Janet, Thank you for your kind response. Here in the US, I have tried to understand the process. Needless to say, she was semi-adopted - but not officially - the the GREEN family. Would they be required to pay fees? John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Janet" <wightway@tiscali.co.uk> To: <ENG-MERSEYSIDE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 7:21 PM Subject: Re: [ENG-MERSEY] Searching for Information on Orphans and Adoptions c. 1850 > Formal adoption did not take place in England and Wales until 1927/1930. > I am quite sure however that there was a system of "fostering" as we know > it today. I wonder about a foundling being christened. Who might have > arranged it of an orphan. > I realise that these thoughts of mine don't help much, but maybe others > will come forward to add to what I have said. > > > Janet > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "john farrall" <jfarrall@cox.net> > >> Listers, >> I would appreciate some guidance here. For background, my great >> grandmother was an orphan left on the church steps of St. Catherine's >> Church >> in Bebington on 20 June 1850. She was Christened on 21 June 1850 as Mary >> BEBINGTON (named after the town). She is listed in the 1851 census for >> BEBINGTON as a nurse child in the family of Thomas and Hannah GREEN. In >> the >> 1861 census, she is listed as Mary BEBINGTON in the GREEN family. In >> 1871, >> she is working for another family and is listed as Mary BEBINGTON. She >> married my great grandfather - John FARRALL - in 1873, and the marriage >> certificate has a blank space for the father. Her name is listed as Mary >> BEBINGTON. The death certificates for two of her sons - John and Samuel- >> (California) listed the mother's maiden name as GREEN. No official >> document >> show that she legally used the name GREEN. My question concerns the >> adoption/non-adoption procedures in Cheshire/UK in the later half of the >> century. Were families expected to pay extra monies to the county? >> Mary did receive a congratulatory letter and cablegram from King >> George >> VI on her 100 birthday in 1850. Palace regulations state that proof >> must >> be provided. The only proof provided was the christening record of 20 >> June >> 1850. She had no birth certificate. What were the adoption procedures >> like >> in the 1850 timeframe? Why would the GREEN family not give her the GREEN >> name? Puzzled. > > > ==== ENG-MERSEYSIDE Mailing List ==== > You can search or browse the archives of this list and also change > membership - move from digest to normal mail mode, or vice versa and sub > and unsub at this link > > http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/intl/ENG/ENG-MERSEYSIDE.html > > ============================== > Census images 1901, 1891, 1881 and 1871, plus so much more. > Ancestry.com's United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13968/rd.ashx > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/409 - Release Date: 8/4/2006 > >

Another ----- Original Message ----- From: john farrall To: ENG-MERSEYSIDE-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 12:34 AM Subject: Re: [ENG-MERSEY] Searching for Information on Orphans and Adoptions c. 1850 Janet, Thank you for your kind response. Here in the US, I have tried to understand the process. Needless to say, she was semi-adopted - but not officially - the the GREEN family. Would they be required to pay fees? John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Janet" <wightway@tiscali.co.uk> To: <ENG-MERSEYSIDE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 7:21 PM Subject: Re: [ENG-MERSEY] Searching for Information on Orphans and Adoptions c. 1850 > Formal adoption did not take place in England and Wales until 1927/1930. > I am quite sure however that there was a system of "fostering" as we know > it today. I wonder about a foundling being christened. Who might have > arranged it of an orphan. > I realise that these thoughts of mine don't help much, but maybe others > will come forward to add to what I have said. > > > Janet > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "john farrall" <jfarrall@cox.net> > >> Listers, >> I would appreciate some guidance here. For background, my great >> grandmother was an orphan left on the church steps of St. Catherine's >> Church >> in Bebington on 20 June 1850. She was Christened on 21 June 1850 as Mary >> BEBINGTON (named after the town). She is listed in the 1851 census for >> BEBINGTON as a nurse child in the family of Thomas and Hannah GREEN. In >> the >> 1861 census, she is listed as Mary BEBINGTON in the GREEN family. In >> 1871, >> she is working for another family and is listed as Mary BEBINGTON. She >> married my great grandfather - John FARRALL - in 1873, and the marriage >> certificate has a blank space for the father. Her name is listed as Mary >> BEBINGTON. The death certificates for two of her sons - John and Samuel- >> (California) listed the mother's maiden name as GREEN. No official >> document >> show that she legally used the name GREEN. My question concerns the >> adoption/non-adoption procedures in Cheshire/UK in the later half of the >> century. Were families expected to pay extra monies to the county? >> Mary did receive a congratulatory letter and cablegram from King >> George >> VI on her 100 birthday in 1850. Palace regulations state that proof >> must >> be provided. The only proof provided was the christening record of 20 >> June >> 1850. She had no birth certificate. What were the adoption procedures >> like >> in the 1850 timeframe? Why would the GREEN family not give her the GREEN >> name? Puzzled. > > > ==== ENG-MERSEYSIDE Mailing List ==== > You can search or browse the archives of this list and also change > membership - move from digest to normal mail mode, or vice versa and sub > and unsub at this link > > http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/intl/ENG/ENG-MERSEYSIDE.html > > ============================== > Census images 1901, 1891, 1881 and 1871, plus so much more. > Ancestry.com's United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13968/rd.ashx > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/409 - Release Date: 8/4/2006 > > ==== ENG-MERSEYSIDE Mailing List ==== You can search or browse the archives of this list and also change membership - move from digest to normal mail mode, or vice versa and sub and unsub at this link http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/intl/ENG/ENG-MERSEYSIDE.html ============================== Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/409 - Release Date: 04/08/2006

Sorry about that - sent to wrong address! Marged (early in the morning - well, earlyish1) ----- Original Message ----- From: Marged To: ENG-MERSEYSIDE-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 9:05 AM Subject: Re: [ENG-MERSEY] Searching for Information on Orphans and Adoptions c. 1850 Another ----- Original Message ----- From: john farrall To: ENG-MERSEYSIDE-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 12:34 AM Subject: Re: [ENG-MERSEY] Searching for Information on Orphans and Adoptions c. 1850 Janet, Thank you for your kind response. Here in the US, I have tried to understand the process. Needless to say, she was semi-adopted - but not officially - the the GREEN family. Would they be required to pay fees? John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Janet" <wightway@tiscali.co.uk> To: <ENG-MERSEYSIDE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 7:21 PM Subject: Re: [ENG-MERSEY] Searching for Information on Orphans and Adoptions c. 1850 > Formal adoption did not take place in England and Wales until 1927/1930. > I am quite sure however that there was a system of "fostering" as we know > it today. I wonder about a foundling being christened. Who might have > arranged it of an orphan. > I realise that these thoughts of mine don't help much, but maybe others > will come forward to add to what I have said. > > > Janet > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "john farrall" <jfarrall@cox.net> > >> Listers, >> I would appreciate some guidance here. For background, my great >> grandmother was an orphan left on the church steps of St. Catherine's >> Church >> in Bebington on 20 June 1850. She was Christened on 21 June 1850 as Mary >> BEBINGTON (named after the town). She is listed in the 1851 census for >> BEBINGTON as a nurse child in the family of Thomas and Hannah GREEN. In >> the >> 1861 census, she is listed as Mary BEBINGTON in the GREEN family. In >> 1871, >> she is working for another family and is listed as Mary BEBINGTON. She >> married my great grandfather - John FARRALL - in 1873, and the marriage >> certificate has a blank space for the father. Her name is listed as Mary >> BEBINGTON. The death certificates for two of her sons - John and Samuel- >> (California) listed the mother's maiden name as GREEN. No official >> document >> show that she legally used the name GREEN. My question concerns the >> adoption/non-adoption procedures in Cheshire/UK in the later half of the >> century. Were families expected to pay extra monies to the county? >> Mary did receive a congratulatory letter and cablegram from King >> George >> VI on her 100 birthday in 1850. Palace regulations state that proof >> must >> be provided. The only proof provided was the christening record of 20 >> June >> 1850. She had no birth certificate. What were the adoption procedures >> like >> in the 1850 timeframe? Why would the GREEN family not give her the GREEN >> name? Puzzled. > > > ==== ENG-MERSEYSIDE Mailing List ==== > You can search or browse the archives of this list and also change > membership - move from digest to normal mail mode, or vice versa and sub > and unsub at this link > > http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/intl/ENG/ENG-MERSEYSIDE.html > > ============================== > Census images 1901, 1891, 1881 and 1871, plus so much more. > Ancestry.com's United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13968/rd.ashx > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/409 - Release Date: 8/4/2006 > > ==== ENG-MERSEYSIDE Mailing List ==== You can search or browse the archives of this list and also change membership - move from digest to normal mail mode, or vice versa and sub and unsub at this link http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/intl/ENG/ENG-MERSEYSIDE.html ============================== Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/409 - Release Date: 04/08/2006 ==== ENG-MERSEYSIDE Mailing List ==== You can search or browse the archives of this list and also change membership - move from digest to normal mail mode, or vice versa and sub and unsub at this link http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/intl/ENG/ENG-MERSEYSIDE.html ============================== New! Family Tree Maker 2005. Build your tree and search for your ancestors at the same time. Share your tree with family and friends. Learn more: http://landing.ancestry.com/familytreemaker/2005/tour.aspx?sourceid=14599&targetid=5429 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/409 - Release Date: 04/08/2006

I'm quite sure we have talked about informal adoption on this list before, you might find something in the archives. I dont think fees would have been paid. It would have been done on a charitable basis with no fees changing hands at that time. I think you will find the information on this page of interest to you http://tinyurl.com/rq5s7 Janet ----- Original Message ----- From: "john farrall" <jfarrall@cox.net> > Janet, > Thank you for your kind response. Here in the US, I have tried to > understand the process. Needless to say, she was semi-adopted - but not > officially - the the GREEN family. Would they be required to pay fees? > > John