Both certs give the same date of birth and father's name as John Rogerson, Pattern Maker, and mother's name as Elizabeth Rogerson, formerly Witham. I did wonder at first if it might have been twins, but why register a second child over a month after the first? Also, only the second registered child appears on the 1851 census and there is no record of a death of the first-named one. Jim Whitton -----Original Message----- From: eng-manchester-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:eng-manchester-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of roy.stockdill@btinternet.com Sent: 28 January 2013 13:43 To: eng-manchester@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [ENG-MAN] Curious case of two birth registrations From: "Jim Whitton" <birdboot@btinternet.com> > I have obtained a certificate showing birth of Susanna Wesley ROGERSON > on 21/10/1841, registered at London Rd on 30/10 1841. I also have a > certificate showing death of her mother, Elizabeth ROGERSON, on > 29/10/1841,also registered on 30/10/1841. > > I also have a certificate showing birth of Elizabeth ROGERSON, to the > same parents, on the same date, but at a different address, registered > at the neighbouring district of Ancoats on 26/11/1841. > > I suspect that the father must have decided to rename Susanna after > her mother's death and so went to another district and gave a > fictitious, or perhaps a relation's, address. Has anyone else come > across such a case?> I presume you are absolutely certain it was the same child? Could it have been a different child but with the same named parents? Coincidences are ten a penny in genealogy! -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Famous family trees blog: http://blog.findmypast.co.uk/tag/roy-stockdill/ "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE :-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~: Except for personal messages, please post replies to the list. Other people can learn from them! Be sure list mail is in PLAIN TEXT. Please SNIP when replying. Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No fees! :-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~: ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-MANCHESTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

From: "Jim Whitton" <birdboot@btinternet.com> > Both certs give the same date of birth and father's name as John > Rogerson, Pattern Maker, and mother's name as Elizabeth Rogerson, formerly > Witham. I did wonder at first if it might have been twins, but why register a > second child over a month after the first? Also, only the second registered > child appears on the 1851 census and there is no record of a death of > the first-named one. > > I presume you are absolutely certain it was the same child? Could it > have been a different child but with the same named parents? > > Coincidences are ten a penny in genealogy! > > -- > Roy Stockdill I think you are probably right, but I wonder if you have seen John Rogerson's two apparent marriages? Both are found as potential marriages with FreeBMD and confirmed on Lancashire BMD. John Rogerson married Elizabeth WITHAM at Barton-upon-Irwell in the Dec quarter of 1840 (vol 20 page 83). John Rogerson married Susannah Westley [sic] WITHAM at Manchester in the Mar quarter of 1846 (vol 20 page 625). John and Susannah are found in the 1851 census with the child Elizabeth. It rather looks as if after Elizabeth died John married her sister, Susannah. I haven't checked but I believe that it was technically illegal for a man to marry his deceased wife's sister at that time, unless Susannah was a cousin. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Famous family trees blog: http://blog.findmypast.co.uk/tag/roy-stockdill/ "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE

Yes, Roy, I had found that. In 1841 they were all living together at Granby Row together with the two sisters' mother (though the Rogerson's address when the child was born was Arthur Street) . I would guess that after Elizabeth's death, her sister probably cared for the infant and so it was perhaps not surprising (if technically illegal) that they eventually married. Incidentally, the two sisters were baptised together in 1837. I think Susanna was then about 21 and Elizabeth 17. John Rogerson founded a photographic printing works and a lithographic print of his works in Albion Street appeared in the Journal of Photography in 1871. Apparently, there are some of his photographs in the National Archives though I have not seen them. Jim -----Original Message----- From: eng-manchester-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:eng-manchester-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of roy.stockdill@btinternet.com Sent: 29 January 2013 14:36 To: eng-manchester@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [ENG-MAN] Curious case of two birth registrations From: "Jim Whitton" <birdboot@btinternet.com> > Both certs give the same date of birth and father's name as John > Rogerson, Pattern Maker, and mother's name as Elizabeth Rogerson, > formerly Witham. I did wonder at first if it might have been twins, > but why register a second child over a month after the first? Also, > only the second registered child appears on the 1851 census and there > is no record of a death of the first-named one. > > I presume you are absolutely certain it was the same child? Could it > have been a different child but with the same named parents? > > Coincidences are ten a penny in genealogy! > > -- > Roy Stockdill I think you are probably right, but I wonder if you have seen John Rogerson's two apparent marriages? Both are found as potential marriages with FreeBMD and confirmed on Lancashire BMD. John Rogerson married Elizabeth WITHAM at Barton-upon-Irwell in the Dec quarter of 1840 (vol 20 page 83). John Rogerson married Susannah Westley [sic] WITHAM at Manchester in the Mar quarter of 1846 (vol 20 page 625). John and Susannah are found in the 1851 census with the child Elizabeth. It rather looks as if after Elizabeth died John married her sister, Susannah. I haven't checked but I believe that it was technically illegal for a man to marry his deceased wife's sister at that time, unless Susannah was a cousin. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Famous family trees blog: http://blog.findmypast.co.uk/tag/roy-stockdill/ "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE :-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~: Except for personal messages, please post replies to the list. Other people can learn from them! Be sure list mail is in PLAIN TEXT. Please SNIP when replying. Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No fees! :-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~: ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-MANCHESTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Roy I had cause to research the legality of marrying a deceased wife's sister a few years ago and the legal barrier was removed in an Act of 1907. One of my great grandfathers committed this "offence" in 1891 but - as far as I know - never challenged for it Amusingly, the marriage certificate was witnessed by his son-in-law (my grandfather) who, as a solicitor's clerk, should perhaps have known better! Martyn > From: roy.stockdill@btinternet.com > To: eng-manchester@rootsweb.com > Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 14:36:00 +0000 > Subject: Re: [ENG-MAN] Curious case of two birth registrations > > From: "Jim Whitton" <birdboot@btinternet.com> > > > Both certs give the same date of birth and father's name as John > > Rogerson, Pattern Maker, and mother's name as Elizabeth Rogerson, formerly > > Witham. I did wonder at first if it might have been twins, but why register a > > second child over a month after the first? Also, only the second registered > > child appears on the 1851 census and there is no record of a death of > > the first-named one. > > > > I presume you are absolutely certain it was the same child? Could it > > have been a different child but with the same named parents? > > > > Coincidences are ten a penny in genealogy! > > > > -- > > Roy Stockdill > > I think you are probably right, but I wonder if you have seen John > Rogerson's two apparent marriages? > > Both are found as potential marriages with FreeBMD and confirmed on > Lancashire BMD. > > John Rogerson married Elizabeth WITHAM at Barton-upon-Irwell in the > Dec quarter of 1840 (vol 20 page 83). > > John Rogerson married Susannah Westley [sic] WITHAM at Manchester in > the Mar quarter of 1846 (vol 20 page 625). > > John and Susannah are found in the 1851 census with the child > Elizabeth. > > It rather looks as if after Elizabeth died John married her sister, > Susannah. I haven't checked but I believe that it was technically > illegal for a man to marry his deceased wife's sister at that time, > unless Susannah was a cousin. > > -- > Roy Stockdill > Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer > Famous family trees blog: > http://blog.findmypast.co.uk/tag/roy-stockdill/ > > "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, > and that is not being talked about." > OSCAR WILDE > > > > > > > > :-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~: > > Except for personal messages, please post replies to the list. > Other people can learn from them! > > Be sure list mail is in PLAIN TEXT. > > Please SNIP when replying. > > Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No fees! > > :-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~:-~: > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-MANCHESTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I have seen this scenario a few times, one being one of my husband's great-great grandfathers. Most times the marriages take place well away from their villages, but not always. I often wondered if those that were brave enough to marry in the local church, were ever in trouble for having done so? I've always assumed not as the families appear to be together after the marriages (births of children, census entries etc) and can't find any sort of criminal case being brought against them. Regards, Sally ---------------------------------------- > From: martyntaylor@msn.com > To: eng-manchester@rootsweb.com > Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 16:59:01 +0000 > Subject: Re: [ENG-MAN] Marrying deceased wife's sister [was Curious case of two birth registrations] > > > Roy > > I had cause to research the legality of marrying a deceased wife's sister a few years ago and the legal barrier was removed in an Act of 1907. > > One of my great grandfathers committed this "offence" in 1891 but - as far as I know - never challenged for it Amusingly, the marriage certificate was witnessed by his son-in-law (my grandfather) who, as a solicitor's clerk, should perhaps have known better! > > Martyn