Welcome to our forum ~ please post your questions below.
Another problem with this family! I have found the following baptisms(in the Cathedral) for the Cooper children:
Charles Henry born 4/9/1860 Mother's maiden name SYKES
Kate Eliza born 27/5/1863
George Edwin born 14/8/1864
John William born 23/9/1867.
Father is Charles and mother Sarah Ann. The problem is I can't find 3 of their birth registrations as I wanted to confirm mother's maiden name.
I have found a marriage between a Charles Cooper and Sarah Ann Sykes in 1859.
Can anyone see their birth registrations?
Looks as though Charles and Sarah split up as they were never together after 1861.
1871 census shows Kate, George E and John W living with mother Sarah it says married so perhaps Charles was off somewhere!
there is a Charles Cooper)married) living his brother Joseph and family. Could this be him?
I think that's him. On each census they both said they were married even though they didn't live together.
It was the birth registrations of the 3 children that puzzled me. I can't seem to find them.
Its strange because they seem to have had the children baptised.
In 1881 census, George E 16y and John W 15y are living with father, Charles in Petre Street.
Even on the 1891 census Charles still states he's married but doesn't live with Sarah Ann. Would it be illegal not to register a child's birth at that time?
Even though registration was introduced in 1837 it wasn't until 1874 that it became compulsory for parents to register their child. Prior to that they had to register if the registrar asked them. From 1874 it was the parents responsibility to register rather than the registrar's duty to collect the information. As the children were all born before 1874 it is possible they weren't registered.
Even after 1874 many parents believed that baptising their child was registering them. Parents had to register the birth within, I think, 42 days of birth. If they were late they could be fined so parents quite often 'adjusted' the date of the child's birth to avoid the fine.
Many thanks for the explanation Steve. Good to know for future reference.