Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Missing Birth Registrations

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Missing Birth Registrations

    My friend and I have been trying to find an entry in the Birth Indexes for Ada Menhennett. Ada was born 3 Sept 1905 in Battersea. She was baptised 15 Sept 1905 at St Saviours Battersea. The baptism register gives her date of birth as well as her date of baptism.

    Her parents were Richard Charles Menhennett and Emily Rebecca Moult. Richard and Emily had 8 children that we know of -

    Emily Rebecca born 1900, Richard Charles born 1902, Ada born 1905, Alice Elizabeth born 1910, Millicent born 1912, Albert born 1917, Lily also born 1917 and Marjorie born 1920. They were all born in Battersea.

    My friend is one of Ada's daughter, so she does know her mother's date of birth. She also knows Ada's siblings as they were her aunts and uncles and their children were her cousins.

    Once we started searching, we discovered that of the 8 children only four were registered - Emily, Albert, Lily and Marjorie.
    Only Ada, Alice, Albert and Lily were baptised.

    I know that it was quite common for births to be unregistered before 1875, but I would have thought that by 1902 everybody would have been registered. Can anyone find these missing entries, or offer an explanation as to why they were missing?

  • #2
    That is very odd, I am no expert but have looked like you and can see the first born and the last borns and the 4 in the middle all missing.

    Did assume that the name had been badly written as so unusual but not an Ada in Wandsworth for that period that is looking likely.
    Carolyn
    Family Tree site

    Researching: Luggs, Freeman - Cornwall; Dayman, Hobbs, Heard - Devon; Wilson, Miles - Northants; Brett, Everett, Clark, Allum - Herts/Essex
    Also interested in Proctor, Woodruff

    Comment


    • #3
      I've had a look too, can't find anything obvious.

      I have been searchingoff and on for years for the birth of a relative which didn't appear to have been registered in 1900. Very odd because the parents were highly respectable "proper" people and the following four were all registered and baptised. I found him last week! His name was Joseph, I found him registered as Thomas, which I can only presume was a clerical error by the registrar at the time.

      Obviously this is not what has happened in your case. I can only guess deep indifference to officialdom, carelessness or actually making a stand against the law. I think it was still possible not to register a child and get away with it in the early 1900s.

      OC

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by clematbow View Post
        I know that it was quite common for births to be unregistered before 1875
        It was never common for births to be un-registered - studies show that shortly after the beginning of registration, around 1840, the non-registration of birth was probably about 6-8%, but that the rate fell quite quickly and by 1874/5 (when the rules were clarified), the rate was down to about 1-2%, and went lower after that. However there is no doubt that even by the early 1900s there were a number of births that didn't get recorded, and there are still a few people who choose not to register their children today.

        You do find the occasional family who seem to not register any of their children, but it is more of a concern when you have a single child un-registered, but all their siblings were. It may just have been an oversight on behalf of mum/dad but you need to consider if the child was brought into the family, was the birth somewhere else, or under a different name, later changed ? The baptism register suggests not, but you never know.
        Last edited by AntonyM; 26-08-19, 09:52.
        Retired professional researcher, and ex- deputy registrar, now based in Worcestershire. Happy to give any help or advice I can ( especially on matters of civil registration) - contact via PM or my website www.chalfontresearch.co.uk
        Follow me on Twittter @ChalfontR

        Comment


        • #5
          I note that the 1911 census does say 4 children born and 4 alive and place of birth was an address.
          Carolyn
          Family Tree site

          Researching: Luggs, Freeman - Cornwall; Dayman, Hobbs, Heard - Devon; Wilson, Miles - Northants; Brett, Everett, Clark, Allum - Herts/Essex
          Also interested in Proctor, Woodruff

          Comment


          • #6
            What Antony said!

            I have an example of a child being brought into the family in 1860. The fifth of ten children, my direct ancestor, so I got his birth cert and all seemed quite in order. Many YEARS (!) later, I was devastated to discover from baptism records that he was not their child but the illegitimate son of the sister of the man who brought him up. His mother died in childbirth, the couple had recently buried a baby so it made sense but WhY did they lie to the registrar!!!!

            OC

            Comment

            Working...
            X