, literacy level, standard of formal education, actually had a huge influence how the civil registration system functioned....
She has not done anything 'wrong'. In fact she followed the normal usual practice of NSW women in that era who were no longer co-habitating with the man they had formally married. It is actually NOT possible to know how many couples enrolled to vote in NSW and residing at the same address as each other, were actually formally married to each other. Many were simply common law relationships, and until the gold rushes era of the early1850s, most immigrant (convict/came free/wife of a soldier etc) females in NSW retained the surname that they were known by when they arrived as adults.
So from say the mid 1860s for the next 100 plus years, in NSW females became known by the surname of the male with whom they resided whether formally married or just common law wife.
I should also note that in more recent times is only since the 1970s that it has become the habit of women to refrain from becoming known by the same surname as their spouse. And it is only since the mid 1990s that NSW BDM has issued documentation for females who wish to change their surname on marriage to the same surname as their husband.
JM
-
The logic of your second example - providing a surname as a middle given name - actually shows just how much Gran cared for her children, regardless of what surname the NSW BDM ended up assigning as their surname.
You see, up until the mid 1970s, NSW BDM used to issue an EXTRACT of a birth cert. It gave the full names and date of birth of the child, and where born. No parents names listed. You could actually easily 'deface' it by drawing a single line through any word on it. So it could have easily had the 'wrong' surname 'defaced' by a being struck through.
ADD ... one of my ancient rellies has just phoned me, and said 'YES, and often the person issuing that extract would say to the applicant -WHICH SURNAME IS TO BE USED HERE - and so the extract would NOT include any surname that the applicant said was no longer used. NO LAWS BROKEN, THIS WAS THE THEN STANDARD PRACTICE, He added, it is still legal in NSW to become known by another name/names - so long as you are not setting out to defraud or deceive. It is just that since the 1990s it is now much harder to open a bank account, sign a lease agreement for a home to live in (rent or buy), or to seek social security benefits or be employed by others.
I WILL COPY AND REPOST the add on.
JM
-
I have added to my very recent post.
The logic of your second example - providing a surname as a middle given name - actually shows just how much Gran cared for her children, regardless of what surname the NSW BDM ended up assigning as their surname.
You see, up until the mid 1970s, NSW BDM used to issue an EXTRACT of a birth cert. It gave the full names and date of birth of the child, and where born. No parents names listed. You could actually easily 'deface' it by drawing a single line through any word on it. So it could have easily had the 'wrong' surname 'defaced' by a being struck through.
ADD ... one of my ancient rellies has just phoned me, and said 'YES, and often the person issuing that extract would say to the applicant -WHICH SURNAME IS TO BE USED HERE - and so the extract would NOT include any surname that the applicant said was no longer used. NO LAWS BROKEN, THIS WAS THE THEN STANDARD PRACTICE, He added, it is still legal in NSW to become known by another name/names - so long as you are not setting out to defraud or deceive. It is just that since the 1990s it is now much harder to open a bank account, sign a lease agreement for a home to live in (rent or buy), or to seek social security benefits or be employed by others.
I WILL COPY AND REPOST the add on.
JM
-
great thanks JM, i understand the name aspect but my uery is about the father name on the birth record being her legal husband when it couldnt possibly have been? And why give the child the surname of his real father as a forename and not just name his real father???
It stands out to me as the husband of a married woman in those days was presumed as father and named as such so therefore to acknowldge the child auctual dad she has included his surname as a middle name?
Is this valid? Why couldn't or would they just record the real father as father under her married name? Why name her husband as father when he isnt?
-
Please do remember that your Gran did not state that her formal husband was the father of her children. The person recording the information put the name of her formal husband in that column and they did so based on the questions they chose to ask your Gran. She has not fibbed, she has not sought to deceive, she has given honest answers to the questions. It was the SYSTEM itself that has caused the confusion.
JM and on behalf of my several ancient rellies with first hand experience of NSW BDM procedures and practices across several decades of the mid to late 20th century.
-
Appreciate your knowledge JM.
From your perspective was my pop ever a chance of having his name on his child birth records in that era wile his wife was still legally married?
Does the register ask, "Married or not? Name? Maiden Name? Who is your husband?" or do they ask "Name? who is the father of this child?"
Could an umarried mother list the father on the birth record?
-
Appreciate your knowledge JM.
From your perspective was my pop ever a chance of having his name on his child birth records in that era wile his wife was still legally married?
Does the register ask, "Married or not? Name? Maiden Name? Who is your husband?" or do they ask "Name? who is the father of this child?"
Could an umarried mother list the father on the birth record?
Hi Matthew,
If you have the birth certificate handy, perhaps you can look closely at the headings on each column.
This will help in understanding how the orally presented questions (which were the column headings) could be misconstrued and compounded by the factors already mentioned in the replies in this thread .
Social propriety was important too.
Sue
-
great thanks JM, i understand the name aspect but my uery is about the father name on the birth record being her legal husband when it couldnt possibly have been? And why give the child the surname of his real father as a forename and not just name his real father???
It stands out to me as the husband of a married woman in those days was presumed as father and named as such so therefore to acknowldge the child auctual dad she has included his surname as a middle name?
Is this valid? Why couldn't or would they just record the real father as father under her married name? Why name her husband as father when he isnt?
Yes, it is Valid. Yes, the system did NOT actually ask WHO IS THE REAL father - statute law in NSW and actually throughout each of the jurisdictions that make up Australia - was based on English law (NOT on Scottish law - only on English statutes).... So the child of a married woman was automatically legally the child of her husband .... until such time as the marriage was legally terminated (death of that husband, or judicial separation or divorce etc).
The NSW law has been changed in my lifetime, but back in 1920s there were still some taboo aspects to domestic relationships.
Appreciate your knowledge JM.
From your perspective was my pop ever a chance of having his name on his child birth records in that era wile his wife was still legally married?
Does the register ask, "Married or not? Name? Maiden Name? Who is your husband?" or do they ask "Name? who is the father of this child?"
Could an umarried mother list the father on the birth record?
It depended on the ever changing mood/knowledge/education of the clerk posing the question. But basically the question as to WHO IS THE BABY'S FATHER was unlikely to be posed by the clerk in that way to any woman who was registering a baby's birth.
The question re an unmarried mother register a father's name in NSW ... that's worthy of a 50,000 word answer. But basically she would need to be like a stick of bamboo - bend the truth a tad and give a date/place of marriage.
JM
-
Also, the need to actually obtain the birth certificate for the chap born 1920, - there was NO NEED for him to actually need it in his childhood, or in his working life, or to join the military or the police forces or get his Drivers Licence, or enrol to vote. Not until he turned 100 would he need to have proven he was turning 100 and expecting a Birthday Card from the Governor and the Governor General
JM
-
Hi
Perhaps while you are looking at the column headings, you might also confirm that the person registering the births (that is the informant) is in fact the mother herself.
There was no requirement as I understand it, that a parent had to complete this procedure.
I recently saw a couple of birth certificates where the grandfather went register a couple of children.
Sue
-
It is possible that the NSW BDM document issued recently has a different layout from that used back in the 1920s, but the heading for the column of concern OUGHT to read :
Father's name, occupation, age and birthplace.
At first glance you would likely think : Simple questions, no hassles. etc etc
But in the 1920s some of the clerks asking them were already aged in their 70s ... and were familiar with what is now archaic English. They may have used 'Thy' and 'Thou' and may have had an English Accent ... and it was and continues to be fairly easy to be mis-understood if speaking the English of the King James Version of the Bible.
Who is THY father? Who is THE father? .... Can you hear the subtle difference if you are in a queue of people who are all speaking ... this is the era where people exchanged their news by speaking with each other - radio was a luxury, TV not yet invented, people walked miles to spend time with other people.
so the clerks all developed their own alternative ways to determine what to record in that column. .... Basically, if the woman had a ring on her ring finger on her left hand, or if someone in the queue greeted her as Mrs XYZ, she was considered a married woman. The clerk then was able to avoid the question and ask the 'who, when, where did you marry....'. The Registrar General's Office was not just responsible for BDMs. Until mid 1970s it was actually part of the NSW Land Titles Office ... the 'General Office' responsible for 'Registering' : Land Transactions, Deeds, and also the Births, Deaths, Marriages... etc etc etc.
JM
-
Appreciate your knowledge JM.
From your perspective was my pop ever a chance of having his name on his child birth records in that era wile his wife was still legally married?
Does the register ask, "Married or not? Name? Maiden Name? Who is your husband?" or do they ask "Name? who is the father of this child?"
Could an umarried mother list the father on the birth record?
If your Pop had gone along with Nan to register the births, and they had told the registrar that he was the father, then in that case his name might have been written in the “father” column. This is how it was in the UK at least. JM or Sue will be able to advise if that was the same in NSW.
It is possible that they did not do this as it may have been a bit scandalous at the time,or they might have been a bit embarrassed, as explained earlier by JM. They probably felt they did not want or need to explain their personal life to a stranger, and as long as the child’s birth was registered, that was all they needed to do.
If a mother was previously married to Mr X, her surname upon marriage in that era would have changed to X too. This was now her legal surname. If she went on to have relationships and dozens of children with numerous men, then went and registered those births, they would all be registered under her married surname.
-
I have been reading this post with great interest
In our family we have a similar situation when Mary Black married John Brown, when that marriage failed, she met Tom Smith and had 2 sons the father was Tom however their birth certificates recorded their mother’s name as Mary Brown formerly Black, and her legal husband’s name John Brown
The Boys where always known as the Smith Boys. Mary Brown never divorced John Brown or married Tom Smith. When she died her death certificate was issued in the name Mary Smith
We understand that the boys discovered they were illegitimate when they signed up for WWI, and that this was a great source of shame and secrecy
When we obtained copies of the birth certificates for Family history purposes we found there was a handwritten endorsement to change her name to Mary Smith formerly Black, and that there was a stat dec from Tom Smith and Mary Brown stating that they are the parents
As you may have guessed I have changed the given and surnames of the people involved as they have a rather unusual surname which would make it easy for them to be identified, all parties involved are now deceased however there are grand and great grandchildren still living.
Cass
-
Yes, Ruskie and Cass are also giving great info.
There was no formal requirement for Stat Dec. but if offered to the NSW BDM deputy/ clerk recording the info, they were obliged to note it's existence.
It was simply a different era, a different set of circumstances, rules, standards, principles, methodology...
JM
-
So it seems as though if a woman was married the register would ask, Husbands name? and not who is the father of the child???
It would seem family history and secondary sources of info, census, voter list, absence of legal husband etc are neccesary to determine someone's true parenthood?
My dad was hoffified to discover his real father wasnt on his birth record but after some digging it seems possible that because his mum was married (not to his dad) she's registered it under her married name and subsequently his father is listed as her legal husband. More context is always neccesary in these extra marital illegitment situations.
My final question is when did this all change? my brother's wife was still marriedd when they had their ids in the 80s and my brother is on the birth record even though they were not married yet.
-
:D
Please, please stop thinking that your Dad's mum 'did this' as though she has done anything 'wrong' or out of the ordinary or in breach of any then law/regulation/rule/practice. She has not done anything adverse at all.
When did the changes occur ... they occurred over time. But the 1970s brought about significant changes for the 'womens rights' movements across most of the western democracies around the world. Equal pay for equal work of equal value; females allowed to apply to be trained in various male dominated trades, and for social security benefits for unmarried mothers and many other social changes,
IN NSW, if the woman said she was not married then she was always able to nominate whoever she chose as the father, without offering any proof, at all. - right from 1856 when civil registration started. ADD, but of course the registrar was also able to decline to record the nomination, and instead, until the mid 1920s or 30s, write ''ILLEGITIMATE" across the NSW ledger, after the baby's mum had completed the registration process, - sometimes it was not written on the local ledgers, but it was written by the Head Office clerks on receiving the quarterly returns - this was one of the reasons given to recall all the local ledgers throughout NSW in the 1980s and for declining access to them unless the NSW Supreme Court ordered for a specific matter.
1976ish is the answer for the 1980s example you offer, assuming it is in NSW.
JM NOTE I HAVE MODIFIED AND ADDED IMPORTANT INFO at 3.50 pm NSW daylight savings time. (so ten minutes after I had posted, it reflects the important reminder from my ancient rellie's urgent phone call... that I had overlooked that very significant proviso. :-X :-X :-[ I am officially in the naughty corner now.
-
Plenty of people in the 1980s were unmarried and having children, and there was little, if no, stigma about doing so. Different times, different attitudes, probably different birth registration forms. Your brother probably went along with the mother to both register the birth of their babies too.
I think you might be overthinking this a bit Matthew. :)
For further proof of parentage, how about getting your father a DNA test for Christmas? Though that might muddy your waters even more. ;D Ancestry have a good sale on at the moment (though I’ve heard there is a problem returning samples to Ireland via Auspost, but you can delay taking the test till that is sorted in order to take advantage of the lower prices at present).
-
Hi,
IM in Australia.
have a query, my grandmother married in 1888 and had 8 children the last to her husband in 1906.
He then moved to WA and wasn’t heard of again. She then partnered with a new man but stayed married.
They had 3 kids 1908, 1909 and 1911.
She register them under her husbands name with him as father.
The first child she gave her new partner’s (the bio father’s) last name as a middle name.
What was the protocol here? Why didn’t/couldn’t she name her new partner as the kids father? But instead uses his last name (Black) as a second name.
*** Fake names.
The child then is named Charles Black White
With ‘White’ being her legal husbands name.
-
And her legal husband in father column,
when he clearly wasn’t???
-
Because when a married woman produces a child, the legal father *is* her husband .
-
Hi,
IM in Australia.
have a query, my grandmother married in 1888 and had 8 children the last to her husband in 1906.
He then moved to WA and wasn’t heard of again. She then partnered with a new man but stayed married.
They had 3 kids 1908, 1909 and 1911.
She register them under her husbands name with him as father.
The first child she gave her new partner’s (the bio father’s) last name as a middle name.
What was the protocol here? Why didn’t/couldn’t she name her new partner as the kids father? But instead uses his last name (Black) as a second name.
*** Fake names.
The child then is named Charles Black White
With ‘White’ being her legal husbands name.
I am confident that the NSW BDM's registration process in that era did not actually assign ANY surname to the birth of any baby being registered.
Have you read through each of the responses to your similar enquiry still current on the Australia board?
The registration process in NSW was verbally driven by part time registration clerks asking their questions of the informant often in a queue of people standing at a shop like counter 4ft high and 4 ft wide . The surname that the Mum used had become her own legal surname on her marriage. She did not fill in the clerk's register. The clerk did. The clerk asked the questions, in his own words. The register faced the clerk. When the clerk was ready he swung the ledger around and said 'sign here'. So she did.
;) ;)
JM
-
Because when a married woman produces a child, the legal father *is* her husband .
Yes, that was NSW protocol.
JM
-
As I understand it in cases like this, the biological father has to be present at registration for his name to be listed as "father".
Added: this is in England and Wales.
-
Because when a married woman produces a child, the legal father *is* her husband .
There is a (rebuttable) legal presumption of paternity, which for registration purposes (in E/W) means that a married woman can name her husband as the father of her child without him being present to agree - but if she does that knowing it to be false (or impossible) then she commits perjury.
-
Because when a married woman produces a child, the legal father *is* her husband .
There is a (rebuttable) legal presumption of paternity, which for registration purposes (in E/W) means that a married woman can name her husband as the father of her child without him being present to agree - but if she does that knowing it to be false (or impossible) then she commits perjury.
And similarly in NSW, from 1856 (commencement of civil registration), however .... in NSW the sparse population meant that bdm registrations were not recorded ONLY by dedicated bdm clerks, trained in the statute law governing BDM registrations. The clerk could be selling postage stamps, cigars, pots and pans, and recording the occasional birth etc. Or he could be in the local Lands Office, or Pastures Protection Board dealing with Surveyors, pouring over maps, or livestock brand regisrations and pause to record the occasional birth etc.
Or be the local magistrate's clerk at the Court House, interupting their cuppa tea to go to the big counter ........
The standard of everyday literacy was not sufficient for either the sub-ordinate clerks or the informant to actually comprehend the significance of nuances in protocol in bdm requirements. Unless the legal husband was sought out for maintenance of children he knew he had not fathered, then there was no reason for anyone to become aware of what had been recorded by the NSW bdm head office. No one lied. 21st century eyes see prejury. Early 20th century clerk's eyes saw the social benefits for the innocent babies by avoiding 'illegitimate' from being scrawled across their local register.
People in NSW who married in the late 1800s often knew how to write their own name, but may not have been able to actually read well. Compulsory secular education started in late 1870s.... :)
My ancient living rellies include retired CofE clery and NSW bdm senior officers. Clergy say .... look up the baptisms .... their Dad may be named on the parish register or in a margin note there...
Where the Informant was not formally married to baby's mother but informing that he was father the even in the 1930s in NSW it would simply be noted as 'father' in the column reserved for informant's name and relationship .... It would be extremely rare if the bdm clerk recorded that same name in the area that also required the age, occupation, place of birth and when and where married to baby's mum.
JM
-
Hi there,
One of the very special aspects to RootsChat is that anyone can readily read the threads, even if not actually logged on. The threads are there for ever, and Matthew has raised some very pertinent questions that may be interesting to all family history buffs, now and in the future.
Cheers,
JM.
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=855943.0 (Australia)
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=856224.0 (Common Room)
The following live links provide far more than the short summary I have drawn from them.
https://www.nsw.gov.au/family-and-relationships/family-history-search/registry-records
and
https://www.nsw.gov.au/family-and-relationships/family-history-search/registry-records#toc-our-index
and
https://www.nsw.gov.au/births-deaths-marriages/about-us/history-of-registry
and
https://www.records.nsw.gov.au/archives/collections-and-research/guides-and-indexes/bdms
Compulsory civil registration began in 1856. The Act entitled An Act for Registering Births, Deaths and Marriages 1856 allowed the Governor to establish an office in Sydney to register all births, deaths and marriages in … NSW. … Governor … appoint a Registrar General,… divide …colony into registry districts and … appoint district registrars. …Registrar General supplied district registrars and registered ministers with books and forms for the recording of births, deaths and marriages.
It was …the responsibility of a parent, in … a birth, a minister, in… a marriage, or the owner of a house in which a death occurred, to notify the district registrar of the details ...
In the early years of civil registration most events were registered following verbal advice from the informant. The widespread use of notification forms did not begin until after World War One in 1918. District registrars would enter the details into bound registers and allocate the registration a unique number. In some … districts these numbers ..run sequentially for the whole year, .. in other districts a new number series was begun each quarter. A copy of the registration was made on a loose registration sheet and forwarded to the Sydney Registry at the end of each quarter.
… They were bound with Sydney registrations first, followed by the metropolitan districts and then the country districts in alphabetical order. The consolidated registers were then renumbered starting at one (1) and running through the whole year.
1902
The Legitimation Act 1902 is passed… allowed the registration of a child who was born before their parents were married. Registration of the child was entered in the register of births making it possible to issue a certified copy of the registration. …
1934
The practice of entering "illegitimate" after the name of an illegitimate child and "spinster" after the name of a mother ceases.
1971
‘Parents, regardless of marital status, can now register a birth in person or by mail and add a father's details any time after registration. Prior to 1971, non-married parents had to attend a registry office to complete the registration forms in person whereas married parents could lodge the registration by mail. Also, if a birth was registered without a father's details there was no provision to add these details at a later date’.
2004
The conversion of 1952 to 1992 death and marriage records to electronic files is completed.
Electronic notification of birth commences, enabling the Registry to contact parents who do not register births within the required 60 days.
[/sub]
-
Hi there,
One of the very special aspects to RootsChat is that anyone can readily read the threads, even if not actually logged on. The threads are there for ever, and Matthew has raised some very pertinent questions that may be interesting to all family history buffs, now and in the future.
Cheers,
JM.
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=855943.0 (Australia)
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=856224.0 (Common Room)
The following live links provide far more than the short summary I have drawn from them.
https://www.nsw.gov.au/family-and-relationships/family-history-search/registry-records
and
https://www.nsw.gov.au/family-and-relationships/family-history-search/registry-records#toc-our-index
and
https://www.nsw.gov.au/births-deaths-marriages/about-us/history-of-registry
and
https://www.records.nsw.gov.au/archives/collections-and-research/guides-and-indexes/bdms
Compulsory civil registration began in 1856. The Act entitled An Act for Registering Births, Deaths and Marriages 1856 allowed the Governor to establish an office in Sydney to register all births, deaths and marriages in … NSW. … Governor … appoint a Registrar General,… divide …colony into registry districts and … appoint district registrars. …Registrar General supplied district registrars and registered ministers with books and forms for the recording of births, deaths and marriages.
It was …the responsibility of a parent, in … a birth, a minister, in… a marriage, or the owner of a house in which a death occurred, to notify the district registrar of the details ...
In the early years of civil registration most events were registered following verbal advice from the informant. The widespread use of notification forms did not begin until after World War One in 1918. District registrars would enter the details into bound registers and allocate the registration a unique number. In some … districts these numbers ..run sequentially for the whole year, .. in other districts a new number series was begun each quarter. A copy of the registration was made on a loose registration sheet and forwarded to the Sydney Registry at the end of each quarter.
… They were bound with Sydney registrations first, followed by the metropolitan districts and then the country districts in alphabetical order. The consolidated registers were then renumbered starting at one (1) and running through the whole year.
1902
The Legitimation Act 1902 is passed… allowed the registration of a child who was born before their parents were married. Registration of the child was entered in the register of births making it possible to issue a certified copy of the registration. …
1934
The practice of entering "illegitimate" after the name of an illegitimate child and "spinster" after the name of a mother ceases.
1971
‘Parents, regardless of marital status, can now register a birth in person or by mail and add a father's details any time after registration. Prior to 1971, non-married parents had to attend a registry office to complete the registration forms in person whereas married parents could lodge the registration by mail. Also, if a birth was registered without a father's details there was no provision to add these details at a later date’.
2004
The conversion of 1952 to 1992 death and marriage records to electronic files is completed.
Electronic notification of birth commences, enabling the Registry to contact parents who do not register births within the required 60 days.
-
Here is a live link to a digitised newspaper cutting from 14 September, 1922 from a Sydney NSW Newspaper. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/221507091 It describes some of the roles of a Police Officer in a township some 90 miles west of Sydney NSW and in 1921 had a population of 13,500 or thereabouts (statistics from another newspaper report).
POLICE POOH-BAH ...
The country police officer is often the Pooh-Bah of the community, and he is so burdened with 'outside' duties that very little time is left to him to catch thieves (though he manages to do it) or rope in a stray drunk and disorderly. He is generally the acting CPS; deputy registrar of births deaths marriages; State children's relief officer; inspector of slaughter houses; inspector of licenses; electoral officer and roll collector; agent for various departments; ....
JM
-
So did the registration process change because people were having kids outside of their legal marriage?
So, if you were legally married but separated and had kids to your new partner, your legal husband would be on the birth record of that child? Was this a legal requirement or more out of convenience and fear of ridicule?
If you were a single woman who had a child the father would need to register the birth with you otherwise the child would register under the mother’s name with father blank?
-
Hi,
I wonder whether a re-read of your very recent thread on this same subject where JM and others have kindly advised you might help clarify your understanding
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=855943.msg7243242#msg7243242
Sue
-
Part 1 of 2 parts ...
So did the registration process change because people were having kids outside of their legal marriage?
So, if you were legally married but separated and had kids to your new partner, your legal husband would be on the birth record of that child? Was this a legal requirement or more out of convenience and fear of ridicule?
If you were a single woman who had a child the father would need to register the birth with you otherwise the child would register under the mother’s name with father blank?
Hi there, ;D :) :)
::) So did the registration process change because people were having kids outside of their legal marriage? No. The process changed because over time the NSW Parliament amended the law and its regulations and as more of the population became more literate then both the sub-ordinate clerks and the parents seeking to obey the law by registering their children's births were able to become better informed. That's Democracy in action.
Here's a live link to the General Orders issued by the NSW Governor back in 1810 https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/627934 (Sydney Gaz 24 Feb 1810). He explains his reasons for issuing that General Order. Notice he has concerns for the innocent sufferers - i.e. the children of those criminal intercourses ! So the occurrence of ex nuptial children is not peculiar to New South Wales, nor to Australia nor to the early 1900s.
-
Part 2 of 2.
::) So, if you were legally married but separated and had kids to your new partner, your legal husband would be on the birth record of that child? Was this a legal requirement or more out of convenience and fear of ridicule?
Here are many of the NSW statute laws re Registrar General and BDMs, from the 1855 law through to quite recent ones.
Registrar-General Act 1973 No 67
Registrar-General Legislation (Amendment and Repeal) Act 2010 No 17
Registrar-General's Offices Act 1908 No 15
Registration Act 1855 No 34a
Registration of Births Deaths and Marriages (Amendment) Act 1970 No 93
Registration of Births Deaths and Marriages Act 1899 No 17
Registration of Births, Deaths and Marriages (Adoption) Amendment Act 1987 No 175
Registration of Births, Deaths and Marriages (Amendment) Act 1967 No 45
Registration of Births, Deaths and Marriages (Amendment) Act 1975 No 57
Registration of Births, Deaths and Marriages (Amendment) Act 1979 No 2
Registration of Births, Deaths and Marriages (Amendment) Act 1992 No 45
Registration of Births, Deaths and Marriages (Coroners) Amendment Act 1980 No 35
Registration of Births, Deaths and Marriages (Coroners) Amendment Act 1986 No 30
Registration of Births, Deaths and Marriages Act 1973 No 87
Registration of Births, Deaths, and Marriages (Amendment) Act 1930 No 17
Registration of Births, Deaths, and Marriages (Amendment) Act 1934 No 43
Registration of Births, Deaths, and Marriages (Amendment) Act 1944 No 21
Registration of Births, Deaths, and Marriages (Amendment) Act 1948 No 19
Registration of Births, Deaths, and Marriages (Amendment) Act 1966 No 53
Fear of ridicule is not something peculiar to the 1900s or to NSW residents. Each generation may well develop their own taboos, or habits or practices. For example in the 1950s, many NSW families observed Sundays as a day of rest, attended church and then rested at home. Today's families often spend Sundays at the shops, groceries, clothing, household whitegoods, eating out, and have no knowledge of the practices of their great grandparents Sunday habits at all.
::) If you were a single woman who had a child the father would need to register the birth with you otherwise the child would register under the mother’s name with father blank?
On my recent reply I highlighted the year that the NSW law changed and the use of the words 'illegitimate' and 'spinster' ceased. - 1934. My depth of knowledge for any jurisdiction other than NSW is sparse. Perhaps you could try RChat's own search engine? As I am sure there's many other threads from many other RChatters that have posed similar questions. :) https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?action=search
I continue to be absolutely sure that any mother going to register her NSW born baby in the era before pro-forma printed forms became the normal way would have stood facing a male clerk. The male clerk would have a ledger book facing him. He posed his questions verbally, and once the ink had dried he blotted the page, and then swung the book around to face the mother. Now unless she was TALL and had LONG arms, she likely only could reach his quill and sign the record after stretching and stretching and stretching. I am very familiar with the four foot high and four foot wide counter used throughout the former Lands Department and Pastures Protection Boards and the Court Houses of NSW in the 1950s and 1960s. I can assure you some of those counters date back to the 1860s, and are STILL in use today, particularly in regional NSW. Any woman, recovering from childbirth in the 1900s who would have been most likely nursing her baby, would most likely have NOT expected to have stretched her body 'that far' in the first few weeks after giving birth. It is also very likely that her opportunity to actually read what had been recorded was blocked (inadvertently) by the clerk's arms - one holding the pen and the other pointing where she was to sign.
JM
-
Hi,
I wonder whether a re-read of your very recent thread on this same subject where JM and others have kindly advised you might help clarify your understanding
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=855943.msg7243242#msg7243242
Sue
Hi Sue,
I also wonder, and so too my ancient living rellies.
JM
-
Live Link to New South Wales Births, Deaths ad Marriages Registration Act 62 of 1995, as at 14 October 2021.
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/bdamra1995383/
ADD, One of my ancient living rellies has phoned me to remind me that there is no change to the laws that allow a person to become known by another name ...
so under
BIRTHS, DEATHS AND MARRIAGES REGISTRATION ACT 1995 - SECT 32
Change of name may still be established by repute or usage
32 Change of name may still be established by repute or usage
This Part does not prevent a change of name by repute or usage.
And that the pdf for the 1855 Act is actually available on line : http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/num_act/ra1855n34191/
JM
-
Here is a live link to the 2017 Regulations for registering NSW Australia birth events.
https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/whole/html/inforce/current/sl-2017-0434
Part 2 Information required to be given to Registrar or noted in Register
4 Notification of birth
For the purposes of section 12 (1) of the Act, the following particulars are required—
(a) the sex and date, time and place of birth of the child,
(b) whether the child was born alive or stillborn,
(c) the weight of the child at birth and, if the child was stillborn, the period of gestation of the child,
(d) whether or not the birth was a multiple birth,
(e) the full name (including, if applicable, the original surname), date of birth and usual place of residence (at the time of delivery) of the birth mother of the child,
(f) the full name, occupation, contact phone number, and email address (if any), of the person giving the notice.
5 Registration of birth
(1) For the purposes of sections 14 and 17 (1) of the Act, the following particulars are required—
(a) the sex and date, time and place of birth of the child,
(b) the weight of the child at birth,
(c) whether or not the birth was a multiple birth,
(d) the full name (including, if applicable, the original surname), date of birth (or age), place of birth, occupation and usual place of residence (at the time of delivery) of each parent of the child,
(e) the date and place of marriage of the parents of the child (if applicable),
(f) the full name, sex and date of birth of any other children (including any deceased children) of either of the parents of the child,
(g) whether or not either of the parents of the child is of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin,
(h) if either parent of the child was born outside Australia, the period of residence in Australia of that parent.
Note—
A birth registration statement given to the Registrar under section 14 of the Act must also state the name of the child (see section 21 of the Act).
(2) For avoidance of doubt, the Registrar is authorised to include in the Register the registrable information about the identity of the child’s parents that is required to be provided under this clause.
(3) If the particulars supplied to the Registrar under section 14 of the Act specify that—
(a) a parent who is the father of the child wishes to be identified in the Register as the father, or
(b) a parent who is the birth mother of the child wishes to be identified in the Register as the mother,
or both, the particulars entered in the Register under section 17 of the Act must identify the parent as the father or mother, as the case requires. This subclause does not limit the particulars which may be included in the Register.
JM
-
I understand all of these replies.
I’m still curious though... if it was the case that a still married woman’s children would have her husband listed as father irrespective of whether he is or isn’t then wouldn’t an entire generation possibly not have their bio dad on their birth record... assuming divorce was difficult to attain many women remained married although separated from their husbands.
-
I understand all of these replies.
I’m still curious though... if it was the case that a still married woman’s children would have her husband listed as father irrespective of whether he is or isn’t then wouldn’t an entire generation possibly not have their bio dad on their birth record... assuming divorce was difficult to attain many women remained married although separated from their husbands.
In one of the replies on either this thread or on the other one, there s mention of the lack, at least in NSW, of the generations (plural) who had NO need to obtain a full copy of their civil birth registration. Consequently they would be unaware of what had been recorded on the civil registration entries for their own births, marriages, their parents marriage . etc. Your thread on the Australia board explains that your Dad only became aware of his birth registration information when he turned 100. I presume he married using his known by surname, and enrolled to vote using that same surname, drivers licence, car registration, mortgage, deeds, bank accounts, pension ... and utilities etc.
I was born 1947. Drivers licence at 17,
Electoral roll at 21, married in 1974. All in NSW, all without certified bdm paperwork.
JM.
-
A still married woman, cohabitating with a male who was not her husband.... would likely, in NSW, until the NO FAULT divorce laws came about in circa 1977, have given HER then legal surname (as in her married surname) as the surname for her children. It was NOT until 1969 that any SURNAME was assigned to any baby born in NSW.
ADD ... So several generations after your person of interest' s birth, babies were automatically assigned a SURNAME by the Registrar Generals Office. This was around the time (1976) that NSWBDM was finally separated from the NSW Land Titles Office.
So 1970s was a decade of change in NSW administrative matters.
JM
-
I think consideration for the two threads may be needed ... perhaps to be merged into one, all on the Australia board.
JM.
-
I think consideration for the two threads may be needed ... perhaps to be merged into one, all on the Australia board.
JM.
Yes, I agree; :)
And, remembering that the familial registration predicament Matthew is working on was not confined to Australia, perhaps it is time to accept "the way things were"
Recently accessible DNA matching exposes many of the same kind of anomalies between birth name and biological reality.
Sue
-
Yes, I agree; :)
And, remembering that the familial registration predicament Matthew is working on was not confined to Australia, perhaps it is time to accept "the way things were"
Recently accessible DNA matching exposes many of the same kind of anomalies between birth name and biological reality.
Sue
-
Edited at 10.25 a.m. 12 December 2021 Daylight Savings Time, NSW.
Many thanks for merging these two threads. I hope that there's sufficient detailed explanations to the underlying dilemma that our Original Poster faced.... afterall his two grandmothers both would have been confronted by their various social, domestic, local community taboos/ standards/ practices/ habits of becoming known by a number of surnames in their life times.
JM
-
If the OP’s father knows who is biological father was, and he only discovered the surname “anomaly” on his birth certificate at age 100, and reassurances and explanations have been given on this thread, I would suggest that there is nothing he needs to concern himself with.
If you have further suspicions I suggest getting your father a DNA test. In fact If you think it might be useful in your research in years to come, it might be an idea do this anyway.
Good luck.
-
Yes, my original query was more out of curiosity as to the protocols regarding married woman and kids with their new partners while legal husband is no longer in the scene.
It was only retrospectively that Dad found his mother’s’ original husband on his birth record despite knowing he was at war and they were separated 2 years prior to my Aunty (dads older sister) being born.
-
The children from the 1915 marriage (if there were any) may have had half siblings. Assuming the husband re- partnered after the split.
The DNA testing might reveal something.
Sue
-
Is this the same question?
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=857697.new#new