A Puzzler.....

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 11:21 am

I was reviewing my BMD lectures y'day, and came across this unusual example of a birth registration.

I think that I know what happened, but it needs some careful thought

http://talkingscot.com/gallery/displayi ... p?pos=-748

David

Post by **emanday** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 11:55 am

Possibly born then abandoned or removed from her mother? She is not shown as deceased, so unlikely baby was an orphan.

Was there a poorhouse or orphanage in Kirkfieldbank in Lesmahagow?

I certainly can't think of another reason, unless the registration was done by the Sheriff because the mother couldn't or wouldn't.

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:39 pm

No one's yet commented on the differing dates of birth and registration ........

David

Post by **emanday** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 2:05 pm

Aah! 3 years after the event.

Did an unregistered child have to be registered before it's adoption (by mother's new husband) could be processed, or even before its death could be registered?

Also; Although I'm not sure about passports in those days, but you can't get one these days without your BC, I think.

grannysrock · Post by **grannysrock** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 6:17 pm

David
I of course don't know what happened - but I remember this was a birth which I thought had something to do with the William Bottomley(s) of Dumfries .
http://talkingscot.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=525

If so the Agnes in question was not abandoned.

Was there originally a birth registration made in Lesamahagow as well ? If Margaret's usual place of residence was Troqueer , then that would have been incorrect and perhaps someone spotted that later ???

I haven't a clue really - I think you are MUCH more likely than I to solve this

Sally

Post by **emanday** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 6:44 pm

Ahhaa! The thick plottens!

Looking at the posts in that link, this seems to add a clue...

William Bottomley married Margaret Cardy at Dumfries in 1859

Margaret got married the same year as this late registration of Agnes. Why Margaret didn't register the baby in 1856; maybe because she was illegimate? Who knows?

But I'd say the marriage and the eventual registration both being in the same year, and that Agnes has her stepfather's surname in census.......

I rest my case, M'lud, mainly because I have depleted my wee grey cells with this one.

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 7:07 pm

It's the only example I've ever come across of a registration later than 3 months after the birth.

There is a first registration in Lesmahagow, - http://talkingscot.com/gallery/displayi ... p?pos=-749

After 3 months a birth could only be registered on the authority of a Sheriff, hence his involvement here. (Between 21 days and 3 months the Registrar had the option to proceed on his own authority, including, possibly, levying a fine of 21s.)

The registration was required to be made in the parish of birth but if the father's domicile, or in the case on an illegitimate birth as here, the mother's domicile was elsewhere, then the first registrar was required to send a copy to the other registrar for engrossing into that Register of Births, hence the messy last column in this case.

Here, the Lesmahagow, for some reason, considered Margaret to have her domicile back home with her parents, - Troqueer in this case.

It did also happen that the registrations were the other way round, wrongly first in the district of domicile rather birth, and then transmited to the other registrar.

David

grannysrock · Post by **grannysrock** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 7:09 pm

Well emanday - that certainly puts her in Dumfriesshire when the birth was registered.
I've just noticed o the IGI there are 2 extracted entries for thsi birth -

C118821 Troqueer and
C116491 Lesmahagow

I wonder what the registration date on the Lesmahagow entry is - no credits - so I can't look ...

Sally

Post by **emanday** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 7:42 pm

Did the fact that they got married the same year as the 1859 registration have no bearing then?

David, I love these puzzles. Keep 'em comin

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:36 pm

emanday wrote:Did the fact that they got married the same year as the 1859 registration have no bearing then?

David, I love these puzzles. Keep 'em comin

Wha kens?

All that can be stated from the birth registers is that this was a seriously late registration of birth.........

How does the date of the marriage fit in with the date of the marriage?, - i.e. Margaret wants to get married, and her intended is aware of her illegitimate child, but then it is realised that said child's birth has never been registered.............

David