Find Ancestors

No joy on f/search , Id already been there for both surnames

Makem - try a lookup under the appropriate collection at:

https://www.familysearch.org/s/collection/list#page=1®ion=EUROPE

They don't have complete coverage, but any hits you get will pinpoint where on the reel you should look. Also, there are Durham bishop's transcripts (the church's own back up copy of the OPRs) online, but they're not indexed - just images, and there coverage usually stops 1840-ish.

I have been to the Sunderland Civic Centre on a number of occasions for different certificates and found them very helpful also the Sunderland town centre library has all the local parish registers on reels just a case of ploughing through them when i get the chance which should be this week all going well My local library has the anc****y census but have not been able to get round any of these for a couple of weeks
Thanks again to all parties that have helped
Its great to have helpers when your tied up

Makem - as you no doubt know you can buy BMD certs from both the GRO and from the RD where the events occurred (really the modern RD that currently holds the regos). You can also order m.certs from the vicar etc if the marr is in his current register.

I would recommend buying the b.cert from the local office here, as they're more likely to be responsive to questions abt it. Although they hold the B & D (and sometimes the M) regos that have the informants original signatures, you're unlikely to get an image of that. I think Birmingham's the only local office that routinely certifies an image of the original register. The GRO also certifies images of their regos, but these are not originals, but copies made by the local registrar.


Sunderland Registration Service
Civic Centre
PO Box 108
Sunderland
SR2 7DN

Tel=0191 520 5509
[email protected]

http://www.sunderland.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=505

no, I'm quite positive there will be only one birth certificate ;)

really I don't think one person can have two birth certificates

Chrissie - Surely there will be no details on the 1906 one re the later one, BUT, the 1927 one 'may' reflect back in some way to the original cert??

I am sure they will be the same person.

Dea Xxx

I'm pretty sure there will be a single birth certificate since there was a single birth, one person can't have more than one birth certificate

I'm not sure how it will be done on the certificate but I'm sure it will reflect the re-registration so it wouldn't matter which one you ordered :-)

Let us know how you get on!!

Dea x

I think next week when i check the birth of T.W.Metcalf to see actual birth in1905-06 and it matches with the Pallas birth i will then get the registered birth of T.W.Pallas in 1927 for informant etc
Thanks for all everyones help

Well, I would be tempted in the first instance to get a copy of that re-registration of Thomas Metcalf's birth from 1906:

England & Wales, Birth Index: 1916-2005
about Thomas W Pallas
Name: Thomas W Pallas
Mother's Maiden Surname: Metcalf
Date of Registration: Jan-Feb-Mar 1927
Registration district: Sunderland
Inferred County: Durham
Volume Number: 10a
Page Number: 1223

I don't know what it would say but I think it essential!

Dea x

Hi crissiex you seem to be well informed on the legal requirements. So if he registered his name from Metcalf to Pallas at the age of 21 with mother and her husband (possible real or step father) still alive would there be documentation of the change from A to B and if so would it state the change from A to B on the new registration in 1927

Chrissiex - I was familiar with the English common law, and it's clearly not applicable here.
It's the English statutory law which I think would be relevant, and it's that I'm not familiar with.

but mgnv this birth wasn't in Scotland or Canada it was in England and it is English law that I know and am talking about, I couldn't tell you about Scottish or Canadian law about this because I have no idea :-)

a brief description of the presumption of legitimacy

www.qlrc.qld.gov.au/reports/r20.pdf

'Like most other legal systems, the common law of England drew a distinction between a child born of a legally recognised union and a child born outside such a union.
To be legitimate at common law, it was not necessary that the child be both conceived and born in wedlock. A child conceived before the marriage of his parents was legitimate if they married before its birth; and a child conceived during marriage was legitimate though the marriage came to an end before its birth, either by the death of its father or by the divorce of the parents.
Moreover, it seems that a child who was neither conceived nor born during the marriage of its parents was legitimate provided the parents were married at some time after its conception and before its birth, though the marriage came to an end by the death of the father before the birth.'

to give effect to the presumption of legitimacy ( there are social reasons for that presumption, for treating a child born during a marriage as a child of the husband no matter what ) a child born in those circumstances had to be registered with the mother's husband as the father

that is not to say that the law was not honoured more in the breach than the observance !

Hi mgnv. Had a quick look at the national archives site quite a lot to check he obviously made the legal change by re-registering in 1927 at the age of 21 for one reason or another.The London gazette has lsts of deed poll changes but he's not there and if he changed that way he would not need to re-register.

Makem - re "I do think that after his mother Margaret Metcalfs marriage to Robert Pallas in 1909 he automaticaly was known as a Pallas."

No, nothing automatic abt names - there are conventions, like a wife assuming her spouse's surname, but they needn't be followed. Your name is legally whatever you (or your guardian) want it to be. You might check out:

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/records/research-guide-listing.htm

in particular:
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/records/research-guides/change-of-name.htm

Chrissiex - re "if the mother was married at the time of the birth to a man who was not the father, the child had to be registered in her husband's name by law ( if the mother admitted she was married )"

I'm not sure if this was actually the case, although the only example I've seen where the mum's hubby denied paternity was Scottish. Scottish b.certs have a different format to English ones - the latter have a col for father and a col for mother - Scottish ones have them in the same col.

You can see an example of a Scotish birth entry via:
http://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/Content/Help/index.aspx?r=554&402
The normal format for the parents' column is something like:
William McIntosh
Wm's occupation
Margaret McIntosh MS Rennie
Date & Place of marriage

I've only ever seen one b.cert where the mother's hubby denied paternity. The parents' col in this case said:
Blank
Margaret McIntosh MS Rennie, wife of William McIntosh - Wm's occupation
Date & Place of marriage

If one lives in Canada, one can see this on:
http://www.history.ca/video/default.aspx
It's on Ancestors in the Attic, Episode 16 (Birth Mother) with 17:30 left to play.

Thanks for comment .Most confusing to us mere mortals

names in English registrations don't actually have to do with legitimacy I think

it is very common to see births in the 1900s registered in two surnames, either at the same time or with a second surname added years after the birth

if the mother was married at the time of the birth to a man who was not the father, the child had to be registered in her husband's name by law ( if the mother admitted she was married )

however the child could also be registered at the same time ( or later ) in the real father's surname if he consented at the time of registration

in this case the child was probably always 'known as' Pallas but his parents put his official name on the census in 1911

Hi mgnv. I do think that after his mother Margaret Metcalfs marriage to Robert Pallas in 1909 he automaticaly was known as a Pallas, I was just wondering why it was not made official till 1927.The death record which jax gave me above also stated his birth as 2-12-1905 which matches the army record of stepfather Robert supplied by dea, hopefully when i go and check the Metcalf birth at my library that also matches.If it was not an adoption maybe he changed his name for work reasons or maybe Robert is actually the real father but befor they decided to wed i really dont think i will find the true reason as on his marriage certificate in 1934 i'll bet fathers name is Robert Pallas

Makem - no, I don't think it does.

I know the Adopted Children's Register dates from 1927, and (from the army record) we know Thos was over 21 on 1/1/1927.

I don't know the English law, but the Act for Scotland passed a couple of years later only allowed the adoption of minors (i.e., under 21s).

So I don't think Thos was adopted under the 1927 Act, but I don't know for sure.
Again, I don't know the English law, but under Scots law, the subsequent marr of Thomas's mum and dad would legitimize his birth if they were both free to marry at the time of his birth. I looked into this as it applied to 2 of my g gran's half brothers - the elder was already named Pallas, but the younger was Thomas Metcalf, say, and he changed his name after they wed to Thomas Metcalf Pallas at the age of 16.