It's obvious from the frequency of wrong ages on marriage and death certificates that until relatively recently birth certificates were not required to be produced when registering those events. Many young men also claimed to be older than they were when joining the army or navy, so they couldn't have been required to present proof or age either. Lots more things were taken on trust in those days, and even in living memory. It should also be said that pension entitlements for most people were very minimal, so a few errors would have been peanuts compared with today's benefit fraud. MAR in France. > Message du 25/07/12 14:33 > De : "Robert Holmes" > A : warwick@rootsweb.com > Copie à : > Objet : [WAR] 1874 and beyond > > I read quite recently that about 1874 it became the duty of parents to > report a birth rather than the registar going in search of birth. My > grandfather was born around 1873 and may therefore have been one of the > 30 percent of unreported births. Question is how did they get a pension > assuming they lived to 65? Was a birth cert required ; could they > register retrospectively etc > > > Bob Holmes in tropical Axbridge > ------------------------------- > List archives are at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/index/WARWICK > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to WARWICK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

ramaix wrote: > > It's obvious from the frequency of wrong ages on marriage and death > certificates that until relatively recently birth certificates were > not required to be produced when registering those events. Hallo From what date did birth certificates have to be produced at marriage and deaths? I have not heard of this. Connie in London