Hi Paul
I am wondering now if they may have been non-conformist? Or there is some other back-story as yet unidentified. All of their children, bar 1, appear to me to have probably been registered as WEEKS. The only one who isn't is the last one, John, who I think is registered as WICKS and is the only one registered under Middlesbrough.
Prior to Dec Qtr 1875, the registration District should be Stockton
From Dec Qtr 1875, the registration District should be Middlesbrough
I also noted this:
In the 1871 Census they (either the family's or the enumerator's error) appear to have misnamed the 2 youngest children - it says George 3 and Thomas 9 mths. However, in the 1881 Census Thomas is 13 and George is 11; and in the 1891 Census Thomas is 22 and George is 19. Then, in the Birth Registrations below Thomas is 1868 and George 1870).
These are the BIRTH registrations I can find on FreeBMD - and the ones noted TVI are also
indexed on the Tees Valley Indexes (from where you can directly purchase certificates but for £11 incl postage!)
http://www.teesvalley-indexes.co.uk/Charles 1861/62 [Dec Qtr 1861, 10a 27 - WEEKS] TVI
James 1863 [ Sep Qtr 1863, 10a 37 - WEEKS ] TVI
Alfred Edward 1865 [?Arthur Edward WEEKS? Mar Qtr 1865, 10a 40 ]
William H 1866 [ Dec Qtr 1866, 10a 60 - WEEKS] TVI
Thomas 1868 [ Sep Qtr 1868, 10a 59] TVI
George 1870 [ Sep Qtr 1870, 10a 54 - WEEKS] TVI
Harry 1872 [ Sep Qtr 1873, 10a 52 - WEEKS] TVI
Sarah Jane 1876 [ Sep Qtr 1875, 10a 106 - WEEKS] TVI
John 1880 [ Mar Qtr 1880, 9d 554 - WICKS, Middlesbrough ]
The other thing in favour of identification, is that they resided at 17 Thomas Street from 1881 to 1901 incl, and in 1871 were at 2 Thomas Street.
Cheers
AMBLY