Where Do I Go From Here?

[TerryJ]

Hoping someone can help,
Although I've been researching my family for some years now I've not come across 'father not known' but a relative has asked if I can help him. Well, I've gone as far as I can go but have got nowhere-baptism entry has a father's name but I think the name inserted was done as a favour by the vicar to the family. The birth year was 1929 and at a time when the vicar knew everyone who lived in the small village and the birth certificate just has a blank.
I've asked all the family what they know or if they have a theory which has been helpful. I have been told that 'the mother' at some time went to a court in London but have no idea what court and for what reason would she have gone?
My relative was brought up by his mother and the man she married some years later but there's no chance he was the father.
Thanks

[Megan Roberts]

but I think the name inserted was done as a favour by the vicar to the family.

What is your reasoning for that thought? Is there a description of the father e.g. "alleged" "putative" "natural" etc.?



I have been told that 'the mother' at some time went to a court in London but have no idea what court and for what reason would she have gone?

Maintenance.

She was probably seeking what is called an affiliation order or a bastardy bond.

Try the local record office, or go to your local library and see if they have access to searchable old newspapers.

You could also buy this book from the National Archives:http://bookshop.nationalarchives.gov...Was-A-Bastard/

Illegitimacy can be a road block, but it does not have to be.

[Lesley Robertson]

If the parents weren't married, the only way that the father's name could be put on the birth cert was for both parents to turn up at the office to register the birth. Parish Ministers, on the other hand, had very good ways of extracting names. I'd take the name in the baptismal records seriously unless I had a good reason not to. Also, if she was getting/expecting financial support from him, she'd have no reason to keep his name out of the records - it would probably look better if he was named.

Megan's right and her advice is good. It might also be worth looking through some of the advice in our adoption forum - I know that she wasn't adopted, but a lot of the interest there is in tracking previously-unknown birth parents...
Googling on "bastardy bonds" reveals that many of the regional genealogy groups have their local bbs online, so it might also be worth taking a look at the appropriate one.

[Peter Goodey]

There were no bastardy bonds in 1929. The questioner probably wants the records of the petty sessions / police court/ magistrate's court (the one relevant to where the mother was living).

Have you seen for yourself the original baptism entry?

Presumably you've checked that there was no later re-registration of the birth.

[geneius]

could be put on the birth cert was for both parents to turn up at the office to register the birth.

In 1929 it does appear to have been a requirement that both parties turned up to register the child & have their names placed on the birth certificate.

I have recently learnt, having a battered partly illegible birth certificate for a relative that any errors made prior to the Registrar signing the birth entry are crossed out & initialled, this is the prime source, however the crossed out details were not transferred to the certificate given to the mother. Presumably she declared the father and then for whatever reason decided she did not want it on the certificate that she would keep which was probably why the fathers space was partly defaced. If anyone looked at it they wouldn't realise there was no entry!....In my case the crossed out info turns out to be the father who eventually paid maintenance.


Have you seen for yourself the original baptism entry?

Agreed however you need to look at the original not just the info on line etc.

You can order the film via the familysearch resource section to view at a local centre close to you

Search the Parish other records accounts etc to see if there is any further info

[Peter Goodey]

I think the name inserted was done as a favour by the vicar to the family

I'm not sure what you're getting at there. The requirements for the baptism register and the birth register were quite different. If the mother said that the father was John Smith, why shouldn't the vicar enter it? It didn't have to be a "favour".

On the other hand for the birth registration, in the case of unmarried parents, the registrar was not allowed to enter the father's name unless the father actually turned up for the registration.

[Peter Goodey]

the vicar knew everyone who lived in the small village

OK. Well, was the father named in the baptism register a local resident and therefore known to the vicar?

[TerryJ]

Thanks, I guess it may well be Dartford Kent. I've seen the original on Cityark but have not thought about a re-registration-didn't know of this!

[TerryJ]

The name on the baptism register wasn't the fathers, the person named was however was known to the vicar.

[Peter Goodey]

You said in message 1

baptism entry has a father's name

and in message 9
The name on the baptism register wasn't the fathers

I'm sorry but I don't know what to make of that.

[Lesley Robertson]

Terry, several people have now asked. How do you know that the man in the register was not the father? Why do you think that the Minister would agree to a lie in his Church register?

[TerryJ]

Is it possible to send you a private message as I'm not familiar with this kind of thing.

[Lesley Robertson]

Yes. If you click on my name, it should give you a drop down menu including "send private message".
It does take time to learn the system - I'm still finding new aspects all the time...

[Peter Goodey]

Terry sent me a PM. I won't repeat the details given but from the few clues given I've worked out which parish was involved and from what I know of the district I wouldn't call it a small village where everyone knew each other - more of a rambling parish of horticulture, some industry and a number of hospitals and other institutions.

I've looked at the parish register. It shows the father's and mother's forenames and one surname. Interestingly the preceding entry in the register shows an identical father's forename but crossed out! This does make me wonder about the standard of record keeping at that church. I feel now that the baptism entry is a red herring.

I hope Terry will post more details because that's usually the best way to encourage people to dig around and come up with new ideas.

[TerryJ]

Peter,
Yes, I know what you mean about more details so I've emailed my cousin's daughter to see what she thinks-hopefully she'll agree! I agree with you ref Father's name entry-just an understanding vicar. I see you live in Kent, have you ever visited the church?
The standard of record keeping leaves a bit to be desired-burial records are poor. It would seem that the majority of graves don't have a plot location.
Regards
Terry

[Peter Goodey]

I agree with you ref Father's name entry-just an understanding vicar.

I didn't say that. I would suggest a simple mistake or misunderstanding or having been misled. I don't think vicars have the freedom to knowingly make incorrect entries in a baptism register.

Someone will know what regulations govern the completion of baptism registers. Church law? Civil law?