RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: Nautilus on Friday 10 August 07 07:39 BST (UK)
-
Did people sometimes not register the birth of their children in the 1840's?
I'd like a birth certificate of my gt gt grandmother or her two sisters to get their mothers maiden name but I can't find them. They were born in 1839, 1841 & 1843 so they should be registered. I've found a date of birth & christening for the youngest on the IGI but can't find her even having an exact ( hopefully) date. I've looked in partial & complete free BMD ancestry & Find My Past & can only think that the family just didn't bother. Presumably when registration first started there was less need than now to show your birth certificate for proof of identity or age?
-
Not that unusual, I've heard some frightening stats ...... in the 1870s, a penalty was imposed, but still people chose not to spend the money on registration.
Whats the name - is it possibly prone to mistranscription ..... the other day we found a pair of twins called Rolf, registered as RUFF !
-
It's Lugg. I've checked Leggs though I expect there are lots of other possibilities. I wouldn't have thought all three would be mistranscribed though. Also mistranscription seems more of a problem with census data than GRO indexes.
I didn't realise it cost money to register a birth. That would be a good reason not to bother!
-
Not that unusual, I've heard some frightening stats ...... in the 1870s, a penalty was imposed, but still people chose not to spend the money on registration.
You did not have to spend any money on registration, and the compulsion was on the registrar, as the 1836 Registration Act stated
"....and 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...and to learn and register soon after the Event as conveniently may be done, without Fee or Reward save as herein-after mentioned, "
The registrars also had an incentive to register as they were paid for the entries viz. "for the first Twenty Entries of Births and Deaths in every Year which he shall have registered, whether the same be of Births or of Deaths indiscriminately, Two Shillings and Sixpence each, and One Shilling for every subsequent Entry of Births or Deaths in each Year."
Stan
-
sadly Stan, the Act was amended in 1874 to put the Onus for Registration back to the parent ..... and altho I cant find a figure, I'm pretty sure there was a Registration fee - as there is today ....
Civil registrations were not completely inclusive or reliable during the early years. The new law was regarded as revolutionary in 1837. Many people felt that the government had an ulterior motive for introducing this law (taxes, etc.) and were, therefore, suspicious of registration. Others did not understand the need for civil registration, as their baptisms, marriages, and deaths were all recorded in the church registers. Prior to 1875, there was also no penalty for failure to register events, so many people just didn't make the effort.
In addition to the problems with incomplete records, the system also allowed for many erroneous registrations to take place. During the early years of registration, the burden was upon the local registrar to seek registrations for which he was paid a sum per entry. This compensation per entry, most likely led to cases of fraudulent registrations.
Another common area for errors involved birth records. Many births were not recorded, especially prior to 1874/5, because there was no legal mandate for doing so. Parents often did not even know about the law, or thought that the record of the child's baptism in the church register was sufficient. They may also have lived too far from a registration office to make civil registration practical.
In order to avoid paying a late registration penalty (imposed upon births not registered within 6 weeks), families often stated a later (incorrect) date of birth for the child so that the registration remained within the 6 week period.
Newfster.
Right, lets try and help answer the actual question .......
-
sadly Stan, the Act was amended in 1874 to put the Onus for Registration back to the parent ..... and altho I cant find a figure, I'm pretty sure there was a Registration fee - as there is today ....
Is there a fee to register a birth in England today? Just surprised because in Northern Ireland there is no fee for registering births.
-
I might be thinking about this when mentioning fees ..
1836 Act.
XXII. And be it enacted, That after the Expiration of Forty-two Days following the Day of the Birth of any Child it shall not be lawful for any Registrar to register such Birth, save as herein-after is next mentioned ; provided that, in case the Birth of any Child shall not have been registered according to the Provisions herein-before contained, it shall be lawful for any person present at the Birth of such Child, or for the Father or Guardian thereof, at any Time within Six Calendar Months next after the Birth, to make a solemn Declaration of the Particulars required to be known touching the Birth of such Child, according to the best of his or her Knowledge and Belief, and it thereupon be lawful for the said Registrar then and there, in the Presence of the Superintendent Registrar, to register the Birth of the said Child according to the Information of the Person making the said Declaration ; and in every such Case the Superintendent Registrar before whom the said Declaration is made shall sign the Entry of Birth as well as the registrar, and for every such Registry as last aforesaid the Superintendent Registrar shall be entitled to have a Fee of Two Shillings and Sixpence from the Person requiring the same to be registered ; and the Registrar, over and above the Fee herein-after enacted in respect of every birth registered by him, shall be entitled, unless the Delay shall have been occasioned by his Default, to have a Fee of Five Shillings from the person requiring the same to be registered ; and no Register of Births shall be given in Evidence to prove the Birth of any Child wherein it shall appear that Forty-two Days have intervened between the Day of the Birth and the Day of the Registration of the Birth of such Child, unless the Entry shall be signed by the Superintendent Registrar ; and every person who shall knowingly register or cause to be registered the Birth of any Child, otherwise than herein-before is last mentioned, after the Expiration of Forty-two Days following the Day of Birth of such Child, shall forfeit and pay for every such Offence a Sum not exceeding Fifty Pounds.
XXIII. And be it enacted, That after the Expiration of Six Calendar Months following the Birth of any Child it shall not be lawful for any Registrar to register the Birth of such Child, and no Register of Births, except in the Case of Children born at Sea, shall be given in Evidence to prove the Birth of any Child wherein it shall appear that Six Calendar Months have intervened between the Day of the Birth and the Day of the Registration of the Birth of such Child ; and every Person who shall knowingly register or cause to be registered the Birth of any Child after the Expiration of Six Calendar Months following the Day of the Birth of such Child shall forfeit and pay for every such Offence a Sum not exceeding Fifty Pounds.
-
Actual Registration is 'Free' .... altho if you want a full Cert to be provided at the time, its £3.50
Theres nowt online about the 19th C fees, so I guess it was the provision for a late fee I remembered
-
Same as Northern Ireland then.
-
Hi Nautilus,
Could you give us their christian names so we can try a search?
Steve
-
Thanks everyone. I'm actually setting off for a weekend's camping this afternoon so won't be back in touch till Sunday. If you want to have a look for me in the mean time here are their details, according to 1851 census, obviously approximate years of birth.
Eliza Lugg b1839 Clerkenwell
Clara Lugg b 1841 St Lukes
Alice Lugg b 1845 Clerkenwell, according to the IGI she was born 17 June 1844 & christened 21 July 1844
thanks again
Chris
-
Actual Registration is 'Free' .... altho if you want a full Cert to be provided at the time, its £3.50
Theres nowt online about the 19th C fees, so I guess it was the provision for a late fee I remembered
The 1874 Act Fees to Registrars and Superintendent Registrars.
For registering a birth or death when required to do so at residence of person signing requisition, or at a house where child born or person died (not being a public institution), to register one shilling, to be paid by the informant.
Section 25 of the 1836 Act for registering Births, Deaths, and Marriages in England fixed the fee for a certified copy of an entry of a birth, marriage or death at 2s. 6d. If this required a search of the indexes then registrars could charge 1s. "for every particular search" of the indexes for not more than one year and the law also required a penny receipt stamp to be placed on each certified copy. Thus this accounts for the the usual fee of 3s. 7d. that is sometimes quoted.
Section 30 of the 1874 Act stated that a registrar shall, upon demand made at the time of registering any birth by the person giving the information concerning the birth, and upon payment of a fee not exceeding three pence, give to such person a certificate under his hand, in the prescribed form, of having registered that birth, this was the 'Short Certificate'.
Stan
-
Thanks Stan - is the whole Act online somewhere, or have you transcribed it ?
Glad we sorted out the 1874/5 onus changing anyway ;)
-
Thanks Stan - is the whole Act online somewhere, or have you transcribed it ?
Hi Newf,
There are two sites
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~framland/acts/actind.htm
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01lc/
Stan
-
The IGI has the marriage of William Lugg and Elizabeth Turnbull on the 7th May 1832 at St James's, Westminster London.
Any good?
Carol
-
It doesn't really matter if it's the certificate or the registration you're paying for. Considering the vast majority of people take the certificate at registration, the end result is the same either way. ;)
-
Well I'm back from my campng trip. Looks like my guess is right & the family didn't register the births. Thanks for all the info on registration though.
Carol, I had spotted the marriage of William Lugg & Elizabeth Turnbull on the IGI but how do I know if its the right one? Now I'm getting beyond census info it's difficult to know as there's a lack of other sources to cross check. Thanks anyway
-
Just a thought - can you get the church they were christened in from IGI & then check PRs in the neighbourhood for the marriage?
Steve
-
Have only found the one christening on the IGI for the youngest of 5 children. The marriage is in a different church. I live in Wales & this lot lived in London & moved around the parishes so not an easy task!
-
Hi Nautilus
Pallot's Marriage Index has:
Wm Lugg b & Mary Hassell sp married at St Annes, Soho in 1837. This sounds a good posibility - fairly close to Clerkenwell & St Lukes
Steve
-
No sorry, their mother was Elizabeth according to the census & the eldest child was born 1831. Elizabeth Turnbull seems the more likely marriage although its after the birth of their first child so I have my doubts