Genealogy Chat

Can anyone tell me if a child was re-registered under the Illegitimacy Act of 1926 did they have to be officially adpoted or could they just legally be known by the re-registered name?

You can be called any name as long as it isn't for fraudulent purposes.
Jan

You can be Known by what ever name you want to call your self as long as you are not doing it for fraudulant purposes, (no such thing as a legal name) they never had to formally adopt as the couple would be the biological parents anyway

Roy

By the 1926 Act an illegitimate child could be legitimated by the subsequent marriage of its parents, provided that they were free to marry when the child was born. In 1959 this proviso was abolished. Since the Family Law Reform Act of 1969 the rights of an illegitimate child have been broadly similar to those of a legitimate child, though in no case can it succeed to, or transmit a right to, any dignity or title.

from https://wiki.familysearch.org/en/Illegitimacy_in_England

Also this link is interesting

http://bi-gen.blogspot.com/2011/01/legitimacy-act-1926.html

Roy

Unless the situation has changed within the last 40 years, I beg to disagree with the comment that there is no cross reference between the old and the new, based on evidence within our own family.

The situation we have is as quoted:-

"This may happen, for instance, when a woman has children by a man other than her current husband, divorces and then marries the natural father of her children."

If you look at the GRO Index, all the original regs (in the name of the current husband at the time) are cross ref'd to the name of their natural father, re-registered several years later.

I don't really understand some of the replies. I can only site my own family, self and siblings.

We were all born out of wedlock. 1958 parents married. 1960 we we all registered. For years we were unable to get copies of the original certs to see the actual birth addresses. There is a mark against the records in the registers for the 3 girls.
It was when Freedom of info Act became law I was able to obtain all the certs.
Surprised to find I have actually 3 changes - Father a Military officer my mother tried to hide the fact parents weren't married.

Reregistered - Found my brothers first names were completely changed to his known name. There is no mark in the registers indicating why his name was changed so it is like he is 2 people born the same day.

For years all my fathers Military mail was sent to the officers club in London. Don't know how but my mother recieved his pension not his legal wife who had no children. Though on his war records his legal wife is mentioned but his next of kin was my mother.

There was no adoption or change of name by deed poll just in my case a military swore affidavit.

Susanne, when your brother was re registered their will be nothing on the index to say why, but on his original entry their will be a reference
eg, born john smith sept quarter 1962 vol1 page123 j/68 the reference j/68 means to look on the index for the June quarter 1968 for the amendment/ re registered birth

Roy

My mothers birth record in her mothers maiden name has no note.

The re-registration has her maiden surname registered in both the birth year and the re-registration year (the year after my grandparents married), there is a note on the birth year one telling you where to look.

Hope you can understand this.

Roy

There isn't any mark on the record sheets for my brother - I was so surprised by it.
There isn't even a coment at the bottom of the page like some entries I've seen.The second entry likewise has no mark only a different page ref number that is all.

some times things do go missing, i could not find a birth for my grandfather on the index, but my mother had his original birth cert dated 1887 so i new he was registered, I then phoned the registry office where the birth was registered and they found it no problem,
I asked the lady why i could not find the birth on the GRO index and her reply was that i would be surprised at how many records don't make it onto the GRO index,

so i suppose an amendment could easily be missed

Roy

Many thanks to all of you for your replies.

Janet

Thank you Howard I think this confirms what I originally thought that my older brother was re-registered with my fathers surname after my mother married my father even though he was not his father. My fathers brother had confirmed to me that he was not my fathers child. His birth was first registered in my mothers maiden name as she was not married at that time then a note at the end of the original entry says that it was re-registered under the illegitimacy act of 1926. As you say it seems that as long as my father agreed to this and signed the new entry it became a legal document and his birth was legitimised.

Many thanks

Janet

H - I'm surprised that the informants are allowed to type in their signatures.

I have a registration under the 1926 Legitimacy Act made by the 'child' who, in 1939, reregistered his own birth that took place in 1892.

He lied and made sure that the name by which he had been always known, his mother's maiden name, was recorded as his father's surname.

His mother's maiden name was recorded as her married surname and his father's surname as his mother's maiden name!

Oh what a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive ;-)

Chris

I re registered two of my children in February this year, the registrar typed all the info into a computer and then printed copies (cannot remember how many) but me and my wife definitely had to sign two copies for each child with the old type of Fountain Pen, which is a nightmare for left handed people as we both are.

so they do still hold hard copy's (signed in the old way)

Roy