RootsChat.Com

Scotland (Counties as in 1851-1901) => Scotland => Stirlingshire => Topic started by: jimmain on Sunday 28 August 16 22:31 BST (UK)

Title: a birth registered 68 years after the fact
Post by: jimmain on Sunday 28 August 16 22:31 BST (UK)

I recently reviewed the birth record of Thomas Main, schoolmaster, son of David Main/ Jean Russell; he was born 23Mar 1787, Slamannan.
The birth record reads as follows: “David & Jane Russell had a child born & Registered Dec 31st 1855 named Thomas.”
As well, all the births on this page were registered in 1855!
I realize this was the year Statutory registration commenced, but I'm baffled as to how a birth in 1787 would not be registered until 1855.
Who would have registered this birth?
Hopefully someone will have an answer. Thank you.

Title: Re: a birth registered 68 years after the fact
Post by: RJ_Paton on Sunday 28 August 16 22:54 BST (UK)

The legislation which brought about Civil Registration in Scotland allowed for entries missing from the Parish registers to be recorded in the new system in the Register of Neglected Entries (RNE)
see http://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/research/guides/register-of-neglected-entries

The most common reasons I have seen were for reason of inheritance and proving a particular lineage

Title: Re: a birth registered 68 years after the fact
Post by: Rosinish on Monday 29 August 16 00:35 BST (UK)

Did the 1855 birth record actually state he was born 1787?

Seems a bit odd but I would say this was more likely just a coincidence of names (although I may be wrong)?

Annie