General query

[BlueCrane]

I am hoping someone can answer my general question. Was it necessary to register a change of surname (not through marriage) in the late 1800s early 1900s? Thank you in advance. BlueCrane

[Merry]

I don't know about other countries, but in the UK, no, you could (in theory, can!) use any name as long as it's not for illegal purposes.

Some people did do things on an official basis though - I have two people on my tree who had a change of name reported in the London Gazette in the 19C:

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/

and another who had the details in their local paper. I'm sure there were many people who didn't do this though and no doubt some of those are people who seem to vanish!! Sometimes it is still possible to track these people down though - it may just depend on a lot of incidentals coming together to help you.

Do you have someone you are stuck with?

What Merry said.

I would think it would also depend on how well off you were. In the lower classes there would have been absolutely no personal paperwork other than census every 10 years, marriage certificates and criminal registers and electoral register but no personal paper work as such. Living from hand to mouth mostly.

So if you avoided putting correct details on any of that or avoided them completely you could quite easily dissapear. I have a few who either skipped off to the New World some found by a small detail they keep like a birth date or tracked down recently by a DNA connection.

[Phoenix]

Best Mate's granny reinvented herself when she moved to London by ditching her Christian name and giving herself three new ones. No paperwork.

As Maggie says, the only time an identity is needed is in brushes with the authorities. For an ordinary person to change their name, they have to be a stranger in the area. There is usually a reason: avoiding friends/family/creditors or the law. If you needed poor relief, or had enough assets to leave a will, or were arrested by the police, then alternative names might come to light, but otherwise you could use them with no questions asked.

Even with some of the paperwork I have mentioned they could always give false names. I have a criminal in my tree that in his lifetime used 5 names I only know this because the first two criminal charges are in his real name but as the years went on and the law kept catching up with him they started to list his aliases. His sons eventually changed their name and also his brother's family did both the name changes were to Ross one if the criminal's aliases. I have a photo of him that was on one of his first lot of prison paperwork along with who visited and when.

Lost him in 1879 never to be found again. Assumed he left the country.

[BlueCrane]

Thanks for your help, they rather confirm my own thoughts. I am still trying to trace my maternal grandmother's birth details. She has two surnames on her marriage certificate, the first names (4 in all!!!) are identical. In the past kind members of the forum tried to help, but unfortunately were, like me, unable to find concrete details. Just as a side note: she was in her day a record breaking cyclist and in cycling circles of the time (1890s to about 1905) quite famous. She was apparently a bit of a rebel. Once again many thanks for your help.

[Merry]

I have just been reading your previous thread in case this was to do with that!

When you say we didn't find concrete detail, do you mean we didn't find her birth certificate? I think we did find quite a lot about her parents and other family members.

As time goes by FMP are gradually increasing the numer of birth registrations showing mmn before 1911. As you know, it's not possible to search the GRO for mmn without the 'fathers' surname, but you can do this on FMP. You would expect her mmn to be Campbell, but there are no birth registrations as yet showing in 1876 in Hull/Sculcoates etc for mmn Campbell that look like a possible fit (most of them are for boys!). It seems to me it is very likely her birth was never registered. Did you ever purchase the marriage cert for her parents? (1876 Q1 from memory).

[JBee]

My grandmother's birth was never registered in 1876 - her baptism was though.

Perhaps you might find the baptism for her if you know roughly where she was born

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Merry

I have just been reading your previous thread in case this was to do with that!

When you say we didn't find concrete detail, do you mean we didn't find her birth certificate? I think we did find quite a lot about her parents and other family members.

As time goes by FMP are gradually increasing the numer of birth registrations showing mmn before 1911. As you know, it's not possible to search the GRO for mmn without the 'fathers' surname, but you can do this on FMP. You would expect her mmn to be Campbell, but there are no birth registrations as yet showing in 1876 in Hull/Sculcoates etc for mmn Campbell that look like a possible fit (most of them are for boys!). It seems to me it is very likely her birth was never registered. Did you ever purchase the marriage cert for her parents? (1876 Q1 from memory).

That marriage certificate would provide addresses, which might suggest whether William was shore based or possibly at sea. In 1876, no doubt to a great deal of fanfare, you had to register births, with penalties for being late. To a lot of women, it may have seemed expedient not to register a birth if it would advertise an illegitimacy.

[Merry]

Also, the birth cert for Elizabeth Cressey Q1 1880 might help with the 1881 census.

Oh, quite a few trees have a dob for Elizabeth of 15 Feb (day after Valentines!) 1880-1882. Some are probably from the 1939 register which has 1882. However, her birth was reg in Q1 1880. One tree has an address as well as the date (no image of the cert though, so I can't be sure where the address came from):

15 Feb 1880 • 21 James Street, Jarrow, Durham, England

After much fighting with FMP, I did find the address, but no one we wanted was hiding there!

If you want to see the street on Ancestry, search for Jane Wynn b 1825 living in Jarrow. I've only looked at a couple of pages each way. I was thinking if they (Kate and Elizabeth?) were lodgers they might have been indexed with the surname of the householder in error.