Genealogy Chat

My father's sister was born on 21st January and died on 14th February and her birth and death were registered together on 16th February. I have failed to find a record of her burial, so I have come to the conclusion that she was buried in an open grave at the local cemetery. I was told by an elderly lady that babies were usually buried in graves along the walls of the cemetery chapel, so when it rained, the water from the chapel roof would fall upon their graves and make the graves holy.

I mentioned this on another thread, but my dad started our family history years ago, and he found that on his grandfathers marriage certificate, that he was a widower. Dad has been curious about his first wife for years, now I have found her and him on the 1881 census with 2 boys aged 1 year and 1month. By the end of 1881, both boys had died. In 1887, his wife died at the age of 30. I am now wondering if they had any more children between then and the wife`s death. He later married my grandfather`s mother. I keep wondering, what on earth must they have gone through. No wonder he emigrated to Canada in the early 1900s.

Hello again Jacqui, I have had a bit of a snoop around, and there are such things as stillborn registers. The three main GRO sites for the UK mention them, and the one for England and Wales gives quite a bit if information. In Scotland, I thinkk it may be a bit difficult to get information from the register. Take a look at the GRO sites, it is a bit too long to put on the board Paul

I remember once on FreeBMD, I was searching for the birth of a relative and found someone on the same page as her with a very unusual name. When I looked up the death of my relative's father, there, on the same page, was the death of the unusually named baby (who was actually 18 when he died). Apart from the tragic fact he died so young, what are the chances of that coincidence?

hiya Carole - Thanks for your input - sorry I didn't mention you in my earlier reply - senior moment I'm afraid - cannot remember more than 3 names at a time. It comes from dealing with ancestors day in and day out. The reason I feel I need to know about the poor mites that didnt survive in my family is for me to get a really full picture of the family (as I didn't know hardly anything about the family before I started on this game, I am amazed as to how involved I am getting with the day to day information I am gathering on them - not only names and dates etc but how they lived, where they lived, what the area was like, what they did on a daily basis) I'm afraid it's going to take me much longer than I anticipated to go back down the years -= I just feel the need to know and fill in as many blanks as possible; know what I mean? jA\CQUI

Please don't quote me, but I believe that some areas/districts had such a thing as a "stillborn register". I will try and find out a little more. Paul

Years ago, if a mother asked to see her stillborn child, there were gasps of horror. Fortunately, it is now the norm. Every parent wants to see what their baby looks like, even if he or she didnt survive. On the other hand, I don`t see the point of looking at dead bodies of people I know. To me, it is simply an empty shell, but I respect others who wish to do so. Neither view is right or wrong, just a matter of personal opinion. In my grandmother`s case, the baby was carried by a member of the family, and buried with someone who was being buried at the time, usually by prior arrangement. I dont think that the child was even given a name, which I think is sad. This was all caused because grandmother was rhesus negative and grandfather was positive. We have come a long way since then. How many times have we trawled through 19th century death indices, and seen all those infant deaths. All those zeros in the age column.

Just caught up - many thanks to Margaret, Eileen, Deborah and not forgetting Georgina!! Lots of ideas for me to ponder over - I'll consult the oracle tomorrow at work and find out exactly what should have happened, and then dilute it according to the income and expenditure of my rellies. I believe that Margaret's supposition will be applicable in my case - but I just need to know for certain - do you know what I mean? I cannot just leave one section of the family without finding out simply everything I can about them - compulsive behaviour or what? Thanks to all. Jacqui

Hi Jaceline, Apparently, if a baby was still born, the would be no registration of birth or death. But, if the baby lived for even a very short time, there should be both a birth & death registration. You might find Barbara Dixon's website helpful for BMD's and relevant rules and info. http://home(.)clara(.)net/dixons/ remove brackets then click on GRO Certs link Lots of useful info! Debbie

hELLO jACQUI, I have found out that if you where poor and had a still born or a baby that lived for a couple of hours that they were taken to the local church and left at the gates, so that the priest/vicar would find them and quietly bury them, this meant the family got away with paying and the poor mite remained unknown. How sad is that! regards Eileen

From what I have been lead to belive in some case's the babies are buried along with a newly dead someone else, they would put the baby in the coffin with them so that they would have a Christian buriel. Ok so the death wasnt recorded or put on the headstone, if there was one, but at least the baby wasnt alone. Maggie

Hiya George - sweet 18!!! They do say that every novel is based on fact, and it would seem to be so in this case then, wouldn't you say? I don't think my welsh grannie would have been capable of writing a novel (but if you tell me the author I'll get them on plagerism!!) Jacqui

I once read a historical novel set in a village in the 1800's and the main character had a still birth and they buried the baby under the hedge on the nearby moors if I remember rightly. George

No Carol - I said it was gruesome not morbid! Gruesome in that the poor mites were obviously whisked away to god knows where for burial - that's rather gruesome in my book - no recognition of their short lives really. Still births are registered now I think, and their births celebrated by the parents (as it should be of course) I am just curious as to where the remains would have been interred; I was told the tale many years ago by my welsh grannie that if any lady gave birth to a still born child, or a child that was perhaps "not perfectly formed" then in our village the remains of the deceased were quietly interred under the rhododendron hedge at the local cemetery without benefit of service or ceremony of any kind. That's what I find gruesome and wondered if anyone else had heard of similar practices throughout the country, bearing in mind that "laying-out ladies" usually doubled as "midwives" in the 1800's and possibly early 1900's and were indeed apparently a "law unto themselves". Jacqui

I am not sure, but my grandmother lost about 8 after mum was born in 1923. Some were still born, some lived a few days. She told me that only the live births were registered, the still births were not. Apparently, a still birth was not considered to be a birth at all. You say its morbid, but surely we must be morbid, spending our time trawling through death records.

Just a litte poser for you - I should know the answer to this, but it's niggling at me and I can't get my head around it properly - must be the wine! Baby born (any time really during 1800s and early 1900's) dies within a few days (or perhaps stillborn). Now, would the parents who are hard up anyway register the birth and then register the death? or would then simply register the death? or perhaps even not bother with either? Gruesome I know but legend has it that some births were not even recognised by either birth registration or death registration, and likely that their burials went unrecorded too. I have the almost certain possibility of two children between my dad's birth and his next surviving sister (some 4 years) which seems logical giving the "breeding periods" between subsequent siblings, but cannot find either birth or death records for these poor mites. Any suggestions gratefully taken on board. Jacqui