Perhaps your grandfather never knew his exact birth date. This was quite common. My grandmother celebrated her 60th birthday in 1950 with a party. Wondering why she did not receive a pension she then found out that she was actually born in 1892. As she did not have a birth certificate, it was always assumed that she was born in 1892. Birth Certificates issued at the time were not like the large birth certificates issued now. They were on flimsy bits of paper, which were easily lost or destroyed. These were free, but the large birth certificate you had to pay for. With regards to ages on censuses, these should also be taken with a pinch of salt. It depended on the person who was giving the information. Before the 1911 census this could have been a child, distant relative or anybody that was 'at home' when the enumerator came. Even in 1911 husbands probably guessed at their wife's age. Who would go and check by looking at a birth certificate? I've just checked with my daughter who got married four years ago and she said that they didn't have to take any birth certificates, etc. to prove who they were with them when they went to see the Vicar. So even now, it is dependent on people giving verbal information. Regards Jackie Cotterill Birmingham & Midland Society for Genealogy & Heraldry 5 Sanderling Court Spennells Kidderminster Worcs, DY10 4TS Tel/Fax: 01562 743912 www: bmsgh.org -----Original Message----- From: warwick-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:warwick-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Robert Holmes Sent: 26 July 2012 09:44 To: warwick@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [WAR] WARWICK Digest, Vol 7, Issue 117 very interesting replies. Clearly the opportunities for identity theft were already being used. Presumably, you could acquire somebody else's birth cert or bribe a person to prove who you were. My grandfather's army records show that he was born any year between 1873 and 1882. He appears in only one census 1911. The ages which appear in the census, his marriage certificate, his army records ( more than one )and death certificate all vary. An example: in the 1911 census he is five years younger than when he married! Bob Holmes On 26/07/2012 08:01, warwick-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > > Today's Topics: > > 1. 1874 and beyond (Robert Holmes) > 2. Re: 1874 and beyond (Nivard Ovington) > 3. Re: 1874 and beyond (ramaix) > 4. Re: 1874 and beyond (Bob Douglas) > 5. Re: 1874 and beyond (Jan Rockett) > 6. Re: 1874 and beyond (Dennis Corbett .) > 7. Re: 1874 and beyond (Connie) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 13:31:54 +0100 > From: Robert Holmes <holmes@holmesr923.plus.com> > Subject: [WAR] 1874 and beyond > To: warwick@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <500FE73A.8030500@holmesr923.plus.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > 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 > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 14:36:46 +0100 > From: Nivard Ovington <ovington1@sky.com> > Subject: Re: [WAR] 1874 and beyond > To: warwick@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <500FF66E.6050002@sky.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Hi Bob > > The powers that be used other means to prove the birth date claimed > > Census in some cases or baptism, but also signed declarations, Army > records etc > > If you think about it, if there were retrospective birth registration > they would still have to prove it in the same way > > Apart from the obvious missing the registration, was he born to > married parents or even to those parents, there was no official > adoption system in England until 1927 > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > > On 25/07/2012 13:31, Robert Holmes wrote: >> 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 > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:59:04 +0200 (CEST) > From: ramaix <ramaix@orange.fr> > Subject: Re: [WAR] 1874 and beyond > To: warwick@rootsweb.com, Robert Holmes <holmes@holmesr923.plus.com> > Message-ID: <669174714.14357.1343224744973.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f22> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > > 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 ? : >> 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 >> > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 22:46:04 +0100 > From: "Bob Douglas" <bob@cotswan.com> > Subject: Re: [WAR] 1874 and beyond > To: <warwick@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <E129AD9BB33D4C07AF461CE665F60281@NEW> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > He may have been able to get a certified copy of baptism > > Bob > > -----Original Message----- > From: warwick-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:warwick-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Robert Holmes > Sent: 25 July 2012 13:32 > To: warwick@rootsweb.com > Subject: [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 > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 23:12:16 +0100 > From: "Jan Rockett" <jan.rockett@ntlworld.com> > Subject: Re: [WAR] 1874 and beyond > To: <warwick@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <EAAB170D2D1341EAA93789ADC37120CB@JanPC> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > Pensions came in 1 January 1909 and a man had to be 70. lived here for > 20 years and be a British subject and it was means tested. > Here is a table > he pension was paid as follows: > ?21 p/a Rate of Pension 5s p/w. (25p) > ?21 to ?23 12s 6d p/a Rate of Pension 4s p/w. (20p) > ?23 12s 6d to ?26 5s p/a Rate of Pension 3s p/w. (15p) > ?26 5s to ?28 17s 6b p/a Rate of Pension 2s p/w. (10p) > ?28 17s 6b to ?31 10s p/a Rate of Pension 1s p/w. (5p) > > National insurance came a few years later. They sent forms out and > presumably you had to prove your work record. > > Are you sure he wasnt registered? > > > Jan > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Douglas > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 10:46 PM > To: warwick@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [WAR] 1874 and beyond > > He may have been able to get a certified copy of baptism > > Bob > > -----Original Message----- > From: warwick-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:warwick-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Robert Holmes > Sent: 25 July 2012 13:32 > To: warwick@rootsweb.com > Subject: [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 > > ------------------------------- > 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 > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:49:11 +0000 > From: "Dennis Corbett ." <dennis@denniscorbett.com> > Subject: Re: [WAR] 1874 and beyond > To: <warwick@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <CC35C4C3.AC5A%dennis@denniscorbett.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > > My grandfather was born in 1870 and never registered. Just prior to WW! > His former schoolmaster wrote a letter to the authorities explaining > how ill health had prevented his mother from registering the birth > within the prescribed period. Included in the letter was a handwritten > transcript of the baptism entry from the church record. The letter, > which I have, is accompanied by a second one from the schoolmaster to > my grandfather explaining that he cannot register in retrospect but > that the one provided will provide him with protection from the > authorities should they decide to call him up as being of service age - which at 44 he wasn't! > > Dennis > > ------------------------------------ > > > On 25/07/2012 12:31, "Robert Holmes" <holmes@holmesr923.plus.com> wrote: > >> 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 > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 01:08:55 +0100 > From: Connie <connie.sparrer@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [WAR] 1874 and beyond > To: warwick@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <50108A97.5080002@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Jan Rockett wrote: >> Pensions came in 1 January 1909 and a man had to be 70. lived here >> for 20 years and be a British subject and it was means tested. > Hallo > > I heard that many of those entitled to a pension refused to claim it > as they "didn't want charity". > > Connie in London > > > ------------------------------ > > To contact the WARWICK list administrator, send an email to > WARWICK-admin@rootsweb.com. > > To post a message to the WARWICK mailing list, send an email to WARWICK@rootsweb.com. > > __________________________________________________________ > 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 > email with no additional text. > > > End of WARWICK Digest, Vol 7, Issue 117 > *************************************** > ------------------------------- 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