Married after "Registrars Banns"

[Andrew Tarr]

Often the word b*****d is used  for a child born out of wedlock and I also think it is most unkind.

I suspect you may think that because the word is now a strong expletive or accusation - and probably has been for decades.  It has been used in registers for centuries as a statement of fact, in baptism records possibly to show that a child may not be entitled to support from that parish.  Nowadays that might also be seen as 'unkind', but as usual we should not judge past events by today's values.

[Corryn]

Andrew,
Yes I'e seen b*****d, Illegitimate and base born on baptism records but was wondering why the vicar needed to note the fact on her marriage entry 23 years later.

Corryn

[louisa maud]

I have 2 relations who insist on using that word everytime they hear of a baby born to unmarried couples, I must admit I do tell them off, in no way am  I  confrontational but it isn't nice,  I get told to look in the dictionary but  I still feel it is an unfortunate word to use, it is not the child's fault and certainly it need not have been shown on the marriage cert

Louisa Maud

[stanmapstone]

Also the vicar made a point of entering in the register that the bride was "born out of wedlock" under Fathers Name and Surname.  All others I have seen have just had a line drawn where no fathers name is written.
This marriage took place in the district church Lawley, Shropshire, May 15 1880

Corryn

The Vicar was completely out of order writing this in the column "Father's Name and Surname", and I would be surprised if the Registrar allowed it when the quarterly copy certificate was sent to him. It would be interesting to get the certified copy from the GRO to see if it was still entered.

Stan

[stanmapstone]

Of course he may have just written it in the Church Register and not on the "Registered Copy" he sent to the Registrar.

Stan

[louisa maud]

Stan, if it wasn't on the " registered copy" why should he have written it at all?, but we are talking about some time ago.
   
Louisa Maud

[majm]

"Out of wedlock"  recorded in lieu of the name of the father of bride or groom on a parish register in England in 1880 ...  yes, likely the Vicar was over-reaching protocol even within his own church admin. However, I cannot see that today's family history buffs must immediately decide that that clergyman's words were recorded on his register with the purpose to cause scorn or other adverse comment readily available to the general public to injure the couple being married. ***

BUT from a family history perspective it is actually a very positive and vital piece of information, likely based on a verbal response to the clergy's standard question "who is thy father".   It helps validate the 21st century quest to become informed about nineteenth century ancestors.

I hope that Corryn, who from his profile is currently just 22,  continues to pursue family history studies for there will be many times that confronting facts will need to be examined in context.

Stan, as always, has everything at hand, and I support his thoughts on checking what is actually on the civil registration. 

Andrew is spot on too,  values change, the intent and meanings of words change.

ADD

*** I am in New South Wales,  Australia.  Church records here are not automatically public records.  Over time, various church records have been filmed and made available to the general public, with permission of the denominations head offices.   


JM

[Andrew Tarr]

Of course he may have just written it in the Church Register and not on the "Registered Copy" he sent to the Registrar.

But if the data on these certs is 'informant-led' it follows either that one of the parties volunteered the information, or the cleric knew from long ago and wished the fact not to get overlooked ?  And of course these days a good proportion of children are born 'out of wedlock', which often comes later.

A member of my tree was baptised in Manchester 'cathedral' in 1848 with no father recorded, but he was acknowledged when she married there 25 years later.  In fact he was lodging with her husband while cohabiting with her mother, who he never married.  No clerical comments on the certificate though.

[majm]

 



JM