RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: Marmitch on Tuesday 14 September 04 14:13 BST (UK)
-
Just a general question.
Is it possible for someone born in the late 1850s, not to have had their birth registered. The person I am looking for had other older and younger siblings registered, so presumably the parents were aware of the need to register a child legally, and not to rely simply on baptismal records. Can anyone think of a reason for this omission?
-
Hi Marmitch ;D
I have a similar problem trying to find the birth of my grandfather circa 1888. I know when his birthday was and have his death certificate to prove the year - but no luck.
The Northern Ireland GRO have searched 3 years either side of the date I gave them but cannot find a birth entry for him.
They have given me three possible reasons for this - either he was not born in Northern Ireland, or his birth was never registered,or I have given them the wrong date.
I am positive sure that he was born in Northern Ireland and, as all the other children where registered, can't imagine that he wasn't - that leaves the wrong birth date which means the age on his death certificate must be wrong. The only other thing I can think is that he is registered under an incorrect spelling of his name.
Hope the other RootsChatters can give us a few more suggestions.
Regards
Darcy :D
-
In my family, the age at death has been significantly wrong a number of times. Check who the informant was on the certificate. If it is not a child, spouse or sibling, the age may be a "best guess".
Spelling can also be a problem. My grandmother's birth certificate spelt Ethel as Ahel and the surname bore little relationship to her name. When the registry eventually found it we were most impressed by their efforts especially as she was born 3 years earlier than she had thought.
Trish
-
Hi there
All Births, Marriages and Deaths since the 1st July 1837 are supposed to have been registered by the state, but in the earlier years some escaped the net because the onus was on the Registrar to record the birth, not the parents.
This changed in 1874 when the onus was tranferred to the parents to register a birth, and a fine was imposed if they did not register the birth within a certain amount of days. (think it was 1 month)
The registration system was not completely effective in its early years, and has been estimated that up to 15% of births were not registered between 1837 and 1860.
Before 1875 parents were not penalised for not registering a birth, nor was there any way in ensuring that the information supplied was accurate.
Hope that helps
Chris in 1066Land
-
Just to follow up on Chris excellent reply the time for registration of a birth was always set at 42 days after the event but as has been said in the early yyears this didnt happen because the registrars didnt get paid to go out knocking on doors.
There was a piece in one of the histroical Times newspapers on this subject where the registrar had written a letter to the editor of the times explaining why he had decided to return to the family trade of carpenter instead of being a registrar. He was complining that because people were living longer having fewer children he could no longer make this job pay apparently he took a percentage of each registration. With that in mind I wonder if this was why the births from 1st July 1837 and January 1875 ( or is it 1874 now you have me thinking Chris) in some cases were never chased down
rob
-
Take your pick
1875 - The Oxford Companion to Local & Family History by David Hey, page 96
1874 - Beginning your Family History, George Pelling, page 46
Chris in 106Land
-
Can I just point out to anyone reading this thread that it only applies to England and Wales.
Northen Ireland... http://www.groni.gov.uk/index.htm
What Information is Available ?
Registers of births and deaths (from 1864) and registers of marriages (from 1845). These civil registers make up the main series of records maintained by the General Register Office.
Scotland... http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/grosweb/grosweb.nsf/pages/histgros
The 1854 Act provided for the setting up of the General Registry (sic) Office, the appointment of a Registrar General and the appointment of registrars in every parish. It also provided that the Registrar General should produce an annual report to be forwarded to the Home Secretary to be laid before Parliament containing 'a general abstract of the numbers of births, deaths and marriages registered during the foregoing year'. The first general abstract (relating to 1855) was submitted in 1856.
marmitch,
What area are you researching? The closer you are to the start of statutory registration the higher percentage of BMD NOT registered.
Also what job did the father have? I ask because I had a missing reg in Wales in 1871, the person in question had 10 siblings all registered in Conway but she wasn't.
Turned out she could have been registered in Altringham. Her father was a builder and was on a big job - big enough he took all the family - this only came to light when they weren't where I thouhgt they'd be on the 1871 census.
Cheers,
Pam
-
The father worked as a tailor. What you say about movement could apply as one of his children was born in Salford in 1854, and by the 1860s they lived in Rochdale. I haven't yet located them on the 1861 census, but then I am relying on the kindness of others to do look ups which I understand can be time consuming if you don't have an address or at least a fairly exact location.
As most people will appreciate, clues can be quite limited.
Will post a request for 1861 census again with the best info I have.
-
And there is the fact that often expectant mothers went to their mothers as their due date approached. If they are out of the area, you should bear in mind that the birth should be registered in the district in which it took place.
Kazza.
-
Today Rochdale and Salford are both included in Greater Manchester. They are only about 12 to 14 miles apart so a move from one to the other would be quite a small trip. Workers tended to go where the work was - they did not usually have a wealth of household goods to make moves difficult. Rochdale was at the very centre of the very large cotton spinning and weaving industry. Much of the locally produced cloth was made up into shirts, riding habits and the like within the towns. Yorkshire did much the same with its wool industry. I would imagine work for a good tailor to be plentiful.
-
Yes, it would appear that the family moved on mass from Salford to Rochdale, possibly during the early part of the 1860s (I'm still trying to trace them on the 1861 Census). Thomas costello may have been married twice, with the older children living nearby in Salford, but going from what little I can ascertain from records, ther seems to have been a mass exodus of possibly 3 or more households of the Costellos, from Salford to Rochdale during this period. Most likely they moved for the work, as all are listed in later censuses as working within the cotton industry.
-
What is much much more possible is that it was actually registered, but hasn't made it into the indexes properly. Someone has done some research on the accuracy of bmd indexes (Mike someone) and actually written a book about it all, and his conclusions were quite shocking with an enormous number of wrong or missing index entries.
What you can do if you know the approximate date of the entry is to apply directly to the registration office concerned and get them to do a search. You can find addresses for registry offices by doing a search on the web. If it is an old office that has now closed, then it is reasonably easy to find out which current office holds the old records.
-
Corinne,
I think this is the Mike you are meaning:
A COMEDY OF ERRORS
The story of the civil registration of births, marriages and deaths in England and Wales in the 1800s, by Michael Whitfield Foster
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/mikefost/
Thanks for reminding me, well worth reading (and re-reading) !
-
Thanks for the information. If I can ascertain which district the family were likely to be living in around the time of her birth, I will then look at the possibility that an error in transcribing the records was responsible for her birth being absent from the BMD index.