Author Topic: Did you need a birth certificate for baptism?  (Read 1219 times)

Offline ShawThing

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 8
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Did you need a birth certificate for baptism?
« Reply #9 on: Thursday 14 September 23 16:38 BST (UK) »
It is possible it could be a late registration, but they are quite unusual, especially after such a number of years, and by far the most likely explanation is a re-registration. The timing (1927) suggests that is the case.

Finding the birth registration in 1904 could be difficult, because it could be indexed under a number of names, depending on the marital status, and surnames of the parent(s) named at the time. If you don't want to post the names here - I'm happy for you to send the details via PM and I'll have a look for you.

Were either of the parents, named in 1927, married to other people in 1904 ? If they were that may make a re-registration less likely (assuming they told the truth).

I have just been reading about late birth registration on another forum, and a contributor suggests that the Registrar General would take a baptism certificate as proof of the original birth.  Otherwise how would you prove when a home birth had actually taken place?

The word, or possibly signed statutory declarations, of the parents could be enough - but a baptism certificate might be part of the evidence that could be submitted (but it wouldn't be a legal requirement).

Was it not considered breaking the law not to register a birth post 1837 in England ?

No - it is a lot more complex than that, but a simple failure to register has never been an offence.

The mother was a widow but the father was separated from his first wife at the time of the new son's birth.  All the children of the first marriage stayed with their father.  If the first wife had already died then I see no reason for the couple not to marry before their son was born.  I have now found that there is a birth registered with the mother's surname in the right place at the right time for a child with the same first name, so this may well be a reregistration after the parents marriage rather than a first registration.

Offline BushInn1746

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,571
  • My Family's Links 19th Cent
    • View Profile
Re: Did you need a birth certificate for baptism?
« Reply #10 on: Thursday 14 September 23 18:50 BST (UK) »
There is no original entry in 1904, just a hand written note at the bottom of the page referring to the 1927 registration.  On the 1927 certificate it states under 'Signature of Registrar' - J C Smailes, Registrar.  On the authority of the Registrar General dated 2nd March 1927, and under column 7 - after the father's details As per declaration dated 9th March 1927.

Births and Deaths Registration Act 1874

1874 CHAPTER 88

After the expiration of twelve months next after the birth of any child, that birth shall not be registered except with the written authority of the Registrar General for registering the same, and except in accordance with the prescribed rules, and the fact of such authority having been given shall be entered in the ...

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/37-38/88/enacted

Comment
It seems that if the Birth was not registered within 12 months, then the Birth needed the authority of the Registrar General to be registered, which is what you have stated.

A declaration would be a formal statement probably made by the parent/s?

The GRO might even keep a file or just enter the fact on all the Certificates GRO / District Registrar and any Parents Copy?

Whether a fee is payable, you'll have to ask them.
General Register Office
PO Box 2
SOUTHPORT
PR8 2JD
 ----------
I have a reference on a Certified Copy 1857 GRO Death Certificate to the Informant of a Death returning 5 months after registration with a person of the same surname (named) to the Registrar and both making a Declaration (the Informant could only make her mark) in front of Thomas Kilburn Registrar, to get the surname spelling corrected from Wesley to Westley.

Mark

Offline AntonyMMM

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,371
  • Researcher (retired) and former Deputy Registrar
    • View Profile
Re: Did you need a birth certificate for baptism?
« Reply #11 on: Thursday 14 September 23 19:52 BST (UK) »
It seems that if the Birth was not registered within 12 months, then the Birth needed the authority of the Registrar General to be registered, which is what you have stated.

A late registration would be done under the authority of the Registrar General, but that is also the wording used for a re-registration, which is the most likely scenario (under the Legitimacy Act)  in this case, especially as ShawThing seems to have identified a potential original registration in 1904.


A declaration would be a formal statement probably made by the parent/s?

The word "declaration" on an entry can have two very different meanings..... a "Statutory Declaration" is a statement made that would be related to a change or correction and would normally appear in a marginal note.

But in this case, "as per declaration" appearing in the informant column refers to the information having been given at a registration office outside of the district in which the event originally took place - quite understandable when it is 23 years after the birth and the parties may have moved some distance away ( the entry will still end up being made in the correct district though).

If the 1904 entry identified is correct, and a certificate is obtained from it, then it should have a marginal note rereferring to the re-registration in 1927 ( although occasionally that step seems to have been forgotten by the registrar when filling out the new entry).

Offline BushInn1746

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,571
  • My Family's Links 19th Cent
    • View Profile
Re: Did you need a birth certificate for baptism?
« Reply #12 on: Thursday 14 September 23 20:13 BST (UK) »
There is no original entry in 1904, just a hand written note at the bottom of the page referring to the 1927 registration. On the 1927 certificate it states under 'Signature of Registrar' - J C Smailes, Registrar.  On the authority of the Registrar General dated 2nd March 1927, and under column 7 - after the father's details As per declaration dated 9th March 1927.

Mark


Offline AntonyMMM

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,371
  • Researcher (retired) and former Deputy Registrar
    • View Profile
Re: Did you need a birth certificate for baptism?
« Reply #13 on: Thursday 14 September 23 21:27 BST (UK) »
I have now found that there is a birth registered with the mother's surname in the right place at the right time for a child with the same first name, so this may well be a reregistration after the parents marriage rather than a first registration.

Offline ShawThing

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 8
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Did you need a birth certificate for baptism?
« Reply #14 on: Thursday 14 September 23 22:13 BST (UK) »
The handwritten note referring to the 1927 registration is on the 1904 page for my great uncle's father's surname - Atkinson - the surname by which my great uncle had always been known by and would be reregistered as.  There is no corresponding note on the 1904 page for his mother's surname - Nicholson - where the potential original registration is shown.  My grandad, the subject's half-brother, was definitely registered as Nicholson but went by the name Atkinson for the first fourteen years of his life until he had to produce his birth certificate to leave school and get a job.  He then went by the name Nicholson (although in reality he was neither a Nicholson or an Atkinson).

Offline BushInn1746

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,571
  • My Family's Links 19th Cent
    • View Profile
Re: Did you need a birth certificate for baptism?
« Reply #15 on: Friday 15 September 23 09:29 BST (UK) »
Birmingham City Council, UK, produce a PDF summary of Important Dates in Civil Registration.

PDF
https://www.birmingham.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/3079/important_dates_in_civil_registration.pdf

1st July 1927
Introduction of the Register of Still Births

1927
a) Introduction of the Adopted Childrens Register,
b) Re-registration of illegitimate births allowed if parents subsequently marry each other,
c) Registrars certificate / coroners order required before a burial / cremation of a body.


I was not under the Registrar's Dept and I'm not trying to trip anyone up with my next question ... but would there not be something on the 1927 Birth Certificate to state the 1927 Birth Certificate was a reregistration?

Or is that a question for GRO HQ at Southport?

Because as previously discussed, there were mechanisms for both reregistration 1927 and an earlier 1874 Act allowing late first registration?

Mark

Offline ShawThing

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 8
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Did you need a birth certificate for baptism?
« Reply #16 on: Friday 15 September 23 09:56 BST (UK) »
Birmingham City Council, UK, produce a PDF summary of Important Dates in Civil Registration.

PDF
https://www.birmingham.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/3079/important_dates_in_civil_registration.pdf

1st July 1927
Introduction of the Register of Still Births

1927
a) Introduction of the Adopted Childrens Register,
b) Re-registration of illegitimate births allowed if parents subsequently marry each other,
c) Registrars certificate / coroners order required before a burial / cremation of a body.


I was not under the Registrar's Dept and I'm not trying to trip anyone up with my next question ... but would there not be something on the 1927 Birth Certificate to state the 1927 Birth Certificate was a reregistration?

Or is that a question for GRO HQ at Southport?

Because as previously discussed, there were mechanisms for both reregistration 1927 and an earlier 1874 Act allowing late first registration?

Mark

No there is nothing on the 1927 birth certificate to say it was a registration.  Just that it was 'On the authority of the Registrar General dated 2nd March 1927'.  That is a very useful link to important dates in civil registration, thank you.

Offline AntonyMMM

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,371
  • Researcher (retired) and former Deputy Registrar
    • View Profile
Re: Did you need a birth certificate for baptism?
« Reply #17 on: Friday 15 September 23 10:16 BST (UK) »
I was not under the Registrar's Dept and I'm not trying to trip anyone up with my next question ... but would there not be something on the 1927 Birth Certificate to state the 1927 Birth Certificate was a reregistration?

No - if the registrar followed the process correctly (and not all did) then the re-registration wouldn't usually have anything other than the "authority of the Registrar General" note in the informant column, but there should be a marginal note added to the original 1904 entry referring to the later re-reg.