What IS it that makes parents have multiple baptisms...?

[behindthefrogs]

If you ignore the issue of multiple baptisms then the question comes down to why are twins triplet etc born.

In the case off non identical twins this is entirely down to the fact that the woman ovulates more than one egg or in modern days the surgeon implants more han one egg.

In the case of identical twins it is because the egg divides into more than one egg  usually after fertilization.  Again I believe this is entirely down to the woman.

david

[behindthefrogs]

In the case of my family it was obvious that a new vicar in Thame had a round up of all the unbaptised children.  In the first year after he took office the number of baptisms trebled.

[stanmapstone]

In some cases, unknown to the priest, money was obtained by the parish clerk and sexton on the pretext of remuneration for the additional trouble and necessity for cleaning the church. This was commented on in a letter to "The Times" 28th. November 1843, by a priest who could not understand why some parishioners said they could not afford the fees.

Stan

[trish251]

The Baptismal Fees Abolition Act was passed in 1872, under which no fee can be charged for baptism notwithstanding any ancient custom to the contrary. 

The purpose of this act was to make the law clear in respect of fees for baptisms or for registering baptisms, it appeared that fees were being charged in some parishes, and it was intended to put an end to this system.

In one case where a rector demanded a fee of two shillings for a baptism legal opinion was that;
a)   No fee can be claimed for the registration of a baptism;
b)   It is very doubtful whether in any case, even where there has been a custom to do so, a fee can be asked for the administration of baptism;
c)   It is certain that no such fee can be recovered by law;
d)   It is also certain that any clergyman refusing to baptize or to register the baptism on the ground of no fee having been paid can be proceeded against and punished under the 68th and 70th Canons of the Act of 52 George III., cap. 146.

Stan

In one of my Dorset parish registers, I found this
Baptisms From the First of October 1783 being the DAY on which a Tax of 3d duty to the King commenced from every Marriage, Birth or burial (excepting from those who are born of Parents that receive relief from the Parish, and those that are buried from any Work House or Hospital, or at the sole expence of any Charity)

So would it be correct that a fee was charged - and given to the King/State  between 1783 and 1872? I had 3 baptised at once in Dorset (1825 - born over the preceeding 6 years). I assumed it was because "they didn't get around to it" or because of the cost - but have never been sure as to why. The previous six children in the family were all baptised shortly after birth.

Trish

[stanmapstone]

It was not a fee required by the church, it was a tax imposed by the government. It is like saying that VAT is a fee for the shopkeeper
Under the Stamp Act of 1783 (23 Geo. III, c.67) a tax of three pence was levied on each Church Register entry of birth, baptism or marriage, except for paupers. The parson or other receiving the tax was allowed two shillings in the pound for the trouble involved. There was such a popular outcry against this tax that it was speedily repealed in 1794 (34 Geo, c.11), however it is interesting to note the sudden increase in the numbers of those declared to be paupers over this short period.

Stan

[trish251]

it was speedily repealed in 1794 (34 Geo, c.11), however it is interesting to note the sudden increase in the numbers of those declared to be paupers over this short period.

Stan

Thanks Stan - I knew you would have the answer - in many ways things never change 

Trish

[Keith Sherwood]

Hadn't realised this would start up quite a forum for discussion of this topic.  I know that early on in my family research I used to wonder why I was turning up so many examples of "twins" on the IGI entries, until I realised that siblings of different ages were being baptised at the same time.  And not all the original records of the baptisms have a note alongside of the actual date of birth; it all seemed to depend on who was incumbent vicar or curate, so it can sometimes be difficult to get at a true date of birth...
keith

[trish251]

Hadn't realised this would start up quite a forum for discussion of this topic.  I know that early on in my family research I used to wonder why I was turning up so many examples of "twins" on the IGI entries, until I realised that siblings of different ages were being baptised at the same time.  And not all the original records of the baptisms have a note alongside of the actual date of birth; it all seemed to depend on who was incumbent vicar or curate, so it can sometimes be difficult to get at a true date of birth...
keith

I was very lucky - mine had the ages on the baptism record (birth date would have been better) - otherwise I would have had triplets (and there were twins in this family - so triplets wouldn't have looked out of place!)

Trish

[stanmapstone]

There can be some confusion between a fee for a Baptism and a fee for the Registration of a Baptism.
Stan