Early statutory registrations/ Maiden name only searches

[grannysrock]

Hello TS

I was kind of aware that in the early years of statutory registration , people were just shown as married or widowed, without saying who the spouse was.
At the weekend I had a nice surprise though . After following up the sisters and brothers of my ancestor Ann Pringle née McGall/McCall, I found a death cert that indicated her mother Ann McGall née Kerr was still alive in 1860. Not conclusive by any means. Previous cross-searching on both surnames had previously yielded nothing, nor had even more previous searching on Ann's married name , so I had kinda assumed she was deid prior to 1855......... Well this time I looked under her maiden name ( Kerr/Carr) only and found her death in 1862 .... It just says Ann Kerr, widowed , with no mention of her husband's name. BUT I can identify her due to the informant being my GGG grandfather who gave his relationship as son-in-law (and she died at his home) .

Perhaps this was a total mess-up on the part of the registrar or my ggg grandfather or perhaps this is normal if the lady preferred to be known by her own name rather than her married name* But it had never before occurred to me to search by maiden name only for married ladies .

*Come think of it I have never found the marriage record , but there are several children to Ann Kerr/Carr and John McGall in the indexes , so I have always assumed they were regarded as man and wife.

Obviously I am very happy to find another ancestor post 1855 with named parents ( At first sight non existant parents but we'll have a go ....) , but I thought this experience might might be useful to other searchers - perhaps others could comment on :

When it became a requirement to put spouse's details on a death registration?

Is it that common for married woman to be registered only under their maiden name on death registrations ?


A really happy Sally who has still much to learn ....

( Now Looking for John Kerr and Ann Brown married 1776 +/- 20 probably Berwickshire ...)

[DavidWW]

Hi Sally

When statutory recording started in Scotland in 1855, ambitions were very high, which is why it can be great advantage to find an 1855 record due to the "extra" information.

This "extra" information, and some other information was dropped in 1856, with just a small amount being restored over the next decade.

In the case of death register entries, an 1855 record shows the name of the spouse, including the maiden name if appropriate.

For 1856 to 1860, however, only the marital status of the deceased is shown, i.e. no name of the spouse, but there will sometimes be the occupation of the spouse for a female death.

Sometimes this means that it's not possible to be certain that the record is the correct one, but occupation, informant's name and relationship, never mind address, will often help.

That written, I've seen the full name of the spouse on a register entry in the period 1856 - 1860, and the information missing on a record from the eraly 1860s .......

It's important to appareciate that registrars were ordinary human beings, with all the foibles that you can imagine, and maybe some of them didn't agree with the instructions from Embra in 1856 - 1860, or some, in the early 1860s, hadn't read their memos from the Registrar General

However, the complications don't stop there, - if only it were so easy , - as it's the indexes that we first search, not the register entries, and, for the first few years of statutory recording the situation regarding the treatment of maiden names was complicated.

So, for married females deaths, the treatment of the maiden name varies as follows:

For 1855 the death is indexed under both the married name and the maiden name.

For 1856 to 1858 the only entry is under the name reported, i.e. normally the married name for a married female, but if a widow had reverted to her maiden name, then that may have been the surname used.

From 1859 onwards there should be entries under both the maiden and married surname(s).

There are several important points here. First, as always, the information in a death register entry and the related index is 100% dependent on the informant.................

Secondly, the female death cross check search will not produce a result in 1856 - 1858; and, when you are searching on the married surname and don't get a match, don't give up before you repeat the search for the maiden surname.

Again, indexers sometimes made mistakes so don't be surprised if there turn out to be occasional exceptions to these "rules".

In later registers and indexes remember that the information given and then indexed depends on the informant, and it's far from uncommon to find an informant who didn't know the maiden name of the wife of the deceased, or who didn't know that the deceased had been married more than once, - in the latter case, even very close family informants sometimes didn't know, or didn't report this information (did every registrar make it obvious that the register entry required not only the name of the current spouse but also any previous spouse[s]?).

And, if the information isn't there in the register entries, it can't appear in the indexes


The above comments about the foibles of registrars brings to mind the story of a registrar who was dissatisfied with the information provided to him from GRO in London in relation to a death overseas, the only requirement for consulates etc., being to match the information requirements for the English death records; so this Scottish registrar went out to the local community and obtained the full information required for a Scottish registration, - and apparantly this was not unique!

David

[CatrionaL]

David

Reading your post brought back to mind a reality common in small towns and communities.

Thinking back, I realise that for neighbours and friends, a woman remains Jean Untel from birth to death, even though the whole neighbourhood attended the wedding in the Kirk and know her husband well. It often requires a great effort to remember her married name.

Bien à toi.
Catriona

[DavidWW]

My wife and her mother still do it !! - wife born Dalry, mother lived there for 55 years, born in Kilwinning.

And when I ask who they're referring to the answer is "Jean Brown?, - her that merrit John Smith"

David

[grannysrock]

Thanks David for explaining the different "eras" so clearly. I now understand what the requirements were - even if they weren't stuck to. I love the story of the Scottish registrar - you see bureaucracy does have its benefits ( well that's what I say to myself in Belgium on a fairly frequent basis ....)

In this particular instance, there is not much chance my ggg grandfather didn't know his mother-in-laws married surname ( it was his wife's name after all ) I kinda think that in 1862 the registrar in Greenlaw was just a bit off the pace ..... I just looked at the other two death entries on the page - they are both for married ladies . Initially he has recorded them under their maiden names , then scored these out and added the married names next to their forenames . As both of these ladies' deaths were recorded by their husbands , this was not too difficult for him. And looking at Ann's death I see a dot next to her forename where he might have been planning to add her married name , but never got round to asking for the details ?

Well I guess I'll never know... and I've found my ggggg grandparents names so I'll just be happy about that.

Catriona , you've got me thinking about another lady in my tree whose married name on her death certificate put me off for a while .... because I only ever saw her referred to by her maiden name.
On the 1841 and 1851 census records she was Jane/Jean Hope which was her maiden name . When I found her death cert it was more than a year before I realised it was her - because there it mentioned a husband ( Robert Watt) I hadn't known about . ( To explain more fully I descend from Thomas Fisher whose death cert does not use the "I" word - but does only give a mother's name Jane Hope ( no mention of Watt or any married name) . It was only when I found Thomas living in Eccles in 1851 at the same house as Robert Watt, whose subsequent death at the same address revealed him to be the son of Robert Watt and Jane Hope that the penny began to drop ...


I'm rambling again, I guess the moral of the story is keep looking at all your bits and bobs and maybe something wil jump out at you .

Time for a cup of tea.

Thanks again

Sally