obviously, Jacqueline's birth cert must be down as STEEL.
Hi Cupcake,
I am absolutely certain that it is NOT obvious that Jacqueline's birth certificate must be down as STEEL, particularly if her birth was registered in New South Wales. You see, I am born in NSW, so too all my siblings, and all my first cousins, both my parents, all four of my grandparents (and their siblings), all eight of my great grandparents (and their siblings), and I assure you that simply because we were born prior to the 1960s, none of our birth registrations include a surname. Simply put, it was not a requirement.
The baby became known by the mother's surname. That's how the system worked until about 1969. So if mum was using same surname as baby's dad, then baby becomes known by dad's surname only because that was the THEN surname mum was THEN using... It was not compulsory to produce proof of identity such as birth certificates, when seeking to marry. A Baptismal certificate was often sufficient proof, particularly if marrying within your own denomination.
So the baby took on mum's surname, and if mum changed her surname at some stage after birth of baby (by usage, or adopting the surname of her husband on marriage,) then baby would become known by mum's new surname.
So just as Charles Robert JACKSON's birth seems to be indexed under BOYD, so too it may well be that Jacqueline's may be indexed under STEEL, but Cupcake, it is also quite possible that Jacqueline's birth (if registered in NSW) MAY BE indexed under what ever surname HER MUM was using at the time of Jacqueline's birth. So it could well be Titterington, as that's the name Jacqueline's mum was using as per the Electoral Roll.
So I am still wondering about how Jacqueline came to be, at 17 years of age, using the surname STEEL, if as you say, you have nothing to show her mum had ever used that surname herself.
Cheers, JM