Help with a McCall family in Glasgow as of 1857

[loobylooayr]

Please do not discount that baptism record David,
It may not be your Patrick McCall ...but
the date of the 20th June may actually not be his date of birth....
The birth was registered on the 20th June 1857...it had become compulsory to register births two years earlier in 1855....but some people slipped through the net...and some were a bit tardy in attending to it!
We only know that the birthdate of June 20th was given to the registrar by the person registering the birth...in this case Patrick snr (who can't read or write).
Patrick jnr, later known as Patrick John might always have considered his d.o.b to be June 20th  but it might not have been the right date.
The couple as RC could have had the baby baptised pretty smartly after birth as was common but dragged their heels on registering him.

We haven't found much trace of the family. I think a baptism of a Patrick McCaul with a father Patrick and mother Judith around June 1857 at a church a stones throw from where they lived is worth looking at. 
We haven't found any other births of a Patrick McCall/McColl/McCaul to a Patrick and Juda/Judith. So who is this wee baby being baptised??

Looby

[loobylooayr]

Just as a post note to my previous post David -
I have a friend whose father was born in the 1920's in a very rural location in Scotland in the dead of winter during heavy snow weather. His birthday was celebrated on 23rd Dec, the same day it was registered....he only discovered as a grown man from one of his older siblings that he had actually been born prior to that date...but no-one could remember when?! 
When he questioned his, by this time, elderly mother , she told him that with all the work on their farm, older children, lack of transport and the terrible weather they hadn't got round to registering his birth very quickly. And when they did , they couldn't remember exactly which the day his birth  was. Time and dates weren't that important to them...so they just gave him the birthdate of 23rd Dec.

[davidlstern]

Fair points and thanks for raising!

How do we get a look at that baptism record and what info May it contain? The English records are pretty simple....

[MonicaL]

Great find Looby 

And so it is, the correct one 

[MonicaL]

From this, Patrick and wife Judith were Catholic and married. The word 'lawful' after child's name confirms this. The baptism took place at St Patrick's in Glasgow.

I can see where the confusion over dates arises from the image and the indexing of it. Two dates given; date of birth and date of baptism. Unfortunately, each column is on either side of the spine of the ledger. As can be seen above, the image has a shadow and angle too at this point. I am thinking birth was written as 20 June as you have on the statutory register and the baptism maybe 21 (can't be 31st!) of June.

Witnesses names were a William Murphy and a Sarah Curran (think it is Curran).

No other children showing on the RC baptism registers to a couple with these names. Searching for parents as:

P*t*r* M*c*l  and mother only as J*d*

So what happened to them after this is still a puzzle....but at least confirmation that Patrick and his parents show elsewhere on record apart from the statutory registers and confirmation from the RC entry that Patrick's parents were married indeed.

Monica

[loobylooayr]

Hurrah! At least we've turned something else up!
Had wondered if perhaps Patrick when he registered birth had just said child was born that same day. But it turns out to be a indexing error caused by the spine of ledger disguising correct date.

David www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk   - you will need to buy 30 credits for £7. Look for Catholic birth and baptism register option. Search for McCaul Patrick parents Patrick and Judith date 1st June 1857. This will give 2 results (both the same - one relates to birth/one baptism I think) . 6 credits will allow you to view original register page. 

So I wonder what happened and where Patrick Jnr was 4 years later at 1861 Census.
Just throwing this in to the mix -Could Patrick have died and Judith remarried - new surname and Patrick under step fathers name ?? Wouldn't be the first time that's happened ....and he reverted to proper surname later in life. Just a suggestion to consider David 

Looby

[loobylooayr]

Been studying an enlarged screen of the snapshot of the baptism record.
What a pity Judith's maiden name is not recorded 
Yet the one above and below are!
Do you think that's because her maiden name was the same as the married name Monica?

[MonicaL]

Sorry Looby...just back.

That could be the reason. I know with SP when you search the death statutory registers, if you are searching for a married woman with the same married and maiden surnames, they only index it once and leave the other surname box on the screen blank. This also means that you cannot use both surnames to search either to try to narrow down results, which is a pain. You have no way of knowing if the search page results are for a married or unmarried woman with that surname (when you are researching MacDonalds in the Highlands, as I did, this is a pain   ).

Not sure if the Catholic records did the same. If they did, may be less uniformly by parish perhaps? Some would, some would not perhaps.

The problem we have here is that searching now for deaths, for example, for a Jud* M*c*l (with just one surname) only brings up one death entry and this is in 1902 and she is too young to have been Patrick's mother as she shows under the age of 50.

Monica

Added: Looking up and down the page, 30+ entries at least, only Judith's maiden surname is not included. For all the other married couples, the mother's maiden surname is given.

[MonicaL]

Added: Looking up and down the page, 30+ entries at least, only Judith's maiden surname is not included. For all the other married couples, the mother's maiden surname is given.

Also just noticed that Judith is the only wife where the words ' his wife ' are written. Maybe because of this issue with the surname being the same in this case?