RootsChat.Com

Ireland (Historical Counties) => Ireland => Armagh => Topic started by: Siely on Saturday 17 January 26 20:54 GMT (UK)

Title: Devenport Brothers
Post by: Siely on Saturday 17 January 26 20:54 GMT (UK)
Devenport brothers Robert (born 25 Jan. 1867) and James (born 1870) were both born in Clonlum , Co. Armagh to Margaret Devenport (died 1883) who was daughter of Hamilton Devenport of Clonlum.
(source irishgeneaology.ie)
On BOTH Robert and James birth records the father's name is omitted, why would this happen ?
(both Margaret and her father Hamilton were illiterate making a "X" on the register so this is unlikely to be the reason for the omission of the father).
Robert later has a William Devonport (miner) as his father on his marriage cert. in Birmingham to a Kate Sylvester in 1891.
Why did he
stay anonymous on birth registrations ? Any thoughts ?
Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: heywood on Saturday 17 January 26 21:47 GMT (UK)
Just for information, here is Robert’s birth record
https://www.irishgenealogy.ie/files/civil/birth_returns/births_1867/03490/2282712.pdf
And James https://www.irishgenealogy.ie/files/civil/birth_returns/births_1870/03327/2219743.pdf
Margaret is a spinster on her death record
https://www.irishgenealogy.ie/files/civil/deaths_returns/deaths_1883/06356/4823771.pdf

In these kind of circumstances,  people often invented a father for respectability.
Sometimes, they would use a stepfather or grandfather’s name or another male relative.
In this case, as Margaret did not marry and grandfather was not William, it could be just an invention.
Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: gaffy on Saturday 17 January 26 22:02 GMT (UK)
I think I see a potential uncle William marrying: (1) Mary Jane Donnelly (1867); (2) Susan Patterson (1887), he wasn't a miner but maybe he was the inspiration for the invention of the name. 

Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: heywood on Saturday 17 January 26 22:38 GMT (UK)
That looks promising, gaffy.
Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: Wexflyer on Saturday 17 January 26 23:26 GMT (UK)

Why did he
stay anonymous on birth registrations ? Any thoughts ?

Because legally he wasn't supposed to be named.
The fathers of illegitimate children were not to be named. Except perhaps if they turned up in person at registration and accepted that the child was theirs.
Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: CaroleW on Saturday 17 January 26 23:50 GMT (UK)
It was the same situation with birth registration in England.  If a child is illegitimate, the biological father has to attend the registration & sign the register which acknowledges the child as his.

If he refuses to attend or sign - his name cannot appear on the birth cert for obvious (& probably legal) reasons.  My late uncle fathered a child with a married woman in 1936 but signed the birth register

Present day - I don't know what the position is if a DNA test proves he is the father
Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: Jon_ni on Sunday 18 January 26 02:16 GMT (UK)
Quote
Because legally he wasn't supposed to be named.
The fathers of illegitimate children were not to be named. Except perhaps if they turned up in person at registration and accepted that the child was theirs.

Actually legally the mother could name any person she liked as father from the start of civil registration 1864 up to when the Births and Deaths Registration Act (Ireland), 1880 came into force on 1 Jan 1881.
In the 1863 Act there was no "Saving for father of illegitimate child".

Eighteenth Annual Report of the Registrar-General of Marriages, Births, and Deaths in Ireland 1881.
page 3. https://archive.org/details/op1251206-1001/page/n5/mode/2up

Amongst minor changes may be mentioned:
3. Prior to 1881, the mother of an illegitimate child could, acting as informant, have the name of any person inserted in the register as father of such child.
Under the new Statute the Registrar is prohibited from entering the name of any person as father of an illegitimate child, unless at the joint request of the mother and of the person acknowledging himself to be the father of such child, both of whose signatures are required to the entry.

The first 5 to 6 pages of the introduction, up to the comment regarding Roman Catholic marriage registration defects, are a useful summary & explaination of the changes.

Edit: for completeness:
The Registration of Births and Deaths (Ireland) Act 1863
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/26-27/11/pdfs/ukpga_18630011_en.pdf
Births and Deaths Registration Act (Ireland) 1880.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/43-44/13/enacted

The "saving for father" applied in England and Wales from their 1874 Act, updating the 1836.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/37-38/88/enacted
Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: Wexflyer on Sunday 18 January 26 02:19 GMT (UK)
Very interesting. Thank you
Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: Siely on Sunday 18 January 26 06:25 GMT (UK)
Thank you all for your help.
Heywood- I have noted your point that Margaret was a Spinster on her death record.
Margaret may have had a brother David who married Margaret Ferguson also in Clonlum area.
(Two Donnelly witnesses on marriage cert.)
The anonymous father of both Margaret Devenport's children is going to be difficult to pinpoint.
Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: Kiltaglassan on Sunday 18 January 26 11:17 GMT (UK)

Margaret may have had a brother David who married Margaret Ferguson also in Clonlum area.
(Two Donnelly witnesses on marriage cert.)
 

Here's that marriage - 3 November 1875 at Jonesborough Parish Church. Father of the groom, Hamilton Devonport.
https://www.irishgenealogy.ie/files/civil/marriage_returns/marriages_1875/11218/8112273.pdf

Added: Clonlum townland about 5-6 km NW of Jonesborough
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5214646#map=13/54.10974/-6.37207


Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: Siely on Sunday 18 January 26 17:38 GMT (UK)
Thanks kiltaglassan

Is it "Church of Lowsford"  and rector of Lowsford at bottom of David & Margaret marriage cert.
Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: aghadowey on Sunday 18 January 26 17:42 GMT (UK)
Is it "Church of Lowsford"  and rector of Lowsford at bottom of David & Margaret marriage cert.

It's "Church of Jonesboro" [a variation of Jonesborough] and 'rector' doesn't appear on the marriage registration.
Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: Siely on Sunday 18 January 26 18:01 GMT (UK)
At bottom of whole page it says
........R. Scott
Rector of Jonsboro
 
Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: aghadowey on Sunday 18 January 26 19:20 GMT (UK)
At bottom of whole page it says
........R. Scott
Rector of Jonsboro

Ah, bottom of page not bottom of their marriage entry- It's a poorly written Jonesboro and yes, rector. I think his name is James R. Scott not R. Scott.
Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: Kiltaglassan on Sunday 18 January 26 19:39 GMT (UK)

Quote
I think his name is James R. Scott not R. Scott.

Agree with Aghadowey  ;)

Image below.

Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: Siely on Sunday 18 January 26 19:55 GMT (UK)
I wonder if the Canon Law of the Church of Ireland or Roman Catholic Church would prevent a second marriage (and hence child birth registrations) of the anonymous father of both Robert and James.
Title: Re: Devenport Brothers
Post by: aghadowey on Sunday 18 January 26 22:28 GMT (UK)
I wonder if the Canon Law of the Church of Ireland or Roman Catholic Church would prevent a second marriage (and hence child birth registrations) of the anonymous father of both Robert and James.
Sorry but I'm not sure exactly what you are saying. The birth registrations (which have nothing to do with the church) for Robert and James do not list their father/fathers because the parents were not married. This doesn't mean the father/fathers was/were not in their lives at least for a little while.