Author Topic: Possible confusion for someone in the future!  (Read 540 times)

Online BumbleB

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 11,059
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Possible confusion for someone in the future!
« on: Saturday 27 June 20 16:45 BST (UK) »
I do transcriptions for FreeBMD, and I came across something today which may cause confusion.

I can't name names, as we're talking 1969 marriages.  Same surnames in both instances -

Patricia J T marries Leslie A S P in Wolverhampton Registration District

Patricia J T marries Leslie A S-P in West Bromwich Registration District

Same page number for both entries, even though different Districts  :-\ :-\
Transcriptions and NBI are merely finding aids.  They are NOT a substitute for original record entries.
Remember - "They'll be found when they want to be found" !!!
If you don't ask the question, you won't get an answer.
He/she who never made a mistake, never made anything.
Archbell - anywhere, any date
Kendall - WRY
Milner - WRY
Appleyard - WRY

Offline Nick_Ips

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 471
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Possible confusion for someone in the future!
« Reply #1 on: Saturday 27 June 20 17:20 BST (UK) »
Same page number for both entries, even though different Districts  :-\ :-\

If you didn't know better one might conclude they couldn't decide where to get married, so did it twice in one day?  ;D

There are a pair of possible births for the husband.... ongoing uncertainty by those responsible for completing the paperwork?

Online BumbleB

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 11,059
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Possible confusion for someone in the future!
« Reply #2 on: Saturday 27 June 20 17:31 BST (UK) »
I just thought it was strange.  I haven't done any further research, I just noticed it whilst doing my transcription.  I've seen two entries for the same event due to spellings, or even three, but they have all been recorded in the same Registration District.  BUT this is slightly different in that we have two Registration Districts for what appears to be the same event.

Transcriptions and NBI are merely finding aids.  They are NOT a substitute for original record entries.
Remember - "They'll be found when they want to be found" !!!
If you don't ask the question, you won't get an answer.
He/she who never made a mistake, never made anything.
Archbell - anywhere, any date
Kendall - WRY
Milner - WRY
Appleyard - WRY


Online Treetotal

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 25,633
    • View Profile
Re: Possible confusion for someone in the future!
« Reply #3 on: Saturday 27 June 20 22:48 BST (UK) »
In one of my lines, a Mother had three children whilst unmarried and were registered in the Mother's maiden then reregistered when she married four years.
Carol
CAPES Hull. KIRK  Leeds, Hull. JONES  Wales,  Lancashire. CARROLL Ireland, Lancashire, U.S.A. BROUGHTON Leicester, Goole, Hull BORRILL  Lincolnshire, Durham, Hull. GROOM  Wishbech, Hull. ANTHONY St. John's Nfld. BUCKNALL Lincolnshire, Hull. BUTT Harbour Grace, Newfoundland. PARSONS  Western Bay, Newfoundland. MONAGHAN  Ireland, U.S.A. PERRY Cheshire, Liverpool.
 
RESTORERS:PLEASE DO NOT USE MY RESTORES WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION - THANK YOU

Offline JohninSussex

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
    • View Profile
Re: Possible confusion for someone in the future!
« Reply #4 on: Sunday 28 June 20 00:36 BST (UK) »
Same page number for both entries, even though different Districts  :-\ :-\

In principle, that is impossible as the volume+page number will relate to an original page from a particular Registrar.
So I would think one entry has been indexed with the incorrect district name.

Or perhaps there is a more complicated explanation such as the marriage being recorded in one district and the registrar discovered it actually took place in the other, so two index entries for the same event.  Or maybe some esoteric denomination built a church exactly on the border of the two places, and they said their "I Do"s in Wolves and signed the register in West Brom.
Rutter, Sampson, Swinerd, Head, Redman in Kent.  Others in Cheshire, Manchester, Glos/War/Worcs.
RUTTER family and Matilda Sampson's Will:

Offline Colin Cruddace

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,546
  • Looking for GG Grandad... Must have GSH
    • View Profile
Re: Possible confusion for someone in the future!
« Reply #5 on: Wednesday 01 July 20 22:29 BST (UK) »
I also transcribed for FreeBMD many moons ago, and it was the early handwritten records.
The BMD indexes are GRO search aids to finding a certificate, and if there is some doubt about anything then multiple entries will result, and will cover all possibilities.
As your entries have the same page number then there must have been something unclear about the registration district name in the quarterly return when compiling the alphabetical index.

Oh how I yearn for those pre-digital days to return  ::)
Colin