Author Topic: Baptized Twice ??  (Read 1195 times)

Offline PSRMJones

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 37
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Baptized Twice ??
« on: Tuesday 30 October 12 01:47 GMT (UK) »
I have access to Cheshire original baptism records on FindMyPast and have been able to find lots of ancestors this way.  One confusing item however concerns one ancestor who appears to have been baptized twice in the same church.

George CLUTTON, son of John and Sarah CLUTTON was baptized in Malpas church on September 2nd and then again on December 6th.

By coincidence another CLUTTON (not an ancestor of mine that I know of) was also baptized twice in the same church that year, the second baptism occurring on the same day as the second baptism of George above.

Thomas Highway CLUTTON, son of Martha CLUTTON was baptized in Malpas church on September 23rd and on December 6th.

None of the above has any notation on the original record to indicate the first record was a 'private baptism' which I know can sometimes lead to an apparent second baptism.

Does anyone have an idea why the two baptism records exist for these children?

Thanks,

Phil

Offline stanmapstone

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 25,798
    • View Profile
Re: Baptized Twice ??
« Reply #1 on: Tuesday 30 October 12 08:42 GMT (UK) »
Is the year 1840? The entries for Thomas Highway Clutton are from (a) the parish register and (b) the bishop's transcripts, so two different sources and not two baptisms.

Stan
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline PSRMJones

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 37
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Baptized Twice ??
« Reply #2 on: Tuesday 30 October 12 23:15 GMT (UK) »
Stan,

The year is indeed 1840 but there are two distinct baptisms recorded in both the parish register and the bishop's transcripts. 
There is slight variation for the way Thomas Highway's middle name is spelled.

The records are detailed on FindMyPast as:

1.  CLUTTON  Thomas Geighway  1840  Malpas   (this one is the September 23rd Parish Register)
2.  CLUTTON  Thomas Heighway  1840  Malpas   (this one is the September 23rd Bishop's Transcript)
3.  CLUTTON  Thomas Highway  1840  Malpas     (this one is the December 6th Parish Register)
4.  CLUTTON  Thomas Highway  1840  Malpas     (this one is the December 6th Bishop's Transcript)

In all four records the 'parent' is listed as Martha - Spinster (confirmed by reviewing original records)

Equally there are four distinct records for my ancestor George CLUTTON.

1.  CLUTTON  George  1840  Malpas   (this one is the September 2nd Parish Register)
2.  CLUTTON  George  1840  Malpas   (this one is the September 2nd Bishop's Transcript)
3.  CLUTTON  George  1840  Malpas   (this one is the December 6th Parish Register)
4.  CLUTTON  George  1840  Malpas   (this one is the December 6th Bishop's Transcript)

In all four records the parents are John and Sarah with John listed as a labourer in all records (again confirmed by reviewing original records)


So to my mind these records still show two people as being baptised twice and both being baptised for the second time on the same day.

Thanks,

Phil

Offline Alexander.

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,306
    • View Profile
Re: Baptized Twice ??
« Reply #3 on: Wednesday 31 October 12 00:38 GMT (UK) »
2 Sep 1840 and 23 Sep 1840 were both Wednesdays, while 6 Dec 1840 was a Sunday. Even though it isn't noted it in the records, I think it's most likely that the children were originally baptized privately, and on that Sunday were publicly received into the church.

Alexander


Offline PSRMJones

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 37
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Baptized Twice ??
« Reply #4 on: Wednesday 31 October 12 01:01 GMT (UK) »
Alexander,

Thanks for your comments.  I never thought about looking up the day of the week, so your observation about Wednesday versus Sunday is very interesting.

Phil