RootsChat.Com
Research in Other Countries => Australia => Australia Lookups completed => Topic started by: mygirlbill on Wednesday 13 July 16 23:57 BST (UK)
-
I am researching an ancestor who may have been adopted circa 1870's. On his marriage and death certificates the names of his parents are not given which leads me to think that he may have been adopted or was reared in an orphanage. Does anyone know if adoption records for this era are now available to the public? Any kind of advice greatly appreciated. Cheers.
-
There were no adoption laws until the 1920s (1896 in WA). There were informal arrangements where children were taken in by family/friends or they went through the system of orphanages and industrial schools where they were apprenticed out to employers up to the age of 16.
Which State are you talking about? The most accessible records for children in care are for NSW and Victoria.
Does the marriage certificate say 'unknown' for parents' names or is it just blank? Were the bride's parents named?
https://www.findandconnect.gov.au/
Debra :)
-
Hi there,
I support Debra's comments, and encourage you re-check the marriage cert you hold.
......Does the marriage certificate say 'unknown' for parents' names or is it just blank? Were the bride's parents named?
Each of the six colonies had (and as six sovereign states, they still have) their own legislative bodies so each former colony's system of civil registration varies from each other even today.
For example,
In NSW, the civil registration system commenced 1 March 1856. And the NSW BDM's own website recognises that their holdings for marriage registrations are not as detailed as they could be. It is not unusual to find that the NSW BDM does not have all the details recorded by the marriage celebrant if the ceremony was held prior to 1895. The information is usually available; NSW BDM notes this, and offers suggestions as to how to overcome those elusive blanks.
JM
-
Thank you for your help and advice. Regarding the marriage certificate, the names of his parents are left blank. At this stage, we have no idea as to in which state he was born etc. only that he married and died in Queensland. Yes the names of the brides parents were named on the marriage certificate.
I have researched the available online school records and he does not appear to have attended school in Queensland which could mean that he came to this state sometime as an adult. Either that or he isn't who he pretends he is.....Will continue to look further into it. Cheers!
-
Can you give all the information on the certificate please and we might be able to identify his origins.
-
Hi there,
May I suggest that if the Queensland marriage was celebrated by a clergyman, that the clergyman recorded all the details in his own parish register. The Qld certificate will note the name of the clergyman and the denomination and the location for the marriage. Likely the names of the parents of the groom and the occupation of the groom's dad will be on that original register. If the person providing information for the death registration had relied on the information held by the Qld BDM as per that marriage certificate, then that may well help to explain the deficiency in info on the death registration.
NSW civil registration system was established 1856. Queensland was hived off from NSW in 1859. Probably the Qld BDM civil registration system copied the existing system.
So, hopefully it will be a matter of determining where the clergyman's register is currently held. Likely that will be with the diocese or state headquarters for the denomination of the clergyman.
Church records are not public records, so you may need to ask for access, and likely you may need to wait until a volunteer has looked up their record. If you were to provide a copy of the Qld BDM marriage cert, there may be clues on it for the volunteer to use in their look up efforts.
JM
-
Many thanks to everyone for your help which I very much appreciate. Unfortunately I don't have the marriage certificate in my possession at the moment but will ask to have it returned to me and then will get back to you all. Once again, thank you so much. Cheers!
-
Can you please let us know the surnames of the bride and the groom and the year of the Queensland marriage.
JM
-
Charles Henry Wakefield and Mary Ann Amelia Cox. Marriage date: 21/11/1900
-
http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article69764586
SILVER WEDDING
WAKEFIELD—COX Charles Henry Wakefield and Mary Ann Amelia Cox, on the 21st November, 1900, at St. Barnabas' Church, North Rockhampton.
Funeral notice
http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article56952599
No parents noted on the death index either.
I wonder what is his age and place of birth on his children's birth certificates?
Cando
-
Charles Henry Wakefield is not an ancestor of mine. He's an ancestor of a friend of mine who is not on the computer and so I've offered to help her as she firmly believes Charles was adopted. We have a birth date which I believe came from the marriage certificate, 16/9/1875 but place of birth or names of his parents not mentioned. Thank you Cando and cheers!
-
I wonder what is his age and place of birth on his children's birth certificates?
This is actually a suggestion for further research to help find his place of birth.
Full dates of birth are not usually on a marriage cert. Just age in years at time of marriage.
Cando
-
The 16/9/1875 was the date he gave on one of the documents in my friends possession. Also that he was born in Queensland. I thought it might have been on his marriage certificate but obviously not. However, a birth for a Charles Henry Wakefield in Queensland was not found and because of that, my friend seems to think that he was adopted and Wakefield was his adopted name. That being my reason for inquiring about adoption records. Any other suggestions gratefully received. :-\
-
He might be related to these two ???
http://www.archivessearch.qld.gov.au/Image/DigitalImageDetails.aspx?ImageId=9918
http://www.archivessearch.qld.gov.au/Image/DigitalImageDetails.aspx?ImageId=10232
I think they are the children of Henry WAKEFIELD and Mary Ann MURPHY, but I can't see a registration for Elizabeth. I also can't see a death for the mother.
Debra :)
-
May I suggest that the failure of a clergyman to record the names of the parents of the groom on the civil registration of a Queensland marriage simply does not mean that the groom was adopted or fostered or raised by anyone other than his birth mother and/or father. Surely the lack of information just points to an administrative oversight.
May I suggest that as we now have additional information, that it is followed up by making contact with the Church authorities. If you were to provide photocopy of the Qld BDM civil registration of the marriage and ask for a look up of the private records of the Church, particularly for details of the groom, his then age, his place of birth, his then occupation, his then usual address, his father's name, occupation and if noted as deceased, and his (the groom's) mother's name, former names, and if noted as deceased, it is very likely that Church volunteers will strive to help you. You may need to be patient, as quite often there's less and less volunteers offering to help and more and more family history enquiries pushing for answers.
The 16/9/1875 was the date he gave on one of the documents in my friends possession. Also that he was born in Queensland. I thought it might have been on his marriage certificate but obviously not. However, a birth for a Charles Henry Wakefield in Queensland was not found and because of that, my friend seems to think that he was adopted and Wakefield was his adopted name. That being my reason for inquiring about adoption records. Any other suggestions gratefully received. :-\
http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article69764586
SILVER WEDDING
WAKEFIELD—COX Charles Henry Wakefield and Mary Ann Amelia Cox, on the 21st November, 1900, at St. Barnabas' Church, North Rockhampton.
Funeral notice
http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article56952599
No parents noted on the death index either.
I wonder what is his age and place of birth on his children's birth certificates?
Cando
JM
-
In 2005 the churches of St Barnabas' (North Rockhampton), St John's (Koongal), and St Matthew's (Park Avenue) were closed, and a new Parish was formed using St David's Church in Frenchville as the main worship centre.
http://www.allsaintsrocky.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=2&Itemid=4
http://www.allsaintsrocky.org.au/index.php?option=com_contact&view=contact&id=1&Itemid=2
JM
-
Cando: Yes he could be related to Henry and Mary Ann Wakefield but I doubt it. Unless he was born in another state, there is no birth record for a Charles Henry Wakefield in Queensland. Also, I checked the school records and he did not attend school in Rockhampton which would have been the norm if he was living here as a child. This may then suggest that he was born interstate or if born in Queensland, adopted by a Wakefield, or God forbid, he had taken on a false identity for whatever reason known only to himself.
Majm: I will pass your information on to my friend and hopefully she'll get some answers through the church inquiries.
Thank you both for your help. Much appreciated.
-
Searching on first name CHARLES with given DOB, in Qld BDM, gives just one result:
1875 C4499 (country birth) Dominico Charles, parents James FORNO and Elizabeth Carl.
Does that surname ring any bells with your friend?
Dawn M
-
I will ask her. Some weeks ago I found on the Gov. site that altogether there were 17 Charles Henry's born in Qld in 1875. But it really doesn't mean anything until it can be confirmed that he was adopted.... or not. I think our best bet is to start with the church records. Hopefully that may give us a few answers. Cause otherwise it's like looking for a needle in a haystack. :-\
-
Formal adoption commenced in Queensland in around 1928. He would have been aged in his 50s.
In 1875 it was compulsory to register births in Queensland. However, I am aware of many instances where it seems that a birth has perhaps not been registered, or an entry missed from the online indexes, or the name recorded is not a name that 21st century eyes would expect.
JM
-
Yes there was the possibility that his birth wasn't registered but if that had a been the case, he still would have known the names of his parents. My friend did apply to purchase his birth certificate only to be told that there was no birth recorded for him between the years 1870 and 1880 in Qld. So he was either born interstate or he wasn't born a Wakefield although he claimed to have been born in Queensland. The search continues.......
-
Yes there was the possibility that his birth wasn't registered but if that had a been the case, he still would have known the names of his parents. My friend did apply to purchase his birth certificate only to be told that there was no birth recorded for him between the years 1870 and 1880 in Qld. So he was either born interstate or he wasn't born a Wakefield although he claimed to have been born in Queensland. The search continues.......
So Qld BDM do not have a birth registration for a Charles Henry WAKEFIELD between 1870 and 1880. Please don't expand that to mean anything other than Qld BDM did not find a birth in those names between those years. It could have been registered at the local office but not received at the Head office, it could be that the longhand writing was in a scribble and the surname has been 'mis-read' or it could be that the birth was registered in another surname or the given names were reversed, or that Charles was raised as Charles, but registered under a different name. There are many explanations. Simply put, to my way of thinking, when looking at 19th Century record keeping procedures, Adoption should not be the paramount explanation for lack of details about a person's parentage.
The information recorded on a marriage certificate in Queensland was based on the information transmitted to the Registrar General by the clergy. I find it very unusual for the clergyman to have conducted a marriage in 1900 without noting on the civil registration the name of the parents of the groom. It had been the practice of Anglican clergy to record these details for decades and decades. In fact, it is possible to make the argument that the clergyman was not permitted to proceed with a marriage contract without first obtaining these details, or at least noting that those details were 'unknown' after making enquiries.
I think it is a flawed decision to decide that simply because the details are not listed on the marriage certificate issued by the Queensland BDM that the person was adopted and/or that he did not know ANY of the names of his parents.
Have you looked for WAKEFIELD as a surname in Rockhampton in 1875? :) Or on Queensland Electoral Rolls from say 1896 (when Charles Henry may have turned 21 years of age, and therefore become eligible to enrol to vote) ...
JM
-
I agree with you 100% and then some! However, my friend will insist that he was adopted and I am not at all 100% convinced that he is. From what I can gather from school records there was one other Wakefield family living here in Rockhampton who had a son who attended school here. However, he (John) was born 27/7/77. My friend has a document in her possession in which Charles claimed his birthdate to have been 16/9/1875. Yes, he has been found on electoral roles etc. but no clue there. Also no clue on his death certificate as the informant (a son) apparently did not know the existence of any grandparents which kind of confirms that they did not figure in their father's live. But anyhow, I will see what we can find out regarding what the clergy man may or may not have recorded in his register. If what you say is correct that a clergyman was not allowed to proceed with a marriage without all these details than the chances of getting to the bottom of this mystery are probably looking positive.
-
When and where was he first sighted on an electoral roll?
ADD
I have looked back through posts I have made to help others. Here's one that should be helpful here too.
From a 1893 Qld marriage cert, so I would expect similar info on a 1901 Qld mc. :)
When and where married
Names and surnames of the parties (the groom then the bride)
Condition of the parties (Bachelor or Spinster or Widow, no mention of Divorcee)
Birthplace (the cert I am looking at while typing this up, is for a couple who were both born outside of Australia. So, this document gives the town, the county and then the country [in the UK,] groom then the bride)
Married in the/at (the street address, a private residence in a rural district in Qld)
According to the rites of (the denomination) (Also, if either party was under 21 years, here was sufficient space for the clergy to write the details of the person giving consent, and their relationship to the bride or the groom)
The Rank or Profession of the groom and then the bride (in this instance the bride was recorded as “Private Life”)
Ages (groom, then bride)
Usual place of Residence (their respective addresses in rural Qld)
Father’s name and surname, Mother’s Name and maiden surname.
Father’s rank or profession
The signatures of the groom and bride
The witnesses
The Officiating Minister/Registrar
ADD
I am not sure when Qld required the clergy/registrar to ask if any of the parents were known to be deceased, but in NSW that requirement dates from 1899, and the clergy often abbreviated it to a small notation, sometimes "dec" other times a simple † near the parent's name
Cheers, JM
JM
-
What causes you to believe that Charles Henry WAKEFIELD was born anywhere in Australia?
A birth certificate for one of his children would ask for age and birthplace of parents.
You need to see a birth certificate for one of the children.
I am reading your post to mean that Charles Henry WAKEFIELD is the author of the document with birth date, not someone else giving information about him.
And during his lifetime Charles Henry WAKEFIELD recorded his birth date as 16 Sep 1875.
FreeBDM birth
WAKEFIELD Charles Henry Sep Q 1875 Tetbury 6a / 353
It would be useful to know what the document is, and if Charles Henry is definitely giving information about himself.........or possibly something an earlier researcher has found, and looks promising, but not confirmed?
-
perhaps this baptism would be for the civil birth registration found by Wivenhoe
C of E Baptisms, Kingscote, Gloucestershire
8 August 1875
Entry no. 499
Charles Henry, son of Charles & Louisa WAKEFIELD, of Kingscote, a shepherd.
Here he is in the 1881 English census
https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QKXH-Z2HY
JM
-
According to documents my friend has in her possession it claims that Charles was born in Queensland on the 16/9/1875. I'm not sure what these documents are but will look further into it. Electoral roll perhaps?? On his children's birth certificates it also claims that he was Qld born and I am not 100% certain but I think she said that he claimed to have been born in Rockhampton. However a thorough research here hasn't turned up anything. His age on these certificates coincides with a birth in 1875.
Yes, he was definitely giving information about himself.
Regarding the Tetbury birth of a Charles Henry Wakefield. The fact that he was born in England or anywhere else other than Australia is a possibility too except for that there is no record of him coming to Australia.
If I remember correctly (so please don't quote me! lol) Charles and Mary had about 10 children altogether and none of these children knew of their father's parents existence.
If for arguments sake he was born illegitimate and was given up for adoption at birth, who would have registered the birth and who's Christian name would he have been given? The mother's or the father's?
-
Oops, sorry, make that "Who's surname would he have been given?"
Charles's and Mary's first born was given the names Harold Charles Wakefield. Because it was common in those days to name your offspring after family members, and because as far as I can ascertain there was no Harold on Mary's side of the family, It is possible that Harold may have been the name of Charles's father or brother etc. etc.
-
"...According to documents my friend has in her possession"
I do not think you will be able to use a forum to advance your research until you are able to give us the information on these documents.
Can you fully transcribe, or scan an image of the marriage certificate.
Can you fully transcribe the birth certificates please. (for children of Charles Henry WAKEFIELD that you know to be dead)
Can you please identify and date the document in which Charles Henry WAKEFIELD gives his birth date.
-
I'll see what I can do about getting the documents. However, I'm confident that we will get the answers we need from the records kept by the clergy man which were compulsory as mentioned by majm. Seeing as there were no adoption laws until the 1920's and that children were taken in by relatives, friends or placed in orphanages ect. makes me think that it may just be possible that he was reared in an orphanage and not adopted like my friend seems to think. It would explain why no-one knew who his parents were. On the other hand, he may not have been who he claims he was which over 100 years ago was easily done. As to why he kept his true identity a secret remains to be found out. He may have been running from something in his past or perhaps he did not want to be associated by a certain family member. I'll keep you posted.
-
I'll see what I can do about getting the documents. However, I'm confident that we will get the answers we need from the records kept by the clergy man which were compulsory as mentioned by majm. Seeing as there were no adoption laws until the 1920's and that children were taken in by relatives, friends or placed in orphanages ect. makes me think that it may just be possible that he was reared in an orphanage and not adopted like my friend seems to think. It would explain why no-one knew who his parents were. On the other hand, he may not have been who he claims he was which over 100 years ago was easily done. As to why he kept his true identity a secret remains to be found out. He may have been running from something in his past or perhaps he did not want to be associated by a certain family member. I'll keep you posted.
Just because names of parents are not known to grandchildren does not mean the grandchildren did not know their grandparents. It is of course possible in that era that the grandchildren may have referred to their grandparents as Grandma Wakefield and Grandpa Wakefield. I have not read anything in this thread to date that actually gives me any reason to consider that Charles Henry Wakefield was an assumed identity, or that he was not aware of his parents' names.
There was an Orphanage in Rockhampton.
https://www.findandconnect.gov.au/ref/qld/biogs/QE00188b.htm
JM
-
Certainly my friends mother and none of her mother's siblings ever knew of Charles's parents or any siblings that he may have had. As for Charles Henry Wakefield being an false identity. Perhaps I've seen and read too many detective movies and books ;) but it would be wrong to rule it out entirely. He's definitely not adopted like my friend (his grand daughter) thought he might have been and so that is the only option that I am prepared to rule out...thus far. I've been in contact with her and she is going to request the clergyman's records etc. Will keep you posted.
-
I wonder what is his age and place of birth on his children's birth certificates?
Cando
Cando
-
Cando: "According to documents my friend has in her possession it claims that Charles was born in Queensland on the 16/9/1875. I'm not sure what these documents are but will look further into it. Electoral roll perhaps?? On his children's birth certificates it also claims that he was Qld born and I am not 100% certain but I think she said that he claimed to have been born in Rockhampton. However a thorough research here hasn't turned up anything. His age on these certificates coincides with a birth in 1875."
After having spoken to my friend on the phone today I can confirm that on the birth certificates of his children his place of birth is Rockhampton and age is consistent with having been born 1875.
-
Hi,
I agree with Wivenhoe, a birth certificate for one of the children should show the age and birth place for the father. My GF was born in Qld in 1894 and after getting his BC I found out that my GGF had been born in Cape of Good Hope, his birth place was a brick-wall until then. He had told fibs on his marriage certificate re his birth place (New York).
Gerry
-
G'day Aussie. If you read my previous post again you will see that I had written, " After having spoken to my friend on the phone today I can confirm that on the birth certificates of his children his place of birth is Rockhampton and age is consistent with having been born 1875."
-
Who is the informant for these birth certificates...who is giving information about Charles?.
Who are the witnesses on the marriage certificate?
It is very inefficient if you are functioning as the intermediary, relaying questions and answers between your friend and this forum.
You need to have a copy of all the documents relating to your enquiry.
-
Hi,
Oops, I see it now, sorry.
Just for interest the requirement to register Qld births in 1875 is as follows. Interesting the 3 years lapse time.
http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/122069732?searchTerm=
Gerry
-
wivenhoe: "It is very inefficient if you are functioning as the intermediary, relaying questions and answers between your friend and this forum. You need to have a copy of all the documents relating to your inquiry."
I apologize if it all appears "inefficient" to you. I was not aware that one had to have certificates (documented evidence) before posting a query on this forum. Perhaps this should be made clearer to all who use this site because if the many postings made by people who have no documented evidence in their possession is anything to go by, then I am certainly not the only one. My apologies.
However, can I just bring your attention back to my original posting. My query was about available adoption records and nothing more. Why would I need marriage or birth certificates etc. to ask that?
Adoption Records
« on: Wednesday 13 July 16 23:57 BST (UK) »
"I am researching an ancestor who may have been adopted circa 1870's. On his marriage and death certificates the names of his parents are not given which leads me to think that he may have been adopted or was reared in an orphanage. Does anyone know if adoption records for this era are now available to the public? Any kind of advice greatly appreciated. Cheers."
Once again, my apologies.
-
Certainly my friends mother and none of her mother's siblings ever knew of Charles's parents or any siblings that he may have had. As for Charles Henry Wakefield being an false identity. Perhaps I've seen and read too many detective movies and books ;) but only a fool would rule it out entirely. He's definitely not adopted like my friend (his grand daughter) thought he might have been and so that is the only option that I am prepared to rule out...thus far. I've been in contact with her and she is going to request the clergyman's records etc. Will keep you posted.
Yes, it is possible that Charles Henry Wakefield's birth was not registered in the colony of Queensland, either in that name, or in any other name. But I cannot see any reason to form the view that simply because the Qld BDM registration of his marriage does not note his parents details that that oversight means he was adopted, or he has a false identity. To me it is a huge step to go from details not noted on a document to determining that that means someone has falsified their identity. If Queensland BDM searches through their birth registers are similar to those undertaken by NSW BDM in past years, then if asked to search for Charles Henry WAKEFIELD that is the exact spelling for the search. The search would not consider variations on that spelling, nor would it consider variations on the order of the names, or different surnames. I am not familiar with the practices at Queensland BDM, perhaps your friend has a much better understanding of the search Queensland BDM undertook.
May I please suggest your friend checks the birth certificates of the children of the couple, and particularly seeks out the birth certificates where Charles Henry Wakefield is the actual informant. What information did he provide about himself (verbally of course) when he registered the birth?
Your friend needs to seek out first hand information.
JM
-
Thank you for your help and advice. Regarding the marriage certificate, the names of his parents are left blank. At this stage, we have no idea as to in which state he was born etc. only that he married and died in Queensland. Yes the names of the brides parents were named on the marriage certificate.
I have researched the available online school records and he does not appear to have attended school in Queensland which could mean that he came to this state sometime as an adult. Either that or he isn't who he pretends he is.....Will continue to look further into it. Cheers!
May I please ask for the online link for school records for Queensland. I would like to access it to help my own family history research. I am particularly interested finding records for students in non-government schools in regional Qld in the late 19th Century.
JM
-
http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/204766667
The Swan Express 11 December 1914
Registering the Choild :)
;D ;D ;D
JM
-
mygirlbill
You will have read carefully the links and associated pdf documents kindly posted by Dundee in reply#13.
I was interested in following up on these records.
Elizabeth WAKEFIELD and John WAKEFIELD born in CLERMONT, were the children of Henry WAKEFIELD and Mary Ann MURPHY who married in 1872. I don't see the birth registration for Elizabeth. The records cited above say Mary Ann was dead by 1880.
The records also say these two children went to Mrs HOMER after some early years in the orphanage.
The HOMERS, Edward Thomas and Sophia Leah worked Barfield Station at Banana, south of Rockhampton.
The marriages, births of children and deaths of Elizabeth TAYLOR (nee WAKEFIELD) and John WAKEFIELD can be traced quite easily online and the details can be posted, but only if relevant.
The WAKEFIELD couple of Clermont had other children in the 1870's,. Some of these can be tracked, others are not so obvious, and likely there are omissions of registration too. ::)
I have had a look around attempting to connect Charles Henry to this family, and have nothing to show.
A couple of co-incidences -
The forename Harold was given to a son of John WAKEFIELD and a son of Charles Henry WAKEFIELD. :)
Both John and Charles were carters at some stage,(1903) albeit one in Rockhampton and one in Bundaberg.
That’s about it really ::)
Sue
-
Interesting?
Further to reply #13 and Elizabeth WAKEFIELD -
Morning Bulletin 10 Mar 1904
http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/53008237?
Parents of Mary Ann Amelia COX are George Thomas COX and Susan AIRDS.
Can you give your attention to this question please -
"...Who are the witnesses on the marriage certificate?"
-
G'day Sue. Charles Henry Wakefield claimed to have been born in 1875 in Rockhampton. The Claremont Wakefields also had a son (John) born in 1875 albeit that he was born in Claremont and an exact date at this point in time is unknown. If they are one and the same, then it would mean that Charles Henry had taken on a false identity which as I have mentioned earlier, I will not rule out entirely until proven otherwise. However, at this point in time, I doubt very much that they are one and the same. I wonder if on marriage and death certificates of these Claremont born Wakefields the names of their parents were given?????
-
As I have mentioned on several occasions I do not have the marriage cert in my possession. I saw no need for it seeing as I was inquiring about online adoption records and therefore I haven't a clue as to who were the witnesses on the marriage cert but what I do know is, is that it wasn't a Wakefield.
I have seen the Morning Bulletin article regarding Grace Isabella Amelia Wakefield who was born in 1903. As to who Elizabeth was I have no idea...as yet. In 914 Charles and Mary had a daughter whom they named Elizabeth so it's possible that an Elizabeth figures in it somewhere.
-
G'day Sue. Charles Henry Wakefield claimed to have been born in 1875 in Rockhampton. The Claremont Wakefields also had a son (John) born in 1875 albeit that he was born in Claremont and an exact date at this point in time is unknown. If they are one and the same, then it would mean that Charles Henry had taken on a false identity which as I have mentioned earlier, I will not rule out entirely until proven otherwise. However, at this point in time, I doubt very much that they are one and the same. I wonder if on marriage and death certificates of these Claremont born Wakefields the names of their parents were given?????
I am not in any way suggesting, by any means whatever, that John WAKEFIELD and Charles Henry WAKEFIELD are the same person and I do not know where you got the idea :P
I have raised the history of the WAKEFIELDS of Clermont only as a line of reflection. A family in difficulty with children in need of care in the right time frame.
I have said in my post about the family, that yes, quite clearly Elizabeth and John were the children of the couple from Clermont.
Have you actually read the links from Reply #13?
If you just want to confine your question to "Are adoption records available?"
The answer is "No". Adoption as you mean it, did not exist as has been pointed out earlier.
If your friend wants more guidance and support, he/she will need to reflect on the answers given in the thread with an open mind.
Sue
-
Interesting?
Further to reply #13 and Elizabeth WAKEFIELD -
Morning Bulletin 10 Mar 1904
http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/53008237?
This seems to mean that after the marriage of her daughter Mary Ann Amelia to Charles Henry WAKEFILD, Mary Ann's mother Susan COX was caring for a child of Elizabeth WAKEFIELD, as yet unmarried.
ADDING
Here is the marriage of Elizabeth-
1907 C1768 Elizabeth WAKEFIELD
John Edward TAYLOR
To clarify further- this gives a link between Elizabeth of the orphanage, born at Clermont and Charles, the subject of our OP's interest.
-
Not at all accusing you of suggesting that John Wakefield and CHW are one and the same. I was merely stating I knew of their son John who was born in 1875 also and speculated that "if they are one and the same....." Can you tell me how you came to that conclusion?
-
Thank you for your help and advice. Regarding the marriage certificate, the names of his parents are left blank. At this stage, we have no idea as to in which state he was born etc. only that he married and died in Queensland. Yes the names of the brides parents were named on the marriage certificate.
I have researched the available online school records and he does not appear to have attended school in Queensland which could mean that he came to this state sometime as an adult. Either that or he isn't who he pretends he is.....Will continue to look further into it. Cheers!
May I please ask for the online link for school records for Queensland. I would like to access it to help my own family history research. I am particularly interested finding records for students in non-government schools in regional Qld in the late 19th Century.
JM
Firstly, I thank our OP for the PM which includes the following link for the school records : It is www.archives.qld.gov.au
May I mention that, like the OP, I too have decades of involvement in family history. I am New South Wales centric, particularly 19th century. I am not nearly as familiar with the five other colonies that were federated into one colony in 1901, but I note that each of those colonies had, and as states, continue to have, their own parliaments that govern those states. So, from a family history perspective, each of those states has their own laws that govern their own sets of records, their own registration of births, deaths, marriages, their own administration via their own civil Courts for Probates, Intestacies, Insolvencies, Licences for Mining, Land Titles, Publican's licences, etc etc etc.
Each of us come to RootsChat either seeking advice or offering advice or as a combination of those. The Opening Post included the words "Any kind of advice greatly appreciated". On reading back through this thread I can see that we have given our OP all kinds of sensible advice, together with explanations, local knowledge, specific knowledge, links, and have endeavoured to help our OP help her friend. Her friend's quest is basically to find the names of the parents of Mary Ann's husband.
Charles Henry Wakefield and Mary Ann Amelia Cox. Marriage date: 21/11/1900
I am sure any RChatter who has researched NSW marriages registered in the period 1856-1895 is aware of the long running debate between Church and State in respect of the depth of details to be recorded on NSW marriage certificates. I am also sure that many RChatters are aware of my own intense interest in the admin procedures of the civil institutions of that same era, and perhaps some RChatters are aware of the thread I prepared, and sometimes update regarding the elusive blanks (lack of parents details etc) on NSW marriage certs for that era.
Here is the OP, with highlighted words by me.
I am researching an ancestor who may have been adopted circa 1870's. On his marriage and death certificates the names of his parents are not given which leads me to think that he may have been adopted or was reared in an orphanage. Does anyone know if adoption records for this era are now available to the public? Any kind of advice greatly appreciated. Cheers.
May I re-post the live link re orphanages.
......
There was an Orphanage in Rockhampton.
https://www.findandconnect.gov.au/ref/qld/biogs/QE00188b.htm
Again, I acknowledge and thank the OP for the PM, and for the live link to Archives Queensland. I was not aware they held school records. My interest is in non-government schools in regional Qld in the late 19th Century. I look forward to searching the online offerings from Archives Qld.
ADD
http://www.archives.qld.gov.au/Researchers/Resources/FamilyHistory/Pages/Default.aspx
School admission registers
“School admission registers for many Queensland state schools and state high schools are in our collection. Search for the name of the school ……. to see if we have school admission registers for the relevant school”.
So, not all the government schools records are at the archives. (many and if v all and every) . I wonder if non-government schools perhaps are less well documented.
ADD extra
http://www.archives.qld.gov.au/Researchers/CollectionsDownloads/Documents/sp14_school_admission_registers.pdf
JM
-
G'day Sue. Charles Henry Wakefield claimed to have been born in 1875 in Rockhampton. The Claremont Wakefields also had a son (John) born in 1875 albeit that he was born in Claremont and an exact date at this point in time is unknown. If they are one and the same, then it would mean that Charles Henry had taken on a false identity which as I have mentioned earlier, I will not rule out entirely until proven otherwise. However, at this point in time, I doubt very much that they are one and the same. I wonder if on marriage and death certificates of these Claremont born Wakefields the names of their parents were given?????
Qld BDM online search engine includes facility to determine date of the event. In this instance the date deduces to 1 May 1875.
https://www.bdm.qld.gov.au/IndexSearch/queryEntry.m?type=births
Elsewhere on this thread you had already given us Charles Henry Wakefield's dob as 16 Sept 1875 and an RChatter had already followed that up and found the following for you.
The 16/9/1875 was the date he gave on one of the documents in my friends possession. Also that he was born in Queensland. I thought it might have been on his marriage certificate but obviously not. However, a birth for a Charles Henry Wakefield in Queensland was not found and because of that, my friend seems to think that he was adopted and Wakefield was his adopted name. That being my reason for inquiring about adoption records. Any other suggestions gratefully received. :-\
Searching on first name CHARLES with given DOB, in Qld BDM, gives just one result:
1875 C4499 (country birth) Dominico Charles, parents James FORNO and Elizabeth Carl.
Does that surname ring any bells with your friend?
Dawn M
JM
-
1900 Qld State Electoral Roll
The Electoral District of Rockhampton
Wakefield Charles Henry, age 23, 179 Bolsover street, carter, qualified by residence on 4th July 1899.
Also on the same roll was
Jabez Wakefield, east street.
Gerry
-
1900 Qld State Electoral Roll
The Electoral District of Rockhampton North
Thomas William Wakefield, Nerimbera, tanner, 29, qualified by residence on 10th August 1899.
Gerry
-
mygirlbill
The marriages, births of children and deaths of Elizabeth TAYLOR (nee WAKEFIELD) and John WAKEFIELD can be traced quite easily online and the details can be posted, but only if relevant.
The WAKEFIELD couple of Clermont had other children in the 1870's,. Some of these can be tracked, others are not so obvious, and likely there are omissions of registration too. ::)
Sue
I will just attempt to make clear the line of my information and thinking.
The couple in Clermont Henry and Mary Ann WAKEFIELD, (nee MURPHY) had children between 1872 and 1879. One was JOHN another was ELIZABETH. There were others. Some of the children it seems,were registered, some were not.
Mary died.
The records from the Rockhampton Orphanage- posted clearly for you to read- show John and Elizabeth went to the orphanage.
They made marriages in later life. Elizabeth to John Edward TAYLOR. The TAYLOR couple may have been at Winton as shown on Electoral Rolls.
The marriages, births of children and deaths of Elizabeth TAYLOR (nee WAKEFIELD) and John WAKEFIELD can be traced quite easily online. So yes, the names of the parents are shown on the index at their death. There is no doubt that John WAKEFIELD was John WAKEFIELD all his life. He did not turn into Henry.
I have seen the Morning Bulletin article regarding Grace Isabella Amelia Wakefield who was born in 1903.
This child is not the point of the news item. Linked in Reply#43. You need to read it more closely . Here you are citing the wrong child of the wrong age of the wrong parentage.
Elizabeth (of the orphanage), before her marriage when her surname was Miss Elizabeth WAKEFIELD of Winton, was taken to court in 1904 by Susan COX who was the mother of Mary Ann Amelia WAKEFIELD,( nee COX). The issue was a child that Susan had been minding for a fee. The child was three years of age, so born 1901, and her mother had not paid the minding fee.
All this hints at a connection between CHW and the Elizabeth WAKEFIELD of the orphanage whose parents we do know.
CHW was Mrs Susan Cox’s son-in-law.
How did she come to be minding the illegitimate child of Elizabeth WAKEFIELD of Winton?
Sue
-
majm: Thank you for re-posting my first initial post as well as the other one , the highlights , the bold and enlarged print. ;) I am hoping this will confirm what I have been saying all along but apparently not getting through to some.
majm: "Each of us come to RootsChat either seeking advice or offering advice or as a combination of those. The Opening Post included the words "Any kind of advice greatly appreciated". On reading back through this thread I can see that we have given our OP all kinds of sensible advice, together with explanations, local knowledge, specific knowledge, links, and have endeavoured to help our OP help her friend. Her friend's quest is basically to find the names of the parents of Mary Ann's husband. " (This was followed by the re-posting mentioned above.)
Clearly, I did not at any time ask anyone to help me research the origins of CHW and neither was I expecting anyone to do so. I asked for and I repeat (for the last and final time I hope) ;D
""Does anyone know if adoption records for this era are now available to the public? Any kind of advice greatly appreciated."
How others came to assume that I was asking for advice on anything other than adoption records I haven't as yet been able to work out. And if I have made a mistake at all, it is that I probably should have said "Any kind of advice ON ADOPTION RECORDS greatly appreciated." However, I wasn't aware that I needed to spell it out, so clearly a small oversight on my part. I had expected to be given advice as to where I might have been able to access adoption records. for instance, Ancestry and the like, archives, other websites etc. etc. Hopefully we can now put that issue to bed.
Post #12 mygirlbill " ........ my friend seems to think that he was adopted and Wakefield was his adopted name. That being my reason for inquiring about adoption records. Any other suggestions gratefully received. :-\"
In this instance I am clearly asking for suggestions other than adoption and again NOT for help in finding CHW.
Just getting back to posts 47 and 48 which I wasn't able to give too much time to earlier on this morning before heading out starting with an earlier post.
Post #21 majm "................... it could be that the longhand writing was in a scribble and the surname has been 'mis-read' or it could be that the birth was registered in another surname or the given names were reversed, or that Charles was raised as Charles, but registered under a different name. There are many explanations."
In my post #44 which was in reply to Sparrett's post #42 " G'day Sue. Charles Henry Wakefield claimed to have been born in 1875 in Rockhampton. The Claremont Wakefields also had a son (John) born in 1875 albeit that he was born in Claremont and an exact date at this point in time is unknown. If they are one and the same, then it would mean that Charles Henry had taken on a false identity which as I have mentioned earlier, I will not rule out entirely until proven otherwise. However, at this point in time, I doubt very much that they are one and the same. I wonder if on marriage and death certificates of these Claremont born Wakefields the names of their parents were given?????"
Reply by Sparrat #46 "I am not in any way suggesting, by any means whatever, that John WAKEFIELD and Charles Henry WAKEFIELD are the same person and I do not know where you got the idea :P" Followed further down by,
"If your friend wants more guidance and support, he/she will need to reflect on the answers given in the thread with an open mind."
First I want to refer back to post #10 mygirlbill " Charles Henry Wakefield is not an ancestor of mine. He's an ancestor of a friend of mine who is not on the computer and so I've offered to help her ....
You must have overlooked this post it perhaps????? I might add to that that she is elderly and not computer literate.
My reply #48 " Not at all accusing you of suggesting that John Wakefield and CHW are one and the same. I was merely stating I knew of their son John who was born in 1875 also and speculated that "if they are one and the same....." Can you tell me how you came to that conclusion?"
This brings us once again back to post #21. ".................. it could be that the longhand writing was in a scribble and the surname has been 'mis-read' or it could be that the birth was registered in another surname or the given names were reversed, or that Charles was raised as Charles, but registered under a different name. " There are many explanations."
Can I assume that this post was overlooked as well?
I think this proves that I at least reflect on the answers given in the thread with an open mind.
In reply to post #50. Sorry majm, I was not aware that I could access the exact dates of birth. As I have already told you, I'm not very knowledgeable regarding English and Australian genealogy.
Also, yes I am aware that not all school records are on line however, seeing as he claims to have been born in Rockhampton, I decided to see if I could find an attendance for him there but as I've mentioned earlier, I wasn't able to find one.
Aussie1947. Yes, we are aware of the electoral rolls info. But unfortunately, it doesn't answer as to whether he was adopted or not. ???
Once again many thanks for your help and support and thanks also to the other volunteers however I do think that we have exhausted this thread now. Thank you.
-
I think our postings must have been sent at the same moment.
My last reply on the previous page and numbered #53, was an attempt to widen the possibilities for future searching your friend might undertake, in the absence of adoption records, if he/she is looking for the parents of CHW.
ADDING
I see now you are not looking for assistance in locating the parents of Charles, after all, because you are handling that search yourself.
Assistance was merely asked for in locating adoption documents that give his parents and adoptive parents if they exist.
Sue
-
There was a John Wakefield 8 years 6 moths on the Emu Park State School 27th July 1885, father was a plumber (probably Jabez Wakefield).
Gerry
-
There was a John Wakefield 8 years 6 moths on the Emu Park State School 27th July 1885, father was a plumber (probably Jabez Wakefield).
Gerry
The orphanage records say John WAKEFIELD, son of Henry and Mary Ann (MURPHY) was in the care of the HOMER's at Banana at that time. So a different boy perhaps. The John WAKEFIELD of the orphanage ended up living in Bundaberg.
Sue
-
Thanks for that info Sue, not the same John. There was a Jabez Wakefield in Rockhampton from the 1870s, he was a plumber and at one stage the Mayor of Rockhampton and I think the father of a John Wakefield and maybe Thomas William Wakefield but probably no relationship to Charles Henry Wakefield.
Gerry
-
Yes, there were a lot of Wakefields in the area it seems.
Impossible to sort them out without a lot of certificates and even then, would it find the parents of Charles..... ??? :-\
ADDING
Not for us to worry about, anyway at this stage, as our OP has all the information required.
-
Yes, I agree Sue, Not for us to worry about anymore. I apologise to RChat for asking the following question at #7 and for striving to help with "Any kind of advice" when the OP provided the answer at #8, less than 2 1/2 hrs later, with greater details, including given names, exact date.
Can you please let us know the surnames of the bride and the groom and the year of the Queensland marriage.
JM
-
majm. This will definitely be my last post on this thread for obvious reasons.
majm#60 "Yes, I agree Sue, Not for us to worry about anymore. I apologise to RChat for asking the following question at #7 and for striving to help with "Any kind of advice" when the OP provided the answer at #8, less than 2 1/2 hrs later, with greater details, including given names, exact date.
Quote from: majm on Thursday 14 July 16 03:58 BST (UK)
"Can you please let us know the surnames of the bride and the groom and the year of the Queensland marriage. JM"
Ok, let's do this one more time as clearly nothing is sinking in..still.
After my first initial post, I had no problems whatsoever answering every-ones questions as best I could. I also send you a PM (remember?) In fact, I had no problem at all taking it beyond seeking adoption records as all my posts will verify. The fact that this has gone completely unnoticed by you is simply mind boggling but clearly it has or else you would not have posted #60.
#28 wivenhoe. "I do not think you will be able to use a forum to advance your research until you are able to give us the information on these documents."
Who is she to dictate as to who is allowed or not allowed to use this forum? In my opinion, she was way out of line. To keep the peace, I chose to ignore it.
#36wivenhoe " It is very inefficient if you are functioning as the intermediary, relaying questions and answers between your friend and this forum. You need to have a copy of all the documents relating to your enquiry."
It wasn't until #38 (yes a whole 30 posts after #7 the one mentioned above) that I needed to point out that I originally asked about adoption records (something which I have needed to repeat numerous times since) and didn't realize I would need documents to do so. I find it totally frustrating that you either overlooked or ignored all this. 30 posts!!! Sorry, I don't buy it.
#54mygirlbill ...Once again many thanks for your help and support and thanks also to the other volunteers however I do think that we have exhausted this thread now. Thank you. "
In my opinion you should have left it at that as #60 was uncalled for and made you, not me, look incompetent. So for the last and final time. Drop it, move on and thank you.
-
May I mention that if you wish to mark the thread as completed that you click on the link that reads "topic completed".
JM