Question re entry on birth certificate

[Chusty]

The birth, in 1890, was registered by the mother, who gives details as;
Name of father John Wilkins
Name of mother Kate Wilkins formerly Martin.

I have been totally unable to find a marriage for Wilkins/Martin, so I was wondering if people gave false details, like pretending to be married when they were not.
I have no reason to suspect it could have been overseas. In 1911 John claims to have been married 41 years. His occupations have been milkman and brewers drayman.

Any thoughts would be most welcome please.

[stanmapstone]

The registration system is "informant driven" that is the registrar can only record the information given to him by the informant, although there is the liability, in the registration acts, to a charge of perjury if any of the required details are willfully incorrect.

Stan

[Marmalady]

Yes people did give false information

I have a birth in 1842 registered to "married" parents but 6 months earlier both parents were at their own parents homes & single on the 1841 census. There is no trace of a marriage during the intervening time. Another 6 months later, the father dies of consumption, again at his parents home and when the "widow" remarries she does so in her maiden name as a single person.
The child uses both surnames (father's and mother's maiden name) interchangeably throughout his life

[KGarrad]

You might be looking for an Army marriage?

I guess the parents were John Wilkins, b 1842 Devon, and Kate, b 1852?

1881 census has John as Private 50th Brigade, at the 11th Hussars Barracks, Hounslow
Reference RG11, Piece 1340, Folio 119, Page 25

Wilkins, John  Head  Married  M  40  Private  b Devonport, Devon
Wilkins, Kate  Wife  Married  F  28  b London
Wilkins, Thomas  Son  M  3  Scholar  b London
Wilkins, John  Son  M  2  b Dublin, Ireland
Wilkins, Ernest  Son  M  8 months  b Dover, Kent

[katherinem]

I have a pair that married 53 years after having their first child!  It transpired that both had previous spouses!

Have you considered that Kate may have been married previously and married under that name.

Kath

[KGarrad]

If I have the correct John (looking for the right age, and born in Plymouth/Devonport) then he is also in the Army in 1871?

RG10, 1136, 61, 10
Clarence Barracks, St Nicholas Street, Portsmouth

Wilkins, John  Head  M  30  Private 77th Regiment  b Plymouth
Wilkins, Mary Ann  Wife  F  19  b Portsmouth

This could be their marriage:

March qtr 1871
Portsea district    vol 2b, page 602

Wilkins, John
+ and on the same page +
Martin, Mary Ann

[Chusty]

The marriage to Mary Ann Martin is interesting, the year fits if not the first name. I suppose she might also have Kate as another forename and chose to use it later, this needs further investigation.
There is no sign of the children Thomas John and Ernest, but 1911 states 10 children, five of whom were dead, so that could be the explanation.

I will keep in mind that Kate was telling porkies, but I have more possibilities to look at, so thanks to everyone.

Rootschat comes up trumps again.