No birth registration details

[beatrice834]

I am currently researching a rather complicated family.  I have found the London Baptismal records for three children born in 1853, 1854 and 1855  before their parents married in London in 1856.  I am pretty sure I have the right couple because of the father's occupation and the area of London.  These records helpfully give dates of birth.  The children were all baptised after the marriage, two on the same day.  I thought it would be easy to find the official registration of their births, but have drawn a blank, searching both under father's surname and mother's maiden names, with variations of spelling for both.

Would it have been common for births not to be officially registered at that time, especially if out of wedlock?

Thanks.

[Billyblue]

Registration started in 1837 but it seems it was not compulsory to register, for some years.

I'm sure there will be someone along soon to give exact details.
Doubt that it would have had anything to do with whether or not the children were born in or out of wedlock.

Dawn M

[Redroger]

I think the date was sometime in the 1870s when compulsory registration became law. No doubt Stan will have the details.

[Mort29]

It was always compulsory.

In the early years the onus was on the Registrar and staff to to 'capture' the registrations ..... but by 1874, penalties were introduced and the onus was on the parties involved for births & deaths - marriage obviously different.

see this comprehensive site built & maintained by Guy Etchells.

http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~framland/acts/actind.htm

[Redroger]

Compulsory but not enforced, sounds like many laws today!

[stanmapstone]

There was a fee for late registration in the 1836 Act, but not for non registration. There was only a penalty for non-registration in the 1874 Act, not late registration. 
See http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,482301.msg3411284.html#msg3411284

Stan

[stanmapstone]

The first Statistician of the GRO  Dr. William Farr (1807–1883) estimated a 5% non-registration rate for births 1837-76, declining from  6.9% in 1841-50 to 1.8% in 1861-70. I assume he had good access to the statistics on which he based these figures.
See  http://www.rootschat.com/links/092n/   

Stan

[Redroger]

Like "unrecorded crimes" statistics of non registration can only ever be an estimate.

[Just Kia]

A point to consider is that the birth would be registered where it occured and not necessarily where the mother was living atthe time or where the baptism took place.
If, for example, the mother was living in London but went to her parents/sister/friend/auntie in the country to give birth, then that's where the birth would be registered, so look outside the area you expect to see if the birth maybe elsewhere.