Here's something I've never seen before.....

[Merry]

I have been trying to sort out someone who may or may not have changed identity in early adulthood (there's already a thread about this from a couple of years ago, but I wouldn't recommend looking at it unless you want a headache!)

I thought it would be a good idea to try and tie up all the people who might be confused for each other and then see what I had left.

I began with someone called Kate Chatterley who appears on the 1939 Register. She has no date of birth recorded, is listed as single and is living at Knowle Mental Hospital in Fareham Hants (Droxford RD).

I then saw this death reg:

Deaths Mar 1963
CHATTERLEY KATE 74 DROXFORD 6B 460

and as she was single in 1939, this birth:

Births Sep 1889 (>99%)
Chatterly Kate Reading 2c 346

and thought that seemed fine and nothing to do with my tree (which she still isn't). However, I was surprised by what I came across next.

As Kate could also be Kathleen/Catherine etc etc I thought I'd better look harder at the 1889 girl in case she died sooner and/or married etc, so first-off I looked for her in 1891 and was surprised to see that whilst she was living in Reading she was recorded as having been born in Co Tipperary!

I looked at the Irish registrations and she is there, born Thurles, Tipperary, on 11 Jul 1889. Registered by her father Charles who says the mother is his wife Kate nee Hearsey (so everything matches with the 1891 census). The interesting part is that the registration took place by declaration on 24 Aug 1889 and was registered in Ireland in Sept 1889. The reason for this seems to be that Charles was a colour sergeant in the army, so I presume the army brought him and his family back to England before they had time to register the birth of their child in person and the declaration was made at their local register office in Reading.

Surely however, Reading's registrar shouldn't have also added the birth to their own records?

CHATTERLY, KATE mmn HEARSEY
GRO Reference: 1889 S Quarter in READING Volume 02C Page 346

This isn't usual is it? I presumed it must be a mistake. I wonder what info would be given if a request was made for a copy of the Reading cert?!