Genealogy Chat

Hello. My ancestor TCGriffith was 'adopted' in 1856. This must have been an informal arrangement, because legal adoption didn't start until 1927. His birth cert shows born 16 Sept 1856 in Alby, Norfolk, England; registered 15 Oct 1856 by mother AEGriffith. Father named as HTGriffith, mother as AEGriffith formerly Bryan. My question is this: are these the birth parents or the adoptive parents? Would love to know....! Very grateful for any advice, thanks.
Maggie

If this is your ancestor you must know his full name? Who did he marry? What were his childrens' names? From which child do you descend?

His birth? Dec quarter 1856:

Griffith Thomas Cumber Aylsham 4b 79

Aylsham district covers Alby.

Why do you think they are not his birth parents?

1861 England Census

Name: Thomas Comber Griffith
Age: 4
Estimated Birth Year: abt 1857
Relation: Son
Father's Name: Henry Thomas Griffith
Mother's Name: Anna Elizabeth Griffith
Gender: Male
Where born: Alby, Norfolk, England

Civil parish: Thwaite
County/Island: Norfolk

Registration district: Aylsham
Sub-registration district: Buxton

Henry Thomas Griffith 32
Anna Elizabeth Griffith 20
Thomas Comber Griffith 4
Henr Crista Wandes Jas Griffith 3
Charles Edwd Osborne Griffith 2
Emma Mary Bryon Griffith 7 MO

Thank you all for your input. Most of this info I already have, but family tradition has him as adopted. I'm wondering whether he was born to eg a local girl, spinster relative etc, and the Griffiths adopted him before his birth was registered, so that they registered him as their own. Is this possible?

Do you have him in the 1871 census? Is he with the same parents? He could've been adopted after 1861.

Ozi


Update: I see in 1871 he is at Haileybury College - classy!

If he was adopted at all it was between birth and registration. I have all his history since then. Thanks

Here's his baptism record.

name: Thomas Comber Griffith
gender: Male
baptism/christening date: 19 Oct 1856
baptism/christening place: Thurgarton, Norfolk, England
father's name: Henry Thomas Griffith
mother's name: Anna Elizabeth
indexing project (batch) number: C01720-4

Hmmmm, as Henry and Anna/Ann were married in May 1856 there's a possibility he was adopted. It could also be a story to cover up the very early birth, perhaps by Thomas himself or later generations who found out about the discrepancy.

groom's name: Henry Thomas Griffith
bride's name: Ann Elizabeth Bryan
marriage date: 06 May 1856
marriage place: Selby, York, England
groom's father's name: Thomas Griffith
bride's father's name: Matthew Bryan
indexing project (batch) number: M10900-5

This ais his christening. If Henry and Anna are his parents on birth cert, christening record and census - well, decide for yourself!

Name: Thomas Comber Griffith
Gender: Male
Baptism/Christening Date: 19 Oct 1856
Baptism/Christening Place: Thurgarton, Norfolk, England
Birth Date:
Birthplace:
Death Date:
Name Note:
Race:
Father's Name: Henry Thomas Griffith
Father's Birthplace:
Father's Age:
Mother's Name: Anna Elizabeth
Mother's Birthplace:
Mother's Age:
Indexing Project (Batch) Number: C01720-4
System Origin: England-EASy
Source Film Number: 1526671
Reference Number:

well, it was not at all unusual for brides to be pregnant when they got married!


One line of OH's is descended from millers-cum-farmers living in Lancashire and Westmoreland, so quite well-to-do families................. a contact and I once worked out that about 75% of the brides were at least 5 months pregnant when they got married!

Pregnancy on marriage was not actually all that frowned upon, especially in the country and villages ..... it showed the bride would be fecund, and there would be children to help look after the older members of the family!

It was the middle-class Victorians, the shopkeepers and industry people living in towns, who became so very prissy and upright citizens ........ yet when you look at some of their marriage certificates compared with birth of the eldest child, they weren't that prim and proper either! ;-)



I would suggest that all the evidence points to him being the child of Henry Thomas and Anna ........... and the story was probably made up by later generations!



sylvia

Spot on, Sylvia.


Ozi

thanks, Ozi

Thank you all for your input. You've confirmed my suspicions - a little genteel cover-up! Cheers all!
Maggie

glad we could help!