Genealogists' Forum - We have branches everywhere!



Go Back   Genealogists' Forum - We have branches everywhere! > Research > Research Questions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 30-10-19, 09:19
Merry's Avatar
Merry Merry is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 21,264
Default Electoral roll Q

I know the age of majority was switched from 21 to 18 in the UK in 1970.


I have a woman registered for birth in Q3 1943. She seems to have been married in Q2 of 1961, So probably aged 17, though in theory she could have just turned 18. She then appears in the e-rolls with her husband in 1962, 63 and 1964. The first of these entries shows a bold type Y against the entry, which I thought meant that some time during the lifetime of the register (so 1962/3) the person would become an adult.

I'm bothered that the Y annotation is showing for the e-roll for 1962 when her age would have been either 18 or 19. I know the data might have been collected in 1961 when she might have been 17 (almost 18 if the info was collected immediately after the wedding) or 18, but did the Y refer to turning 18 or 21? If it's 21 then this can't be the right person, but I'm struggling to convince myself it's not her!
__________________
Merry

"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 30-10-19, 09:29
Phoenix's Avatar
Phoenix Phoenix is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,616
Default

You probably need the preamble - which I've never seen in my local electoral rolls - explaining the instructions given to officials. Is it possible that in (say) Borough elections, the age of majority was lower?
Or, possibly, did she lie to her husband? I'm not aware that you need proof of age, only for the householder to state that the details he had entered were correct.
__________________
The chestnuts cast their flambeaux
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 30-10-19, 09:50
Merry's Avatar
Merry Merry is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 21,264
Default

I had wondered those two things! I'm trying to find the answer to your first suggestion.

This family are very annoying! They do everything to sidestep me finding them!
__________________
Merry

"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 30-10-19, 10:48
kiterunner's Avatar
kiterunner kiterunner is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 25,270
Default

Any chance her birth was a late registration or re-registration?
__________________
KiteRunner

Family History News updated 29th Feb
Findmypast 1871 census update
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 30-10-19, 11:28
Merry's Avatar
Merry Merry is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 21,264
Default

Hmmm...I looked up a couple of other people from the same roll with a Y annotation and they were both registered for birth in the first half of 1941. Also, at the start of the Ward it states, "Y printed before a name indicates that the Elector will be entitled to vote only at Elections held after 1st October 1962."

So, that works for the other people! My lady must have been 19 on the first day of Q4 of 1962. Maybe it's not her or maybe she lied about her age? I wish certificates were £1.50 rather than wills!

Kate, goodness knows! This family are all over the place. Some change their names, possibly to avoid the authorities/court/army etc, several cohabit with people they are not married to, often whilst married to someone else living nearby and when they have children the mothers just use any of the previous surnames they have used in the past for mmn! And every important event seems to happen just the wrong side of a date when information gathered might help. If the 1911 census had been taken in 1912 or 1914, the 1939 register in 1940, 1941 or 1943 and/or the marriage of this young lady had taken place a bit later I could be laughing!

I don't know if the 1943 birth is a late registration etc (it doesn't look like a re-reg). The parents were not married (as far as I can see) and there are no other births with the same surname and mmn. The father isn't on the 1939 register (army?) and I don't know who the mother is, except for her potential maiden surname (common).
__________________
Merry

"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 18:40.


Hosted by Photon IT

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 PL3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.