Twins - time on birth certificate

[TracyL]

Hi

I know that twins always have their time of birth recorded on their birth certificates, but can anyone tell me if this has always been the case.  I am sure this goes back a long way, but I anyone can confirm this for me, it would be helpful.

Many thanks
Tracy

[tetcol]

All Scottish births and deaths have the time.

Cathy

[Lloydy]

My GG Grandfather and his twin brother were born in 1881 in Newtown, Montgomeryshire and the time is recorded on the certificates.

Jan

[Shaztoni]

I have a time of birth on my gggrandfathers birth cert in 1848 (1 am) but I don't think he was a twin (well I can't find a twin for him)

BMD index Joseph Beer Sept 1848 vol 10 pg 69 Bideford

There were two other Beers registered in Bideford in Sept 1848 but they were both indexed to p. 62. If Joseph had a twin shouldn't they be indexed on pages 68-69-70, next to Joesph.

Sharon

[TracyL]

Thanks for that.  I didn't know that Scottish birth certificates have the time recorded.
Having twin sisters and twin daughters (!) I do know that twins these days do have the time recorded for the purpose of defining the legal heir, but wasn't sure how far back this went.  I am trying to establish whether or not two siblings I have found could be twins, but I have the birth cert. for one of them in 1905 and there is no time recorded.

Sharon, apart from Cathy's comment about Scottish births, I have not heard of the time being recorded unless it was for a twin.  I would have thought Joseph would be on the same page as his twin unless, for some reason, they were registered on different days?

Tracy

[Valda]

I have some examples of English birth certificates, usually relatively early ones where a time was recorded for the birth but they were not twins. However you would expect to find on all twin births that a time was recorded and that the births were indexed in the GRO index to the same page because their births would be registered together (why would you go all the way back to the registrar and registered another child on another day).
The only time you could miss a twin (with no time recorded on the one birth certificate) would be if one of the twins was stillborn in which case no birth or death (until the 1920s in the case of death) would be registered.

Regards

Valda

[Koromo]

I found someone else's tree which had relatives in common. They were born in Wales in the 1850s (none of them twins) and the time of birth was recorded in the tree. I emailed the fellow but didn't get a reply, so was never sure if he'd made it up, or if it was for real.


K.

[Arranroots]

Thanks for raising this question: it reminded me of something I wanted to sort out!

My gt grandmother was registered in Bedwellty, Monmouthshire in 1861.  I have her birth cert and there is a time on it.  I knew that she subsequently had twin sons herself, but no-one in the family knew that she was a twin.  I have just double-checked the GRO indexes and there is another BIRD on the same page of the register!  Now I REALLY want to know the answer to your question!  Although it seems very likely now that it was a twin birth, the other child - John - is not with the family on the 1871 or subsequent censuses (but there is a John who might fit, if memory serves, only he is elsewhere!)  Must pursue this now - where's my wallet??

 

[Little Nell]

In the very early years of civil registration, many registrars were not always certain what should be recorded on certificates.  My gt-gt grandfather was born in 1838 and the time of birth was recorded on his certificate.  He was definitely not a twin. 

Nell