Welcome to our forum ~ please post your questions below.
Between 1913 and 1921 when registering a birth and giving the father's name would it be necessary for the father to be present? If the mother was alone when registering the birth would she need to show a marriage certificate?
In 1921 if a man was fined for not sending his children to school would he have to appear in court in person?
These are both questions which would help me prove that this man did exist and is not just a name on certificates which I am beginning to believe might be the case. I would be grateful for whatever I can find out about these two sets of circumstance.
Pat, My father was born in 1921 and I have a copy of his birth certificate. In the informant column it states his grandmother registered his birth. The exact wording was F.E. Francis, grandmother, present at birth, Hill Top, Stannington, Bradfield. I am afraid I do not know if she had to provide any other documents. Hope this helps.M9W
Have you checked the General Registry Office Site re the rules and regulations?
Elaine in Ottawa.
Instant Messenger: Skype
You are always such a great help to me whenever I post a question. I did have a look at Sheffield Archives online but they have updated their website and I found it very confusing now. I'm sure that the rules then would have been different to the rules now. I think if the name of the father was different to the mother's name and the father wanted his name on the birth cert. then he would have to be present. The confusion comes when the people aren't married but the mother is using the father's surname herself ie passing herself off as married and also giving the child the father's surname.
I'm not sure if the General Registry Office will answer an historical question but I'll give it a go. Thanks for the suggestion.
Just went and had a look myself and what used to be there is no longer there.
It was strictly for Family Historians and it gave what the rules were after 1837 and changes along the way.
I will keep looking but dont hold your breath. I am just Googling so you can do it also.
This site may give you a better idea of the legality of using the fathers name.
Instant Messenger: Skype
The registry office sent me a reply and said that if a woman was registering a birth, back in the early part of the last century, and said that she was married she would not have been asked to produce a marriage licence. So that answers that question. I still do not know about the court procedure around 1921 though.
I am just transcribing the Petty Sessions for Sheffield and a Parent did attend court if they were fined under the Education Act.
Some of the entries are for the issue of a warrant to attend court and the reason is given, usually as Not Paying Fine. There will be a closure on the 1921 records as they are less than 100 years old, but the newspapers might report it.
Yes, it was in the newspapers on 21st May 1920 but his name is one of many on a list of people who were fined for not sending their children to school. I'm trying to find out if he would have had to attend court for the judgement of this fine or if everyone on the list would have been sent letters perhaps. The thought did occur that perhaps a wife might attend in place of a husband who was working? What are your thoughts, please?
Thanks for replying Angela.
The petty session records are headed:
Register of the Court of Summary Jurisdiction sitting at the Town Hall in the said borough.
Summons No, Name of Informant or Complainent, Name of defendant and age then Adjudication.
Looking at some of the previous entries under the Education Act a summons was issued so therefore they would have to attend court.
Oh that's great Angela. That's what I needed to know. Thank you so much.