Dear Nivard (and others who have chipped in) Many thanks once again. I think I have wasted enough of your and your contact's time. I think if I am going to get any further I shall have to get on to the District Registrar. Just to set the record straight. 1. I even muddled myself into correcting the page no. earlier. Of course the entries are on separate pages in the actual index, but the GRO ref page rerence no. is the same. 2. Although there are separate entries in the index, identical except for surname, there is only one certificate (or at least I got the same one against both entries). 3. The parents are both shown as informants on that certificate. Without being a fly on the wall in 1931, I doubt that I am going to get to the bottom of it. When I started this off, I was wondering whether it was a matter of general policy to list in this way, but from what people have said it could be down to any number of reasons. At least I know reasonably certainly that only one birth was involved. Once again my thanks. Have a Happy Easter. John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nivard Ovington" <ovington1@sky.com> To: "John" <john.townend@o2.co.uk> Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 6:03 PM Subject: Re: [NTT] Registration of illegitimate birth > Hi John > > I have had a reply from my contact who is a retired Registrar > > His reply copied below > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > I have four questions. Who was/were the informants on each registration? > Were the entry numbers on the certificates the same? - i.e. in the first > column if it's a long certificate, or in the top right hand corner if it's > an A4 certificate. Were the registration dates the same? Was it the same > registrar on both certificates? > > When I was a registrar, a man came in one day to register his child. He > was > married to the mother. No problem - just a run of the mill registration. > > Two days later, his wife came in with her lover, to register their child - > the same child. Because we were using computers, I was able to identify > that > the child had already been registered, and I couldn't accept the second > registration without the husband coming in to ask for the first > registration > to be cancelled. Complication - he didn't know that the child wasn't his! > So > the mother had to come clean with him before anything could be done. > > If the case you mention was before the days of computers, then perhaps the > circumstances were similar to those I experienced, and two registrations > were made without the registrar realising. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > If you want to comment I can ask again , the last part does not sound as > though it applies in your case > > Best wishes Nivard Ovington, in Cornwall (UK) > > > > >>>> There is only one certificate, or to be more precise, two identical >>>> copies of the same one. There are two entries in the GRO Indexes, >>>> which when used to order certicicates have the same result. So it is >>>> not a question of re-registration but of dual recording of the first >>>> registration. >>>> >>>> Both parents had been married before and did not re-marry each other >>>> although they lived together thereafter, so presumably neither was >>>> divorced from the first spouse. >>>> Regards >>>> John >>> >>> >> >> > >