Where should I put him on my tree?

[Jomot]

I have the 1877 birth certificate for a George William Barker whose parents are stated to be my GG Grandfather William Barker & his second wife, Alice Peacock.  However, I'm as sure as I can be that George was really William's grandson & his mother was actually my Great Grandmother, Margaret Barker b 1857.

In 1882 Margaret Barker married George William Jackson.

In 1891 a George William Barker Jackson was baptised as the son of George William & Margaret Jackson. No age is given but what looks like "LMR" has been written in the margin.   In the same year a 14-year old George William Jackson appears on the census as son of George William & Margaret Jackson.   This is the first time he appears with them, having apparently been raised by Margaret's sister, who noted him as 'nephew' in the 1881 census. 

He is still with them in 1901 but a few years later - just after the death of George William Snr - appears to drop the surname Jackson and move to Canada.

My question is, where do I put him on my tree?  As the son of William & Alice per the birth certificate, or as the son of Margaret & George per the baptism, or as the son of Margaret & unknown father (I have not been able to place Margaret & George William Snr in the same location at the time that George William Jnr was conceived).

[Spidermonkey]

For the time being, I would put him where the birth cert places him. however if you have the facility on your family tree program, I would make a note of your supposition and what led you to that conclusion so that if more evidence turns up you can change where you place him.

[Rosinish]

Hi Jomot,

A confusing one although it does seem obvious but not quite as simple to relocate to the correct parents 
Thought Spidermonkeys advice was good!! 

Often illegitimate kids were brought up by the grandparents although usually/most cases, signed by the mother? 
Just curious as to who is down as father on his marriage & death certs?

I had a g grandmother born illegitimately (surname Cullen as I eventually found out) but her mother brought her up under the fathers surname McCluskey.
She married my g grandfather by McCluskey & her maiden name was McCluskey on all her kids births & any other legal docs.
In 1871 my g grandmother aged 5yrs was in the household of her aunt & uncle with her father & what seemed to be her mother using the surname of her married sister of Caine/Kane/Kean?
In the same yr (1871) a marriage took place with the said McCluskey & Rose Ann (Caine) sic, giving her parent's as her older sis & brother-in-law, surname Kean???
Anyway, I won't confuse folks anymore...................that marriage McCluskey/Caine was not my gg grandmother (who was actually absent from the said 1871 census).........................
The marriage was Rose Ann Caine (my g grandmothers cousin)!!!
A case of "When the cat's away, the mice will play) !!! 

That was a very confusing scenario in my novice days as I had assumed the Caine was a mistake for Cullen (her birth surname) but I loved untangling the truth, sad as it was although largely different from your case.

Annie

[Jomot]

Just curious as to who is down as father on his marriage & death certs?

Unfortunately he never married and his Canadian death cert doesn't state next of kin.

It appears he never lived with his 'birth certificate' parents, although the 1881 census shows they had a 10-year old grandson living with them whereas their supposed son 4-year-old son, George William, was living with Margaret's sister and was described as her Nephew.

He left for Canada when my gran (Margaret's youngest child) was only 2 and gran certainly never mentioned him when she was alive.  I've also been in in contact with another Jackson descendent and they've never heard him spoken of in the family either so I'm really not sure where to go next.

[Rosinish]

No age is given but what looks like "LMR" has been written in the margin.

It would be interesting to know whether any other siblings were baptised at the same time & what "LMR" actually stands for? Legal/Legitimate - Mother - Registered?

You mention he moved to Canada when your gran was only 2...........................i.e. she would have NO recollection of him hence the reason he was never spoken of?  as I think she was never told because of the "unmarried" circumstances?

Where was G W born. Was he born at the family home or was mum shipped off elsewhere (to a relatives home) to have him to save embarrassment?

An interesting story 

Annie.

[Rosinish]

Unfortunately he never married and his Canadian death cert doesn't state next of kin.
[/quote]

Do you know if he had a will as this would possibly have valuable info.....................although maybe not as he appears to have severed ties for whatever reason?

Annie.

Added...............more likely he never felt wanted???

[Jomot]

All  of the other siblings were baptised shortly after birth.  One other child has LMC written in the margin and he was baptised a few weeks after birth (1893).  However, these copies were passed to me by a now deceased aunt so I need to make sure it wasn't her that wrote in the margins & then photocopied them! 

Yes my gran was only two, but her older sister - with whom she remained close - was 18 and none of her descendants has ever heard of him either.

According to his birth certificate George was born in a village called Arrathorne in the Leyburn Registration district (North Yorkshire) which is where Margaret grew up with her family, but as I'm not 100% certain of her whereabouts in 1871 (possibly Gateshead) its possible that he could have been born anywhere and then brought back to Arrathorne to be registered.

Looking for a will might be an idea - not really sure where to start for Canada but I shall see what I can find.  I've ordered George William Snr's will but fully expect that will simply leave what little he had to Margaret.

[smudwhisk]

Was Alice Peacock young enough to have had a child in 1877?  My 2xGGparents brought up their illegitimate grandson as if he was their own, but my GGmother was in her 50s when he was born so couldn't have been his mother anyway, mind you this hasn't stopped some distant relatives listing as their son even when they've been told otherwise.  I know he wasn't told the woman he believed to be his sister was actually his mother until the night before his wedding, which almost led to its cancellation.  His birth certificate apparently (I've not seen a copy but was told by his granddaughter) lists a fictious father with his mother's surname and his mother listed with her mother's maiden name.  They definitely told porkies on occasions when they didn't want to admit to things publically.

Personally, as it would seem from the baptism and census that he was most likely Margaret's son, I'd place him as that but born before her marriage, until (and if) you can find anything to refute it.  I wouldn't rely on the birth certificate as evidence as it appears to be incorrect from the other evidence.

But that's just my personal view, I know others think differently.

[iluleah]

I have a similar one with my great grandfather, his birth certificate says who his parents were as does his baptism record, BUT his mother married the "father" when great grandfather was 3 months old, she gave him an unusual middle name, years later I found my great great grandmothers sister had married a man with exactly the same first and last name as my great grandfathers given and middle name.
Great grandfather lived with his maternal grandparents from the age of 11 months, by the time he was 10 he had dropped his surname and taken his mother surname. I "know" his father was his aunts husband BUT I have no record proof, so I have put him in the tree according to written records, extensively researched who I think his real father is and written everything in notes of what I have found what conclusions and why I have come to those.

It was a shock to be in touch with a descendant of this man who sent me a photo of themselves and their father it was like looking at a twin brother of my grandfather and Uncle, who are identical to my great  grandfather, so I really do think I am correct as I also have a photo of the man who is legally in written records my great great grandfather and he is soooooooo different, even researching his  family doesn't 'feel' like my ancestors.