Files from Scotlands people

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 4:32 pm

emanday wrote:
DavidWW wrote:Most unusual for a registrar to accept this format based on just 11 months !!

David
I just know I'm going to regret asking this but why wouldn't a registrar accept that a child wasn't the husband's after an 11 month absence 8-[

Only because how could the registrar know that the informant wasn't massaging the period involved that was declared?, such that the supposed 11 months period wasn't actually 10 or even 9 months, so that there had to be some considerable doubt as to whether or not William Stoddart wasn't in fact the father of this child

............

In Scots Law the automatic presumption was that the husband was the father of the child.

In such situations, it's much more likely to find that a period of several years of no contact is involved before the registrar will accept that the husband is not the father of the child.

David

Post by **emanday** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:10 pm

I'll bow to your greater knowledge of the ways of the registrars of the time.

However, I find it very difficult to believe that any married woman would lie and deliberately label her own child as illegitimate . Even if done out of spite, she would have to know that her baby would carry that stigma for the rest of its life.

Doesn't bear thinking about.

JustJean · Post by **JustJean** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:10 pm

my turn to post the foolish question now.....

So what would this new mother have to gain by publicly stating that her husband was not the father of the baby she just delivered??? She wasn't trying to point the finger at someone else...no names are stated! Looks to me like it took a bit of courage to stand up and say your husband had walked out on you and you had conceived a child with someone else. What did she have to gain? Perhaps she was just an honest woman!

And perhaps it was public knowledge that her husband had gone missing or even where he was hanging his hat and so the registrar already knew!

Ok....you can clearly see I'm influenced by a lifetime of small town living

Best wishes
Jean

Post by **emanday** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:13 pm

Ok....you can clearly see I'm influenced by a lifetime of small town living

No, Jean. I think you are, like me, thinking like a woman

JustJean · Post by **JustJean** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:16 pm

emanday wrote:
Ok....you can clearly see I'm influenced by a lifetime of small town living
No, Jean. I think you are, like me, thinking like a woman

Ain't that odd!

Ahh well....my hats off to Mary Wright

Best wishes
Jean

MissNUFC · Post by **MissNUFC** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:13 pm

Thank you to everyone who has helped decipher that extract. I've been cross eyed more times than i care to say trying to read the damn thing

Thing is william was supposed to go to china in July 1870 according to a Poor relief application, but if the lad was born in Nov 1870 thats only 4 months not 11, Annoying thing is, the illigitimate lad Alex is my great grandfather so without his father i can't trace any further back on his side

Thanks Again
Vikki

Russell · Post by **Russell** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 11:00 pm

Hi Vicki

Although he was given no middle name(s) on his birth entry did he use a middle name on his marriage certificate or any other record? We have several in our various branches who used a middle name without it ever being formally registerd.
Sometimes the middle name can give a clue to putative father by using his surname
Its maybe grasping at straws but thats better than admitting defeat on a line.

Russell

MissNUFC · Post by **MissNUFC** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 11:31 pm

Hi Russell,

He has no middle name in any other documents. The only point i can pick up on is that he's the only child to be named "Alexander" so i can only think that has a connection to his real father.
I found the Poor Reliief application for his mother in 1901 and she says on that, that the "putative father is Wm Baird Rennie, contractor, deceased" Of course i can't find any record of him being born, getting married or dying at the right age range, just my luck really.
Any thing else i could try would be much appreciated i'm running out of ideas

Vikki

nelmit · Post by **nelmit** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:38 am

Hi all,

I can't believe he doesn't have something to do with this Alexander Rennie who has a son called William Baird Rennie.

Dwelling: Scotts Land Crosshill
Census Place: Old Monkland, Lanark, Scotland
Source: FHL Film 0203698 GRO Ref Volume 652-1 EnumDist 7 Page 27
Marr Age Sex Birthplace
Alexander RENNIE M 33 M Tollcross, Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Head
Occ: Brickwork Contractor
Isabella C. RENNIE M 33 F Cadder ((...)), Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Wife
William B. RENNIE 9 M Cadder ((...)), Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Son
Occ: Scholar

Kind regards,
Annette M

MissNUFC · Post by **MissNUFC** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 1:15 am

Hi Annette,

Yeah i was just looking into that on when i checked back here. William was born in 1872. The Parents got married in 67 and Alex was born in 1848.
So the Dates mean the father could be alex but she says its william ?!?!?!?!

They don't make it easy do they

Vikki