Hello List I am having great trouble trying to track down a birth record in 1846 for someone whose baptism I have and for whom I have census records in 1851 and 1861. The search is made more complicated - and thus I hope an interesting challenge for those of you intrigued by puzzles! - by not knowing under what surname she may have been recorded, nor in which district, though St Giles and Strand are the most likely. Her forename is Maria - or at least that is how it was recorded in the census and baptism records. She was baptised on 30 October 1853 along with 4 of her siblings, in St Johns Waterloo (yes, Surrey, but the family lived across the river); the record gives her date of birth as 10 Feb 1846. Her father is recorded on the baptisms as having the surname Pearse Chanler; his actual surname was Pearse, and his forenames John Joseph. I have traced the birth records of Maria's 4 siblings: the father's surname is variously recorded as Calender (1843), Pearse (1847), Pearse Chalner (1850) and Chanler (1853). The father and mother actually married in 1849, when he is recorded as John Joseph Pearse Chanler and his father as William Chanler: in reality both son and father had the surname Pearse at birth. The mother's maiden name was Richardson. The 1851 (Pearce) and 1861 (Pearse) censuses record the children's places of birth as St Clement Danes, although the 1843 birth was actually registered in St Giles. I have trawled FreeBMD looking for likely birth records for Maria (or similar) in Mar and Jun q 1846 in both St Giles and Strand registration districts, and have bought a few likely looking BCs which turned out not to be hers. I have also been through all Marias recorded in Middlesex in those quarters, with no joy. I would really like to look through the actual registers of both districts to see if i could track her down through her parents' names or through an address, but of course the Register offices will only allow the public to view the indices. I have been unable to trace Maria after 1861, either on marriage, in death or in a subsequent census. John Joseph died in 1856, with purely the surname Pearse on the record. Can some kind person suggest a different way of tackling this problem of the birth record? With thanks in anticipation. Lawrence

Lawrence Pearse wrote: > I am having great trouble trying to track down a birth record in > 1846 for someone whose baptism I have and for whom I have census > records in 1851 and 1861. The search is made more complicated - > and thus I hope an interesting challenge for those of you intrigued > by puzzles! - by not knowing under what surname she may have been > recorded, nor in which district, though St Giles and Strand are the > most likely. Start with the surname she had at baptism. Have you had a look on Ancestry's London Parish CMB database? It does cover parishes outside of London and also has some entries from Westminster as well although the bulk of Westminster is outside the agreement Ancestry has with the LMA. > Her forename is Maria - or at least that is how it was recorded in > the census and baptism records. I've found Maria and Mary to be pretty interchangeable. > She was baptised on 30 October 1853 along with 4 of her siblings, > in St Johns Waterloo (yes, Surrey, but the family lived across the > river); the record gives her date of birth as 10 Feb 1846. She would have been rising 7 so still close enough to her actual birth for the DoB to be correct. > > Her father is recorded on the baptisms as having the surname Pearse > Chanler; his actual surname was Pearse, and his forenames John > Joseph. Sorry to be pedantic, but a person's name was whatever he (or she) decided it was. It's the same today - so long as it isn't for fraudulent purposes/reasons. > The 1851 (Pearce) and 1861 (Pearse) censuses record the children's > places of birth as St Clement Danes, although the 1843 birth was > actually registered in St Giles. If you can't find the birth registration, how do you know it was actually St Giles? There weren't the checks and documentation then that there is now so the birth could have been anywhere and given in the census however the person who completed the forms believed it to be. Thus if the family weren't able for whatever reason to complete the form and a friend or neighbour completed it on their behalf, that person may not have been privy to what the family knew so put down what they thought was the truth. > I have trawled FreeBMD looking for likely birth records for Maria > (or similar) in Mar and Jun q 1846 in both St Giles and Strand > registration districts, and have bought a few likely looking BCs > which turned out not to be hers. The reason her birth is missing could be because it didn't reach the GRO itself. There are many births as well as marriages and deaths missing. There's also the additional possibility that the registrar whose job it was to find all the newborns, missed Maria. Although the parents were supposed to register the child within 42 days (6 weeks) of the birth if the registrar hadn't come to them, I suspect a great many didn't bother and considered baptism registration enough. The onus changed later to the parents who would be fined if they didn't register their child within the required time frame. That's when you get DoB anomalies where the parents have given a different date so they are within the 42 days and thus don't get fined. > I would really like to look through the actual registers of both > districts to see if i could track her down through her parents' > names or through an address, but of course the Register offices > will only allow the public to view the indices. Many register offices are willing to check for you. Try asking. > Can some kind person suggest a different way of tackling this > problem of the birth record? You may well have to accept what is in the baptism register as the only evidence of the birth. Although many parents couldn't read or write, it never ceases to amaze me just how accurate they were with ages and DoBs. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk http://www.savethegurkhas.co.uk/

How about Births Dec 1846 Pearse Maria Clerkenwell 3 84 She may have been registered very late. Anne South Australia Lawrence Pearse wrote: > > Hello List > > I am having great trouble trying to track down a birth record in 1846 for someone whose baptism I have and > for whom I have census records in 1851 and 1861. The search is made more complicated - and thus I hope an > interesting challenge for those of you intrigued by puzzles! - by not knowing under what surname she may > have been recorded, nor in which district, though St Giles and Strand are the most likely. > > Her forename is Maria - or at least that is how it was recorded in the census and baptism records.

Anne Chambers wrote: > How about Births Dec 1846 > Pearse Maria Clerkenwell 3 84 > > She may have been registered very late. The apparent "wrong" district could be accounted for by the fact births have to be registered where the birth took place which could also account for why it's just a tad outside the required time <G> -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, Greinton and Clutton, SOM Asst OPC for Ashcott and Shapwick, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk http://www.savethegurkhas.co.uk/