Genealogy Chat

Thanks OC, That's given me a new line of thought- maybe it was the fhusband and not the wife who was the natural parent - this fits in with family rumour that the husband was a bit of a cad! Joan

If she was a married woman then the Registrar automatically assumes that her newborn child is the child of her husband - that is the law of the land (and still stands today). So, unless she OR her husband told the Registrar any different, I would expect the child to be registered under her mother's married name. In fact, even if the husband DID tell the Registrar different, all that would happen is that there would be a blank space on the cert where the father's name should go. A child's surname is not actually given on a cert, it is inferred from the surname of the parents. So any child born to the mother would have, by inference, the married surname of the mother - because that is what the mother's name is! Hope that makes sense. OC

If a child was born out of wedlock in the early 20th century to a mother who was married (not to the child's father), what is the likely surname that the child would be given? Have tried both the mother's married name, and her maiden name without luck. Are there any other possibilities? Thanks Joan