RootsChat.Com
Beginners => Family History Beginners Board => Topic started by: coffeecup on Thursday 01 February 07 16:27 GMT (UK)
-
When you send for a birth marriage or death certificate from the records office do you recieve a photocopy of the original?
The reason I ask is that I was contacted by someone researching the same ancestors and they showed me a marriage certificate that I had already independantly sent for. The writing on theirs was completely different to my copy.
Whose copy is from the original?
Also I contacted Liverpool records office to look up a marriage entry in the church records they have on microfiche there, as there is some doubt that the bride's father's christian name is correct and I wanted to compare the certificate I have to the church's entry. They sent me an exact copy of the marriage certificate that I had already. Does that mean the certificate was filled in at the church?
I'm really confused about this. Can anybody explain please?
-
Certificates from the local register office (not records office) may or may not be photocopies of the originals held there - you can usually tell from the format - if a photocopy the middle section is the original - topped & tailed by the current format & registrar. If filled in by the modern registrar is seems better spaced and the writing is more consistent - particularly the signatures.
The church register is that signed at the time of the ceremony so should tie in with that the couple have. After 1837 it is the legal document so there should be no differences.
Modifying - additionally - regarding the difference in father's name - it may be that he used a different name to his "registered name" and that is what was used at the wedding. Sometimes if the father was dead (and it doesn't automatically get stated on the wedding cert.) the daughter could use what he was called, rather than what he was registered with in all innocence. Then again there are "fathers of convenience" who weren't recorded on their offspring's birth certificates ;)
-
Hi,
I am not too sure but this is what I think, maybe someone will correct me!!
When a birth, marriage or death was recorded the registrar of that district would record in his books the event, and four times per year he would send copies of these records to the General Registrar of England and Wales. When ordering from a local records centre I have found that my certs are copied onto new sheets in modern handwriting but this may not be the case elsewhere.
When I order from the Family Records Centre in London I think the copies are photocopied from the General Registrars records, which I think were second copies so not the original.
When I order online with scotspeople I can look at the actual orginal entry of a record.
-
Basically what you are getting from the GRO (Topped and tailed around the entry) and the LRO is a copy of the Register Entry.
The writing will often be that of the Clerk who copied the Register entry from the Church Register or LRO submissions - but an actual LRO Register entry should be original handwriting - I think !
The Certificate was a one-off given to you at the time... and thus all handwriting will be original ..
I'll modify and attach a copy of a Warrington Register entry to illustrate ...
-
This has always bothered me.
Does it mean that there is a chance that the marriage certificate that we get from the GRO can be inaccurate?
Is this what happens? The church register would be completed and a certificate given to the bride/groom which should have identical information.
Then the local register office compiles a "master" register from the information supplied by the churches which again should be identical.
If I'm understanding it correctly then there are at least two chances of error.
Peter
-
I've seen a few examples where the register kept by the church and the register deposited in the local Registry Office differ on things like father's name, etc. Both would have been filled out at the time of the marriage by the minister.
In the 1930s a relative got married and the minister forgot to bring the registers so the couple had to go back to the church the next day to sign them.
-
my own name is incorrect as 'Father of the Groom' - 2004 marriage .... the vicar wouldnt change it once it was in the register ..... :o
-
PSB - take a look at this ....
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/mikefost/
-
In the 1980s my husband to be and I got our marriage licence and went straight to minister to sort out wedding arrangements. While waiting we luckily noticed that it was full of mistakes- his surname omitted and his 3rd Christian name used as surname, his birthplace incorrect, etc. Had to drive back to Registrar to get it done again.
-
Hi All
Newfy I had one of my children's birth certiftcate with the in-correct information on it .
I wrote to the General Registar and asked his permission to have the correct information noted and he agreed.
I then took the in-correct certificate to our local registry office and had a new one issued with the correct surname.
Sandy
-
Newfy
Thanks for the link.
I wonder how we manage to find out anything at all with all of the apparent pitfalls put in our way.
What are the odds of this new reworking of the registers being full of errors?
Peter
-
Any certificate whether issued at the time of the registration or provided years later is only a copy. There is a better chance of one prepared in the local office not containing errors introduced during copying because there is only one transcription involved. An original certificate if it means anything is thus the first one made. In the case of my father's death I had four copies made for various reasons when I registered the death. Which one was the original in that case?
Today when the registry office entry is made straight into the computer this is not likely to occur although there is a still a potential problem with marriages not conducted at the registry office. The certificates are of course now prited straight from the computer record. Our descendants will thus have better records if we bother to get married.
-
That's really interesting.
So it seems that the church entered the details into their own register (I have had copies of originals pre 1837 so no transcribing required), then a copy is made for the register office and one for the married couple. Local reigster offices and the general records office will each have a seperate copy. Is that the general idea?
It explains the handwriting difference.
No wonder there is so much room for error. The name of the father on the certificate I have is William Rowlands, but I've sent for several birth certificates for the bride Alice Rowlands around 1847 in Warrington and none have her father as 'William'. Nor can she be found on the census records and after some lengthy searching and many posts on this topic on the Cheshire and Lancs boards, the general thought was that the marriage certificate is wrong. It's been a huge brick wall.
So it would be a sensible idea to approach Liverpool Records Office again and ask them to check the CHURCH entry?
Thank you very much indeed everyone for your thoughts, links, examples and suggestions.
-
Another thing, it explains why when somebody did actually sign their own name and not with an X, that the handwriting is identical to the rest of the certificate. It's not your ancestors handwriting at all then? That's a shame.
-
Don't forget that prior to 1837 and I think for sometime afterwards a transcript of the parish register was made for the bishop. Many of the printed marriage registers of the late 19th century were made from these bishops transcripts and so again two copies into which errors could be introduced.
Also the IGI entries often were copied from these printed books, three copies to introduce errors.
David
-
This is probably one of the reasons why you find mistakes on the I.G.I index or you cannot find someone. Sometimes people may have been missed.
This could also be the case when you check digital indexes. There could be an amount of human error although I think these are double checked most of the time.
I have an example of this:
if I look at the 1851 census on the computer it states that my great great grandfather was born in Luth on the transcribed statement. However, if you look at the original census carefully you can see it says Leigh, Lancs.
Just always be aware of the pitfalls!! :o
-
LRO certificates from Guisborough are copied by someone on the day you request them. I ordered two and they are the same writing. I checked and that is the case.
So perhaps LROs vary in what they do.
-
.
No wonder there is so much room for error. The name of the father on the certificate I have is William Rowlands, but I've sent for several birth certificates for the bride Alice Rowlands around 1847 in Warrington and none have her father as 'William'. Nor can she be found on the census records and after some lengthy searching and many posts on this topic on the Cheshire and Lancs boards, the general thought was that the marriage certificate is wrong. It's been a huge brick wall.
Don't assume that such problems are always transcription errors. I have two examples which are similar but are what the bride told the vicar.
In one case she said that the name of her father was John when in fact his name was Charles. The reason was that her father had died when she was very young and she had been brought up by his brother John who married his mother. (This took five years to sort out)
The second case occurs frequently where a child is born out of wedlock and when the mother eventually marries, adopts the name of her stepfather (or father inlaw as it would then have been called)
David
-
Hi yes that's quite right about questioning the reliability of what the registrar was told. It could well be that my missing Alice Rowlands is on the census under another name. The trouble is if her birth was registered at all 'William' wasn't named as her father. I've been through them all for Warrington that I can find. I really wanted to double check because I'm not sure what else can be done to trace her prior to her marriage.
I have had one which I think is a downright lie, a girl Jane Mee who gave her father as John Mee on her marriage certificate when I know for certain that her mother Alice Mee never married and that Mee was her mother's maiden name. That threw me quite a bit, started looking for cousins and so forth as possible fathers. She got married quite far from home so I guess no one she knew there to question what she told them.
It would just be useful to know if that the 'original' copy is held by the church whether the father's name differs or not, it's so frustrating not being able to find her birth record, certainly not one that matches anyhow.
-
I have one cert were the woman has put her child as illegitimate but then she marries someone about two months after the birth. He maybe the father but I'll never know for sure.
-
Thurston I had exactly that problem. A boy who's mother married six weeks after he was born, but never put the father on the birth certificate, and when he married nothing of his father on his marriage certifcate either. Finally, after years being clueless, I found this boy's christening entry in the church records, and it turned out that his father was the man his mother had married after all.
Find his baptism if you can, there's a good chance they wouldn't lie to the church.