Declaration by Informant on Birth Certificate

[whittler]

My grandfather was born in 1942 at Albany Road Guildford, Surrey. His mother had been evacuated from London. She was the informant at the Registration of the birth and gave her address in London under which was;
"As per Declaration dated 6th November 1942"

What would the Declaration have been concerning?.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

LJFH
pp
ERH

 

[peter]

From what you've told us it seems that the birth was notified to the registrar in a different district from the one where the birth took place - that would explain the declaration.

 

[whittler]

The birth and it`s Registration were in Guildford but her address was in London. My first thought was that it concerned being away from her usual place of abode. As this is a somewhat complicated family I did wonder if it referred to something that should be followed up. Many thanks.

LJFH
pp
ERH

 

[JoyNor]

Perhaps her address in London was now a bomb site. I have sometimes wondered what people gave as their address if the house no longer existed, eg for the delivery of mail, telegrams etc.. Did they get something like a P.O. box number as a temporary measure

 

[Stuart]

From what you've told us it seems that the birth was notified to the registrar in a different district from the one where the birth took place - that would explain the declaration.

That sounds likely, but what were the dates of the birth and registration in Guildford? The birth should be before 6th November and the (second) registration afterwards. And if there was a registration in London, later rejected, would any trace survive of that cancelled registration?

In Scotland, there was an official procedure for recording a birth a second time, but this was used the other way round, and both registrations remained valid. I've got an example where in the column headed "when and where registered and signature of the registrar", it says "1895/June 10th/at Aberdeen/(signed) James Weston Registrar", and underneath it has "June 17th transcribed at Oyne/Alex. Riddel Registrar". The entry also records her "Domicil" as Oyne, and there is a marginal note of the district of birth as Aberdeen district of Old Machar parish. All very thorough!

The idea was that if a mother went back to her usual place of residence straight after the birth, and had no further connection with that place of birth, it was almost accidental and not much help in finding the record later. An unmarried mother sent away from home to give birth is the obvious example of that, though no doubt there were others. In my example Euphemia Moir was in service in Aberdeen, and the birth clearly marked as "illegitimate".

As far as I know, in England the birth had to be registered where it took place and nowhere else. But the Scottish practice does suggest there would have been quite a lot of cases where people (mothers and others) wanted to do this. So I wonder what could happen when they tried to? Was what happened in Guildford an official way of correcting an error, or improvisation?

 

[JoyNor]

I read that the issue here was not the place of birth, but the address of the informant - which are often totally different. My place of birth is given as the hospital whereas my Dad registered me giving our home address as his residence. Or am I misreading the original query? Perhaps the place of birth was where the mother had been evacuated to specifically to give birth in safety but was not regarded as a regular residence. Was it a temporary domestic address, a home of a friend or relative, a hospital, a mother & baby home, a convent? Lots of possibilities. That "Declaration" may have been a measure implemented by the wartime situation.

 

[peter]

It would have been helpful if the certificate had been shared with us - but nothing we've been told is incompatible with my initial response. It seems clear that the mother went to a different register office because - for whatever reason - she wasn't living in Guildford, and that's why it refers to the declaration.

See this page for the current procedure.

 

[Susan48]

My father's older brother was born on 22 January 1904 at Three Tuns Inn, Easington Lane, Hetton-Le-Hole, Co. Durham. His mother was the informant, with the address "14 South Street, Spenneymoor, as per Declaration dated 19th February 1904". The birth was registered on 20th February at Hetton-Le-Hole in the registration district of Houghton-Le-Spring, i.e. the district where the birth took place. At that time Spennymoor was, I believe, in the registration district of Auckland. My grandfather was a travelling salesman and my grandmother liked to travel with him, so presumably the child was born at the inn while they were away from home. I wonder why the declaration was dated the day before the registration, though. It may be that she'd had to return to Hetton-Le-Hole to register the birth.

 

[peter]

I wonder why the declaration was dated the day before the registration, though. It may be that she'd had to return to Hetton-Le-Hole to register the birth.

It's the opposite - she registered the birth in the district where she was living, and they forwarded it to the district where the child was born, hence the delay of a day (even in Victorian times post didn't always arrive the same day). Again it would it have been helpful and instructive to see the document.

 

[Susan48]

Thank you for the clarification. I have given what I thought was all the relevant information from the certified copy of my uncle's birth certificate, but for reasons of privacy am unwilling to post the document on the Forum. What additional information were you hoping for?

 

[peter]

What additional information were you hoping for?

The more documents we view the more we learn.

 

[whittler]

Thank you for all the comments, particularly JoyNor at 6 and Peter at 7 which are my understanding of my GGM`s situation at the time. I am reluctant to post current documents for privacy reasons.

 

[peter]

I am reluctant to post current documents for privacy reasons.

You're right to be concerned - when posting anything relating to living people (other than celebrities and public figures) it's best to obscure the names, as I do when including screenshots of DNA matches in the newsletter.