Hi listers, I'm seeking confirmation on the parentage of a Thomas SHEPHERD, bp in 1815 at St Nicholas, Chiswick, Mdx. The bapt. entry (on Ancestry) states his parents were Thomas and Sarah, a labourer, of Turnham Green, Chiswick, but I cannot find the marriage of this Thomas and Sarah. I also found a sister Emma bapt in 1818 at St Nicholas. Thomas jnr. MAY be my direct ancestor, supposedly born in Brentford, Mdx, c 1816, and the bapt in 1815 is the closest candidate I can find. I also have Thomas jnr. in the 1841 and '51 censuses. ANY help or suggestions appreciated. Cheers, Robyn of Oz.

Chalk wrote: > I have been right through the GRO Index as well as using FreeBMD. I have > tried all the spellings but for some reason they are missing. It's not just spellings. It's actual totally different surnames that can cause apparently missing children, ones that may not even be known about. It's not unknown for girls to invent a father for an illegitimate child. I have an instance where a child's mother's and stepfather's surnames were swapped over to make the child appear legitimate. > As I said I also do a lot of transcribing myself and even then a lot of > official certification is missing to back up the actual parish records. My experience is the complete opposite. Again it was known for parents to have their child baptised in a completely different parish from the one where the child was born. > I even check for male/female entries where no name was given and different > names on cert to baptism, that happens quite a lot. It definitely happens, even today. My sister nearly had two of her children registered without names because she and her husband couldn't decide on one. I've had a child appear in a census with the father's choice of name but registered with the mother's choice. It was gut instinct that made the connection otherwise the child in the census would have appeared to be unregistered and the child in the index unrelated. > One of the family was a returning officer in Wiltshire in mid 1800's and I > have found some family members even he missed! Yep, I've a couple of they: one in Buckinghamshire and one in Leicestershire. The latter put his neice's husband's occupation wrong as well; after which the father registered the children :)) The bottom line is nothing in genealogy and family history is an absolute. For every event/oddity one person finds, someone else will find the opposite. You have a huge number of missing registrations. I have virtually none. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, Greinton and Clutton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

How do I locate the right marriage record for the lady named Bridget Hyland age 23 in 1861 Middlesex with John, Mary and their (2) two children w/would like ordering all (7) seven certificates? I would like to find one with her parents possibly being listed as Thomas and Catherine. DATES: Dec 1861 Vol.8d pg.847 June 1864 vol.6b pg.927 Sept 1864 6d pg.396 June 1866 Vol.8e pg.84 Dec 1866 Vol.8c pg.243 Dec 1867 vol.8b pg.410 Mar 1869 vol.6c pg.228 If someone could get me a quick check on these records and let me know which one I need to order for my records as I am almost positive this is my family. John and Mary came to the US after 1861 (Hence not found in 1860 IL USA Census) where they were at when oldest daughter Margaret born 1862, followed by Elizabeth in 1863. Thanks so much for your help with this family. Coleen in WY USA

How could it be compulsory for the parents if they could not be penalised? As you say, in the early days it was the responsibility of the Registrar to seek out and deal with the registration! Adrian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charani" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 11:00 AM Subject: Re: [MDX] birth recprds/certificates of birth > Adrian Parry wrote: >> Although civil registration was introduced with effect from 1 July 1837, >> the >> registration of births was NOT compulsory (i.e. there was no penalty for >> failing to register a birth) until the mid 1870s. As a result many births >> were not registered during the early years. > > That's a genealogical urban legend. > > At that time, the government did NOT pass laws that were optional. > All births (as well as marriages and deaths) HAD to be registered. > What changed was the person whose responsibility it was to register > the births. It was initially the local registrar's but later shifted > to the parents on whom there was a financial penalty if they failed to > register the birth within 6 weeks (42 days) of the birth. > > Even after this, there were still some births that weren't registered > and some with "massaged" birth dates where parents adjusted the date > of birth to avoid a fine. > > -- > Charani (UK) > OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, > Greinton and Clutton, SOM > http://wsom-opc.org.uk > > ************************************** > Send your List messages using **PLAIN TEXT** and always **TRIM AWAY** > superfluous old messages in replies. > > **MEANINGFUL Subject Lines - who, what, where, when, with SURNAMES in > CAPITAL letters** > > List Admin can be contacted at: [email protected] > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Adrian Parry wrote: > Although civil registration was introduced with effect from 1 July 1837, the > registration of births was NOT compulsory (i.e. there was no penalty for > failing to register a birth) until the mid 1870s. As a result many births > were not registered during the early years. That's a genealogical urban legend. At that time, the government did NOT pass laws that were optional. All births (as well as marriages and deaths) HAD to be registered. What changed was the person whose responsibility it was to register the births. It was initially the local registrar's but later shifted to the parents on whom there was a financial penalty if they failed to register the birth within 6 weeks (42 days) of the birth. Even after this, there were still some births that weren't registered and some with "massaged" birth dates where parents adjusted the date of birth to avoid a fine. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, Greinton and Clutton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

I have been right through the GRO Index as well as using FreeBMD. I have tried all the spellings but for some reason they are missing. As I said I also do a lot of transcribing myself and even then a lot of official certification is missing to back up the actual parish records. I even check for male/female entries where no name was given and different names on cert to baptism, that happens quite a lot. One of the family was a returning officer in Wiltshire in mid 1800's and I have found some family members even he missed!

Stella Stanger wrote: > Hi, The following might be helpful - > http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ www.freebmd.org.uk is a better link. It is more complete and also has the Postems which give additional information not otherwise found in the indices. Ancestry's version stops in about 1916 whilst that on FreeBMD's own site go up to the 1950s now. FreeBMD's sister projects can be found at www.freereg.org.uk (parish registers) and www.freecen.org.uk (censuses). Both are, like FreeBMD, volunteer projects and not yet complete. FreeREG has a heck of a long way to go and is great need of more volunteers to do transcriptions. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, Greinton and Clutton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

Chalk wrote: > Birth certificates might have been law but were not prescriptive, I have > over 200 births from all over the country missing certificates from my tree > that appear on baptism or census records. This gets better after 1875. > Also have noticed transcribing burial records that a lot of child > births/deaths were not recorded right up to 10 years of age. It was up to the regiatrar to find the newborns. If he didn't, the parents were supposed to go and register the child themselves within 6 weeks (42 days) of the birth. However, there was no financial penalties for the parents if they didn't do so, hence a number of ones missing who might only be found via censuses, when they married or when they died. I have to say I find it quite amazing you have so many missing registration. I would suggest most are there but not appearing as expected. Some may have been mistranscribed either in the registrar's return or by the GRO clerks whilst others were illegitimate and thus registered under the mother's name. Others may have been registered under their biological father's name but appear in cenuses under their stepfather's name after their father's death. Still others may have been adopted/fosterd by other family members who had a different name from the birth mother/parents. In a large database of post civil registration births for my families and in my OPC parishes, I have only one who is missing from the indices - and I strongly suspect she was fostered/adopted by her birth mother's sister and brother in law. There were certainly some doubts her parents really were the biological parents because she said later in life she was their dau. I also find it very strange that you have found so many children whose births and deaths weren't registered up to the age of 10. A death cert was required before burial could take place. Whilst I acknowledge there were instances of the burial taking place before the production of the death cert and in a few cases not at all, I very much doubt this happened as much as you imply. Again, it's not something I have found. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, Greinton and Clutton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

Birth certificates might have been law but were not prescriptive, I have over 200 births from all over the country missing certificates from my tree that appear on baptism or census records. This gets better after 1875. Also have noticed transcribing burial records that a lot of child births/deaths were not recorded right up to 10 years of age.

Hi Charani, Thank You so much - was only aware of the site/s - at the Rootsweb site Am Hopefull = Thank You again, Cheers, Stella At 02:52 AM 06/08/2012, you wrote: >Stella Stanger wrote: > > Hi, The following might be helpful - > > http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > >www.freebmd.org.uk is a better link. It is more complete and also has >the Postems which give additional information not otherwise found in >the indices. Ancestry's version stops in about 1916 whilst that on >FreeBMD's own site go up to the 1950s now. > >FreeBMD's sister projects can be found at www.freereg.org.uk (parish >registers) and www.freecen.org.uk (censuses). Both are, like FreeBMD, >volunteer projects and not yet complete. FreeREG has a heck of a long >way to go and is great need of more volunteers to do transcriptions. > >-- >Charani (UK) >OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, >Greinton and Clutton, SOM >http://wsom-opc.org.uk > >************************************** >Send your List messages using **PLAIN TEXT** and always **TRIM >AWAY** superfluous old messages in replies. > >**MEANINGFUL Subject Lines - who, what, where, when, with SURNAMES >in CAPITAL letters** > >List Admin can be contacted at: [email protected] >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >[email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' >without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

The records in England are baptisms or PRs until 1837, and after this date Civil Registration began. Have you tried searching FreeBMD? http://www.freebmd.org.uk/ Jeanette Quoting COLEEN COLEMAN <[email protected]>: > Would like to know if England kept records of births or if they were > baptisms kept instead? John Hyland born 1855 To Thomas and Mary (Dwyer) > Hyland and Margaret born 1859 to > Thomas and Mary (Dwyer) Hyland. Thanks so much for your input. > ************************************** > Send your List messages using **PLAIN TEXT** and always **TRIM AWAY** > superfluous old messages in replies. > > **MEANINGFUL Subject Lines - who, what, where, when, with SURNAMES in > CAPITAL letters** > > List Admin can be contacted at: [email protected] > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

need to save more money as I need to purchase more credits in order to view the records I located on Free BDM

The 1836 Act for Registering Births, Marriages and Deaths in England (which was a very poorly drafted piece of legislation) required all births to be registered. Penalties were not imposed on parents for failing to register a birth because the Act placed the responsibility for registration on the *Registrar*, not the parents. It is inaccurate to suggest that this made birth registration in any way "optional" until 1875 when the 1874 Act came into force. It is true that some births were "missed" in the early years, particularly in the poorest, most overcrowded urban areas and that other registrations were "lost" in the process of transmission of the information from Registrar to Superintendent Registrar, from Superintendent Registrar to GRO and thence to the Index. Nevertheless, the number of registrations actually went down in 1875 which may well indicate that the old system was more efficient than the new one. Caroline > Although civil registration was introduced with effect from 1 July > 1837, the registration of births was NOT compulsory (i.e. there was no > penalty for failing to register a birth) until the mid 1870s. As a > result many births were not registered during the early years. > > Adrian >

Although civil registration was introduced with effect from 1 July 1837, the registration of births was NOT compulsory (i.e. there was no penalty for failing to register a birth) until the mid 1870s. As a result many births were not registered during the early years. Adrian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Caroline Bradford" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Cc: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2012 10:12 PM Subject: Re: [MDX] birth recprds/certificates of birth > Compulsory civil registration of births began on 1 July 1837. Baptism was > and is a matter of personal choice. > > Sent from my iPad > > On 5 Aug 2012, at 21:43, COLEEN COLEMAN <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Would like to know if England kept records of births or if they were >> baptisms kept instead? John Hyland born 1855 To Thomas and Mary (Dwyer) >> Hyland and Margaret born 1859 to >> Thomas and Mary (Dwyer) Hyland. Thanks so much for your input.

COLEEN COLEMAN wrote: > Would like to know if England kept records of births or if they were > baptisms kept instead? John Hyland born 1855 To Thomas and Mary (Dwyer) > Hyland and Margaret born 1859 to > Thomas and Mary (Dwyer) Hyland. Thanks so much for your input. We have certificates of birth, marriage and death from 1 July 1837 to the present. We have baptisms, marriages and burials from 1538 (and sometimes earlier) to the present. Certs can be ordered from the GRO online. The address you need is www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/ They cost 9.25GBP postage paid anywhere in the world. You will also find the following of use in telling you what information you will get from certs at different times: http://home.clara.net/dixons/Certificates/indexbd.htm -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, Greinton and Clutton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

Compulsory civil registration of births began on 1 July 1837. Baptism was and is a matter of personal choice. Sent from my iPad On 5 Aug 2012, at 21:43, COLEEN COLEMAN <[email protected]> wrote: > Would like to know if England kept records of births or if they were > baptisms kept instead? John Hyland born 1855 To Thomas and Mary (Dwyer) > Hyland and Margaret born 1859 to > Thomas and Mary (Dwyer) Hyland. Thanks so much for your input. > ************************************** > Send your List messages using **PLAIN TEXT** and always **TRIM AWAY** superfluous old messages in replies. > > **MEANINGFUL Subject Lines - who, what, where, when, with SURNAMES in CAPITAL letters** > > List Admin can be contacted at: [email protected] > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

COLEEN COLEMAN wrote: > There was one Bridget Hyland on Google that Married a Malachy Tully but > she was born after this Bridget Hyland so that was a mistake on my part. > The Bridget that married Malachy > TULLY was born 1845, again my apologies my mistake. I misread the > information. She did have 2 children by the same name not mine though Why are you using Google for your research instead of dedicated genealogy sites? Google can be useful but it isn't really a genealogy site. It's primarily a search engine. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, Greinton and Clutton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

> Yes I have a copy of the actual marriage records and since have been > sent e-mail a census return for 1861 listing Mary and John with Malachy > and Bridget along with 2 children John > born 1855 and Margaret born 1859 But this is not what appears in the census entry, which has John and Mary and the two children and his unmarried sister, Bridget. Where did Malachi spring from? If he later married Miss bridget Hyland, then was his name actually Malachi something else? EVE Author of The McLaughlin Guides for Family Historians Secretary, Bucks Genealogical Society

COLEEN COLEMAN wrote: > John and Mary had the following children after emigrating to the US: > Margaret b.1862 McLean Co IL USA If Margaret was born in 1862 in Illinois, she can't have been the same Margaret as was left in England and she couldn't, therefore, have married anyone. The one born 1859 must have died and the next girl born was given the same name. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, Greinton and Clutton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

I am checking all sources including: Rootsweb World Connect, Ancestry.com, genforum.genealogy.com, gen web sites, etc. I am covering all bases. I even went to RootsIreland.ie