I've a puzzle on which I'd be grateful for guidance. My ggg grandfather, James Harbour,and ggg grandmother, Elizabeth Nurse, were married in 1853 in Wortham in Suffolk. A child had been born to Elizabeth a month earlier and from the censuses I had presumed he was their firstborn. However, I find he was registered at 27 days old and a day before the wedding under the name James Nurse, with no details listed for the father. Is the obvious conclusion that James was not the father - as I believe at that time he could have been registered as the father despite the illegitimacy? Could they have waited until after the wedding to register the child as James Harbour (the name he appears with in the censuses)?
Has anyone come across alternative explanations?
I'm curious!
ID:2169
* Illegitimate birth certifcate 1 day before wedding
-
tommy166
- Gold
- Posts: 20
- Joined: 20 Dec 2006 21:55
- Family Historian: V6.2
- Location: Bournemouth, Dorset, UK
Illegitimate birth certifcate 1 day before wedding
If the child was born out of wedlock, the father's name could only be entered on the certificate if both he & the mother were present at the registration. Then the son could have been legitimately used either surname. So having no father mentioned doesn't prove whether James was the father or not! I don't think their marriage would have altered that situation, as they were unmarried when the child was born.
So I suggest seeing who is named as father on the child's marriage certificate as that should be the natural father, or see if a father is mentioned on the baptism register.
Tom
So I suggest seeing who is named as father on the child's marriage certificate as that should be the natural father, or see if a father is mentioned on the baptism register.
Tom
Illegitimate birth certifcate 1 day before wedding
Thanks for this. I will check the baptism register when I visit the Records Office at the end of next month. Unfortunately I haven't (yet) been able to trace James 'junior' as far as a marriage. The family moved to Whittington, Derbyshire to work in the collieries in the mid-1850s and I can find him in the next two censuses still with the family, but not any further...but will keep looking.
I believe that until 1875 a mother could register an illegitimate child and name the father - it was only after this date, with the changes in registration, that the father had to be present. Also, I read in GENUKI that, although uncommon, an illegitimate child could be reregistered after the parents marriage and would then be considered legitimate ... if so surely James & Elizabeth could have delayed the registration until after their wedding to have the same effect? If James was the father wouldn't he want to be recorded as such and their child to be legitimate?
Perhaps this is all too subtle and maybe the stigma of illegitimacy was not so significant as I am presuming. It's easy with the benefit of the information sources we have now to find these things out. However, as illiterate farm labourer and house servant these things may not have been known or considered important!
Fingers crossed the parish records might reveal something.
I believe that until 1875 a mother could register an illegitimate child and name the father - it was only after this date, with the changes in registration, that the father had to be present. Also, I read in GENUKI that, although uncommon, an illegitimate child could be reregistered after the parents marriage and would then be considered legitimate ... if so surely James & Elizabeth could have delayed the registration until after their wedding to have the same effect? If James was the father wouldn't he want to be recorded as such and their child to be legitimate?
Perhaps this is all too subtle and maybe the stigma of illegitimacy was not so significant as I am presuming. It's easy with the benefit of the information sources we have now to find these things out. However, as illiterate farm labourer and house servant these things may not have been known or considered important!
Fingers crossed the parish records might reveal something.
Illegitimate birth certifcate 1 day before wedding
I now have looked up the parish register of the baptism on Dec 4th 1853 (after James & Elizabeth were married). It states 'James son of Elizabeth Nurse now Harbour ...' no father is mentioned. So I suspect James H. senior was not the father, despite his name being adopted by the child.