Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 18:13:32 -0800
From: Geoff Thomas <bargoed(a)nildram.co.uk>
After public registration of births was introduced in Britain in
1837,
what was the system adopted for registering the birth? Which public (or
church) official was responsible for taking the details and did they
wait for the woman to go to them or did they tend to pressurise the
family into registering the birth?
Hi Geoff
I think you have the answers to most of your questions but with regard to
the original means of registration you might find the following information
culled from the 'Genealogists' Magazine' (Sep 1996) of some interest.
From the beginning of Civil Registration on 1 July 1837 it was
realised
that there was a significant level of under-registration, particularly of
births--there were shortfalls in registration of up to 33% as late as
1865-74 in areas of Liverpool.
There were also several instances of inflated or fraudulent registrations
notably in All Souls, St. Marylebone in 1841-3 (deaths +30%; births +38%),
South Shields, County Durham in 1841-3 (births +31%) and Gt. Howard St.,
Liverpool in 1845-8 (births +37%). The newspaper reports of the resulting
trials of the registrars give some indication of how the births and deaths
were registered.
In the All Souls fraud one of those implicated stated that '... , we have
established a direct agency between mid-wives, surgeons and undertakers, by
which means I have reason to believe not an individual birth or death has
occurred in this District without our knowledge.'
In Gt. Howard St. the registrar, Charles Chubb, employed assistants to
obtain details of births in the sub-district (one clerk employed by Chubb
was paid one penny for each birth). Apparently these assistants would go
round and get informants to sign (or mark) the blank register book, taking
down the details on pieces of paper or in a rough book, which were later
copied into the register book by the registrar. In this case the registrar
was found guilty of making false entries in the birth register.
In South Shields, Thomas Wilson was found guilty of having forged the
registers of births and deaths. 'He was in the habit of paying assistants a
fee for bringing him the names of parties where births or deaths had
occurred. His agents brought him the names of persons who had never been in
existence'
So the means of information gathering varied.
As was pointed out in a Poor Law Commission memorandum, the employment of
assistants paid by the birth or death was asking for trouble. How common
the practice was it is now impossible to say but its occurrence in South
Shields and in Liverpool four years later suggests it was widespread. It
should be remembered that the registrars were not occupied exclusively with
the business of registration (Thomas Wilson had been the South Shields'
postmaster for many years).
Incidentally in Liverpool in 1848 registrars were paid two shillings and
six pence for the first twenty registrations in the year and one shilling
each thereafter. As the birth registrations were inflated by about 685 per
year (+37%) one can estimate the amount defrauded.
In the Births and Deaths Registration Act of 1874 the onus for registration
was transferred from the registrars to the informants with penalties for
non-registration.
--
Best regards
Dick Jones
Leigh-on-Sea, Essex. U.K.
rcjones(a)rmplc.co.uk