recording error or mislaid

[h32]

[I am trying unsuccessfully to find a birth record for Charles Connerty and have found the following:

1841 Census Collingwood Buildings, Collingwood Street Liverpool, registration district Liverpool, sub reg district St Martin, piece 563, book 4, folio 11, page number 14,Charles Connorty age 5 years but is it possible the age is incorrect as there is another son Thomas aged 10 in the census but he was older see below;
Baptism 27 July born 11 July 1828 Thomas Conaty son of Caroli & Margareta Conaty, nee Trainer.
Another son John is aged 5 and his baptism confirms his age; Baptism 26 April, born 11 April 1835 son of Charles & Margaret, nee Trainer.
I wondered if Charles was a twin but surely he would have been baptised along side his sibling. He may have died but I cannot locate an entry for his death.
I came across a baptism for a Charles Connaught, Baptism 23 October born 10 October 1831 son of Charles & Margaret Connaught and wondered if the parents surname had been incorrectly recorded.
I have researched the following Church archives in Liverpool; St Anthony’s Scotland Rd, St Patrick's Park Place, St Mary’s Highfield St, Saint Peter’s Seel St, Saint Nicholas Copperas Hill and I have not been able to locate Charles.
Does anybody have any thoughts or ideas that could be of use to me please.
Best regards h32

[kiterunner]

It could be that they thought ages over 5 were supposed to be rounded down to a multiple of 5, instead of ages over 15. So they would have rounded Thomas's age down from 12 to 10 and could have rounded Charles jr's down from, 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 down to 5. In which case the Charles Connaught baptism would fit him. Does that baptism record give their address and father's occupation to check against info that you have about the Connerty family?

[h32]

No mention of occupations or address only Godparents names peter & Margaret Bannon and Pastor/Priest name Richard Croft.

[kiterunner]

This could be him on the 1861 census:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...e&pId=23019105

No 2 No 4 Court Derby St, Liverpool
Charles Connerty Head Mar 28 Car driver Lancashire Liverpool
Mary Ann Do Wife Do 24 Do Do
Charles Do Son 4 Scholar Do Do
Margaret Ann Do Daur 18 months Do Do

This looks likely to be his marriage record (although after the birth of son Charles):
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...ce&pId=1976323

24 May 1859 at St Nicholas, Liverpool, to Mary Ann Wareing. He gives his occupation as coachman and his father is Charles Conerty, bricklayer.

[Merry]

Although Charles and Mary didn't marry until 1859, this may well be the registration of their son, registered as if his parents were married:

CONNERTY, CHARLES mmn WARING
GRO Reference: 1857 M Quarter in WEST DERBY Volume 08B Page 345

Margaret's birth reg has had an amendment:

CONNERTY, MARGARET ANNE WARING
GRO Reference: 1859 D Quarter in LIVERPOOL Volume 08B Page 104

CONNERTY, MARGARET ANNE WARING
GRO Reference: 1859 D Quarter in SAINT GEORGE LIVERPOOL Volume 08B Page 104 Occasional Copy: A


Occasional Copy means that a copy of the register entry was submitted to GRO outside of the usual quarterly returns process. This almost always will be due to some sort of correction, or change, to the register entry.

In such cases there is no "original copy" to order, because the register entry itself has been changed, and any certificate issued will always reflect that change (but it should be clear what the change has been).

So, if you are ordering a copy of this certificate from the GRO, in theory you could click either of the above entries and receive exactly the same document, as the index is just giving you two reference points to the same document. That's the theory, but in practice I would always order the "Occasional copy" 'version' just in case an image of the original certificate has not been removed from the system as it should have been and to encourage the issue of the correct, altered, certificate!

Whilst I was looking I also saw this registration, presumably another child for this couple:

CONNERTY, MARY WARING
GRO Reference: 1861 D Quarter in LIVERPOOL Volume 08B Page 115

[h32]

Thanks for all the replies the Charles in the 1861 census ticks all the boxes and appears to be correct.
Cheers h32