I am sure someone will be able to put me right if I am in error, but is the "rule" not that if both parents turn up to register the birth they will both be named on the certificate, even though not married? Presumably the GRO clerks would have noted the different surnames, concluded that the parents were not married, and thus, following GRO rules, would have entered the mother's surname as the child's. This raises an interesting question: if one's surname is not actually recorded on the Birth Certificate, when does one "officially" acquire a surname? Do the GRO records have any true status in law in this respect? Regards Graham Yate S Glos From: Grahame Arnold <maybach@md850.fsnet.co.uk> Reply-To: maybach@md850.fsnet.co.uk To: LOVELOCK-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Hartley Wintney Lovelocks - fragment Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 23:17:32 +0200 (CEST) Another fragment has come my way which may be of interest to someone. The website gives an excellent list of HW Lovelock BMD's 1837-1881, 1 of these entries is as follows, in full: Birth, 14th August 1858. Father : James Smith. Mother : Mary Ann Lovelock, Hartley Wintney. The GRO registers show this child as having the Lovelock name, but from the certificate it is not possible to tell. Obviously this was an "out-of-wedlock" occasion, however it turned out not to be a direct connection although an indirect one is likely, given so many in HW! Grahame Arnold, Ottershaw, Surrey UK ==== LOVELOCK Mailing List ==== Lovelock family history Web pages: http://perso.numericable.fr/~lovjames/family-history/lovelock/ ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 _________________________________________________________________ Get Hotmail on your mobile phone http://www.msn.co.uk/msnmobile