Scott/Adoption/1919..need help!

[Valda]

Hi

I think we have moved from family history into 'speculate' and the dictionary definition of speculate is to make theories or guesses.


Regards

Valda
co-moderator London and Middlesex

[wrighk00]

I also want to add, that  Mrs. A.T. Scott was willing to have the adoptive mother spend the day with her and the child so the child would have a chance to know adoptive mother and more willing to go with her and seems to be quite relieved to know that the child seems happy.  If not the birth mother, this woman at least had a close connection to the child.  She also wasn't afraid to let the adoptive mother be with her for a day.  I wonder if that happened?

[wrighk00]

Not necessary to the thread

[Valda]

Hi

Mrs Scott could also have been paid to be the person handling the overseeing of the handing over the child, a relative of the birth mother or an intermediary. There really is no evidence either way from the letters - her expressed concern in the circumstances could merely be the sort of expression of emotion you might wish to write to show you are a genuinely caring person.

From the letters I see the time and date of the child's birth, but not the place which I believe was Highgate? Is this the only evidence that the child was born in England? Does it state a place in England in the letters?


Regards

Valda

[wrighk00]

On a subsequent letter to the registration office in London, the adoptive mother in 1932 is writing to ask for a birth certificate of Mona Julia Scott, born 2 April 1916 in Highgate, so she is definitely thinking those are the "facts" surrounding Mona's birth.  I think the search began after she was told there was no registration for a child of that name.

[MonicaL]

Intriguing and emotional story this one. It's a hard period this to research in as so much is not available on line.

One of the main problems from what I understand on adoption cases, having worked on a few, even those that were not formally arranged through solicitors, is that birth parents could and did change around the information so the real facts woud be harder to trace. Names can be the other way around, dates near but slightly out etc.

I spent some time on this yesterday and found one potential family where so much could have fitted (this is the one I sent you details on yesterday Marty) but this morning I found an 1938 marriage for the potential daughter I thought might be Mona, so I think I can draw a big line on that group 

So where are we now? Kathy, you have emailed the Portman Estate on background on 13 New Quebec Street for that period, so lets see what comes back on that. You have also ordered a couple of certificates as potential entries. Again, let's see what is on them and how we can move from there.

I agree with all the comments on the letters. I do not think that Mrs A T Scott was a business woman more likely an employee, from her letters: “ I find that I can find more time than I expected” and “you see, I shall have to lose time from business”. She is sounding to me more like she was employed rather than in charge and arranging time off work unexpectedly but worried about taking any more time off.

Hopefully some new clue may be revealed.

Monica

[wrighk00]

Not necessary to thread.

[MonicaL]

On the case 

Monica

[MonicaL]

Not many A T Scott (male) marriages. The obvious one in the right area for Highgate looks to have gone on to have a number of children after the marriage date...

Monica