Genealogy Chat

As I said in my earlier post, the rules were tightened up in 1875. This example is before then.

Present at Death could simply mean that the person had been in contact with or was aware that the deceased person had been ill. In some cases it was a married daughter who wasn't even living nearby.....!

Having just spotted this after having not been on here for a few days, I feel I must correct some misinformation.
There is a very strict list of people who may register deaths and there are 'priorities' in terms of who a Registrar would wish to act as the informant. Priority is given to relatives, but can extend to 'who found the body', 'causing the body to be cremated (buried)' and 'occupier' the person who 'owns' the building. Information from the 'lower orders' of the list can result in incorrect/inaccurate information.
'Present at the death' does literally mean that and should only be used when the person acting as informant was with the person when they died, although this is sometimes interpreted as being in close proximity within the building at the time, having seeen the person immediately before and after death.
Of course, people acting as informants do sometimes 'twist the facts' to enable a registration to take place.

It would be very nice to think that Jonah Polley was an old friend and that someone was there to grieve for her.

Linda

Whilst many deaths were certified by a doctor (the word should appear on the certificate) it wasn't compulsory until 1875.

Where the death was not certified, the informant was perhaps the unfortunate person who found the body or was one of the first responsible persons to arrive on the scene. That person would then tell the registrar the cause as they had seen it and provided there were no suspicious circumstances to warrant an inquest, this would be accepted, and they would sign as informant.

A similar situation happened with one of my ancestors in 1852, although in his case the death was certified. Originally we could find no trace of the informant (the writing on the cert wasn't too clear, which didn't help) but we did eventually work out she lived next door but one.

But how do you know he was a virtual stranger? If he was the son of Henry and Sarah Polley he could have been best friends with Ronald and looked upon Mary as a second mother. registering a death is never a nice job and perhaps he did it to save his friend, Ronald from having to go through the ordeal.
Of course, this is just supposition, it could have just been that he worked near to the registry office.

Personally, I'd rather have a friend or stranger register my death than a relative who couldn't wait till I died.

(I have no plans to die anytime soon. So chances are my nearest rellies will be my half cousins who I haven't seen for 30+ years and full cousins who I have never met)

Hi Madmeg and Amokavid (how do you choose your names?)

Thanks for all your comments.

I still feel sad that a virtual stranger registered my gggrandmother's death.

Regards Linda

Hi

"Present at the death" can also be misleading, as the deceased might have died alone, in an accident, or with a non-family member or official present. Present at the death often meant the first person or family member to find the body.

I know these things are serious, but I had to chuckle over my g grandfather's death. I got his death cert and it was registered by Llewellyn Platt, son-in-law (my granddad), present at the death. When I told my mum she scoffed and said "my dad was in the pub when my granddad died, they had to go and drag him out".

Don't believe all that you read/hear, and as my wise dad said, only believe half of what you see.

Margaret

Thanks for you help everyone. I'm a little wiser now
Regards Linda

From a website giving tutorials on certificates:-

These people can be informant's:-

1. a person who found the body

***2. inmate of a house or institution - this was a person living at the same address who knew of the event

3. person causing the burial

4. person in charge of the body

This is the web address:-

http://home.clara.net/dixons/Certificates/deaths.htm

Kath. x

I don't think you can do it on Genes census images but you can on Ancestry.

Kath. x

Hi Andrew.

How do you view a previous census page on Genesreunited without knowing any names.

Regards Linda

If you check the previous census page there is an entry for Henry and Sarah Poly, still in the same building. Maybe related to the informant.

Andy

The informant may have been the landlord or owner of the property. This qualified him to be the informant on the death certificate in those days.

Kath. x

Hi Det

It just says X the mark of Jonah Polley present at the death 1 Bromleys Buildings.

I just think its sad that someone who is almost a stranger has to enter your death. I can't understand why her son didn't do it, he was living with her on the 1871 census.

regards Linda

Perhaps he didn't know her deceased husband, and just assumed their son was named after him?

I don't think there is any 'rule' about who could or could not register the death, although they usually had to state their qualification - present at death, son, daughter etc.

I've just received a death certificate for my gggrandmother (Mary Ann Dunbar). I was hoping that it would confirm her husbands name and occupation (William Dunbar - Watchmaker). I was also expecting the informant to be her son (Ronald Dunbar) When I read the details on the certificate that she was the widow of Ronald Dunbar a labourer I automatically assumed I had the wrong certificate. But when I read all the other entries on the certificate i.e.
When and where died - fourteenth April 1871, 1 Bromleys Buildings (the address where she was living with her son Ronald on the 1871 census). The fact that I cannot find her on the 1881 census leads me to believe that she died after the 1871 census and before the 1881 census. I do not recognise the informants name Jonah Polley although his address was 1 Bromleys Buildings he wasn't entered on the 1871 census.
Would someone who obviously didn't t know Mary Ann well enough to know that Ronald was her son and not her husband have been allowed to registerer her death? It has posed more questions than answers.