Why no digitisation of birth, mariage and death vital records?

[Guy Etchells]

Yes, I am aware that the PDFs are not transcribed information; I didn't know they were scans of the copy certificates. Aren't the copy certificates transcribed from the originals? My own certified copy of my birth certificate looks hand typed.

All I'm trying to do, is find a way to get the original information digitally, rather than use a system that is slow and requires a lot of manual intervention.

I suggest you first understand what the current system is and what records the GRO actually hold.

The GRO do not hold original Birth, civil Marriage or Death registers, those are held by the Superintendent Registrars at their offices, the other copy of Marriage Registers is held by the Church in which the marriage took place though these may be held by the Diocese Archive.

Every 3 month the GRO receives transcipts of the events from the Superintendent Registrars, these are transcribed into the GRO “registers” from which the certificates are transcribed either by hand or typed.
All certificates from the GRO (except for a few pre 1837 service BMDs etc which the GRO also hold).

Any PDF or Certificate from the GRO is either a copy of a copy of a transcript or a three times copy of a transcript.

If you are looking for the original register forget about the GRO and purchase from the Superindtendent Registrars or the Church in the case of church marriages.

Cheers
Guy

PS Even if you do purchase from the Superindtendent Registrar you will be lucky if you get a scan of an original but you can get microfilm & digital copies of parish registers which include the "modern" church marriages

[iantresman]

The GRO do not hold original Birth, civil Marriage or Death registers, those are held by the Superintendent Registrars at their offices, the other copy of Marriage Registers is held by the Church in which the marriage took place though these may be held by the Diocese Archive.

Thanks for that, all very interesting and informative. Do you know if there are any laws preventing their copying? I would guess Crown Copyright?

[BushInn1746]

Hello

If anyone is doing this hobby in the UK and on a very tight budget, don't forget your local Library, most have free pc access for one hour, to either one or both F.H. sites, it is free to join (most require only proof of identity and address) and check if any relevant images may be available online.

Over the years, the Library has been an amazing place!

Our Local History Section of our Town Library had our complete 19th Century Census printed and bound for the whole Parish, newspapers on film, etc., etc., and other items, so if you still live local to your ancestors, a Library Member and are prepared to sign these items out, look after them safely and get them signed back in, they will often let you see other items they hold under supervision.

Mark

[Guy Etchells]

Thanks for that, all very interesting and informative. Do you know if there are any laws preventing their copying? I would guess Crown Copyright?

BMDs for approx. the first 56 years are out of copyright the rest are as you say Crown Copyright, however it is highly unlikely the GRO would allow the copying of the registers, though it is always worth a try if you are willing to pay for the digitising.

Many of the older Church marriage register have already been microfilmed and digitised by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) and may be viewed at their family history centers.

The LDS are still digitising records all over the world including in the UK.
I have digital copies of a number of my ancestors original marriage entrys from the registers.

Cheers
Guy

[BushInn1746]

If a marriage took place after civil reg begun, I have often obtained a copy of the marriage cert through the parish records as you get original signatures and the same amount of info as you would get if you ordered the cert from the GRO. If I suspect they married at the registry office, then I order from the GRO or my local registry office. You may find non conformist marriages in the parish records at the record office, but not registry office marriages.

After 1837, I have a Civil Copy of an 1873 Nonconformist Wesleyan Methodist Marriage with original Signatures from the local Registry Office. The GRO will have copied this into their Registers. The original may also be in the Bound Volume with the Chapel or Meeting, or as you say, now at a Records Office (or C of E or Catholic Diocesan Office).

Although civil Birth Registration began 1837, registering a Birth did not become a Legal requirement in England until the 1870s and even then some felt the Parish Register or their Nonconformist Registers satisfied the Law and were reminded that their Congregations or Meeting attenders, must register Births with their local Civil Superintendent Registrar as well.

I am sure when I got married, I signed two Registers on both occasions. One was held at the place of Marriage in a certified safe and the other copy signed by us, the Registrar told me they were taken every Quarter to the Local Superintendent Registrar.

Rather amusing as the second Marriage in a Crown Dependency says by Act of Parliament and the Registrar required consent from the Senior Registrar of their Government Office and I had to prove residency for a set period as we couldn't marry there. Even though residency was proven I still needed a Licence. But we all signed two Certificates at the Registry Office and those Marriages Copies given to us has the Registrar signing our names in her hand.

Mark

[coombs]

If a marriage took place after civil reg begun, I have often obtained a copy of the marriage cert through the parish records as you get original signatures and the same amount of info as you would get if you ordered the cert from the GRO. If I suspect they married at the registry office, then I order from the GRO or my local registry office. You may find non conformist marriages in the parish records at the record office, but not registry office marriages.

After 1837, I have a Civil Copy of an 1873 Nonconformist Marriage with original Signatures from the local Registry Office. The GRO will have copied this into their Registers. The original may also be in the Bound Volume with the Chapel or Meeting, or as you say, now at a Records Office (or C of E or Catholic Diocesan Office).

Although civil Birth Registration began 1837, registering a Birth did not become a Legal requirement in England until the 1870s and even then some felt the Parish Register or their Nonconformist Registers satisfied the Law and were reminded that their Congregations or Meeting attenders, must register Births with their local Civil Superintendent Registrar as well.

I am sure when I got married, I signed two Registers on both occasions. One was held at the place of Marriage in a certified safe and the other copy signed by us, the Registrar told me were sent every Quarter to the Local Superintendent Registrar.

Rather amusing as the second Marriage in a Crown Dependency says by Act of Parliament and the Registrar required consent from the Senior Registrar of their Government Office and I had to prove residency for a set period as we couldn't marry there. Even though residency was proven I still needed a Licence. But all we signed two Certificates at the Registry Office and those Marriages Copies given to us has the Registrar signing our names in her hand.

Mark

1875 I think when the rules were tightened, hence why a number of pre 1875 births slipped through the net as it was the onus on the registrar and his deputies to tour the districts getting notes on new births, so no wonder a percentage overall was missed. From 1875 it was the responsibility of the parents, or whoever was present at the birth, or the next of kin etc.

[stanmapstone]

1875 I think when the rules were tightened, hence why a number of pre 1875 births slipped through the net as it was the onus on the registrar and his deputies to tour the districts getting notes on new births, so no wonder a percentage overall was missed. From 1875 it was the responsibility of the parents, or whoever was present at the birth, or the next of kin etc.

Under the 1836 Registration Act, Section XVIII, registration was compulsory in the case of the Registrar. The onus was on him to collect births and deaths. In carrying out his duties the parents were compelled, under the Act, Section XX, to supply the information when asked. The Act states the parent or occupier 'shall' give information to the Registrar on a birth 'upon being requested to do so.' In official documents 'shall' means compulsion. The reason why it is thought that registration was not compulsory is that in Section XIX the act states that the “Father or Mother of any Child ........ may*, within forty-two Days next after the Day of such Birth or within Five Days after the Day of such Death respectively, give Notice of such Birth or Death to the Registrar of the District;" In this context may means to have the opportunity, or be permitted by circumstances not to wait for the registrar, but to go to him to register the birth, or death, not the option to register the birth or not. If the birth was not registered within forty-two days there was also a fee of two Shillings and Sixpence entitlement for the Superintendent Registrar, and five shillings for the registrar, Section XXII. The registrar was also paid for every entry of birth and deaths, Section XXIX, two shillings and sixpence each for the first twenty entries, and one shilling for every subsequent entry of Births or Deaths in each Year. This gave him the incentive to make sure he carried his duties. Under sections XXI and XXVI, births and deaths at sea on a British Vessel, registration is compulsory.
*May = to have the potentiality to, be at liberty to, be permitted by circumstances to.

A penalty not exceeding £2 was introduced in Section 39 of the 1874 Registration of Births & Deaths Act, for the non-registration of a birth (the wording of the Act is actually for “failing to give information concerning the birth…….. as required by the said Acts”). There was also a penalty for late registration in the 1874 Act, as in the 1836 Act.

Stan

[stanmapstone]

 The onus was on the registrar  to collect births and deaths, however it was left to his discretion to employ such lawful means of informing himself as appeared to be best, but he had to employ some means. Rather than touring the district, he would most likely have referred to people such as doctors, midwives, undertakers etc. that would have knowledge of any birth or death in the district.

As the 1836 Act says Section XVIII
"every Registrar shall be authorized and is hereby required to inform himself carefully of every Birth and every Death which shall happen within his District"

Stan

[Blue70]

These days most of the record images I collect I download from Family Search.


Blue