Is he Howard or Mann 0r both?

[Cynfran]

Can anyone please tell me why the following might have occurred?
Free BMD has a James Frederick Daniel Mann born Brentford Dec 1/4 1905. However the GRO online index shows the entry with all the same details, except for him now having the surname Howard.
Any suggestions as to reason for this would be much appreciated.

[Kay99]

I think he was James Frederick Daniel Mann
Baptism    3 Dec 1905
Baptism Place:    Hindolveston, Norfolk, England
Mother:    Maggie Mann Single Woman


I suspect that Margaret Mann married James Howard in Dec 1908 Aylsham    4b   229 although James may not be living with the couple in 1911  Was the GRO surname amended

Kay

Added  1911? https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X75L-BQ2

[Kay99]

Margaret had more children -

Triplets - Daniel Frederick Mann b 1908  Hindolveston, Norfolk burial 11 Nov 1908 Hindolveston
             George Albert Mann b 1908 Hindolveston, Norfolk burial 2 Feb 1909 Hindolveston
             John William Mann b 1908 Hindolveston   All baptised 18 Oct 1908 Mother Maggie Mann          Single Woman
Albert Edward Howard b 1910 Hindolveston - but I can't see him on the GRO
Florence May Howard mmn    Mann b 1911 Hindolveston baptised  5 Nov 1911 Hindolveston, Norfolk Parents James Robert and Margaret

Kay

[AntonyMMM]

Before 1969 there is no surname shown for the child on a birth registration, so the surnames that appear in the index are those of the parent(s) named on the entry, one or both, depending on their marital status.

This is an odd one and I can't immediately think of a combination of names that would account for the way it appears, and there is no indication of any later correction.

All you can say is that the names Mann and Howard are on there, and also the mother is or has been married (or is claiming to be)  because there is a maiden name of Young also shown.

It is quite normal to get different results between the old printed indexes, as shown on FreeBMD, and the new GRO on-line system because they don't use the same indexing rules.

[Cynfran]

Thank you Kay99 for your response and all the information.
And thank you AntonyMMM for your interesting comments. I'm probably wrong (happens very often!) but if the Norfolk Baptism record is for him, which did seem likely, then I would have thought that his mother's maiden name would have been recorded as 'Mann' in the Births register?

[AntonyMMM]

Thank you Kay99 for your response and all the information.
And thank you AntonyMMM for your interesting comments. I'm probably wrong (happens very often!) but if the Norfolk Baptism record is for him, which did seem likely, then I would have thought that his mother's maiden name would have been recorded as 'Mann' in the Births register?

Yet the GRO index entry you refer to says the maiden name was YOUNG ... so something isn't right ( not to mention why the birth in Brentford, yet a baptism in Norfolk ?) you need to get a certificate to work it out.

[rosie99]

And thank you AntonyMMM for your interesting comments. I'm probably wrong (happens very often!) but if the Norfolk Baptism record is for him, which did seem likely, then I would have thought that his mother's maiden name would have been recorded as 'Mann' in the Births register?

Maybe she was initially trying to cover up the fact that she was not married when she registered the birth in Middlesex. 

[Cynfran]

Yes, I suppose I would have to get a certificate, but not sure now which name I would have to specify in the application, Mann or Howard?

[Cynfran]

I think I might be getting somewhere. I looked for a possible mother (Margaret/Maggie Mann) in his Baptism area and found, on the GRO Index, a birth registration for Margaret Ann YOUNGS Mann.
Perhaps this could point, as you suggested AntonyMMM, to an attempt to disguise her un-married state.