2
edits
History of Parish Registers in England (view source)
Revision as of 20:57, 10 February 2016
, 10 February 2016Made some minor changes - mainly spelling mistakes, missing / incorrect punctuation. This article could be improved by tidying up some of the sentences which are written in a shorthand / abbreviated style
No edit summary |
m (Made some minor changes - mainly spelling mistakes, missing / incorrect punctuation. This article could be improved by tidying up some of the sentences which are written in a shorthand / abbreviated style) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
Some ministers made copies for the Bishop as entries were made in the register, some waited until the end of the year to make these copies. Some entries could have been missed. Most often the original parish entry is more complete. | Some ministers made copies for the Bishop as entries were made in the register, some waited until the end of the year to make these copies. Some entries could have been missed. Most often the original parish entry is more complete. | ||
In '''1603''' Every parish chest should have three locks one for Priest and two parish clerks to have keys. Only could be opened when all three could be present. Priests sometime keep notes in day books with entries of Chr. Marr. and Bur. and was kept until all could get to the chest. Other problems with parish registers. Sometimes private baptisms did | In '''1603''' Every parish chest should have three locks one for Priest and two parish clerks to have keys. Only could be opened when all three could be present. Priests sometime keep notes in day books with entries of Chr. Marr. and Bur. and was kept until all could get to the chest. Other problems with parish registers. Sometimes private baptisms did not get into the records. Early registers did not have any form to follow in recording the date and was left entirely up to the ministers. So depended on minister how much information he wished to give. | ||
'''1641-42''' protestation rolls. | '''1641-42''' protestation rolls. | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
In the restoration of '''1650''' of Charles they went back to the church to keep chr. marr. and bur. The civil records that were kept were filed in with the parish in their registers. | In the restoration of '''1650''' of Charles they went back to the church to keep chr. marr. and bur. The civil records that were kept were filed in with the parish in their registers. | ||
After '''1650''' it is quite usual to find entries explaining the situattion during the Interrgerum. One rector stated that on 23 April 1643 "Our church was defaced our font thrown down and new forms of prayer appointed". Another minister not quite so bold wrote "''When the war, more than a civil war was raging most grimly between royalists and parliamentarians throughout the greatest part of England, I lived well because I lay low''". | After '''1650''' it is quite usual to find entries explaining the situattion during the Interrgerum. One rector stated that on 23 April 1643 "''Our church was defaced our font thrown down and new forms of prayer appointed''". Another minister not quite so bold wrote "''When the war, more than a civil war was raging most grimly between royalists and parliamentarians throughout the greatest part of England, I lived well because I lay low''". | ||
'''1656''' was the year of the plague and many burial entries in the parishes. Also the fire of London destroyed London Bridge and many of the records of London destroyed at that time. | '''1656''' was the year of the plague and many burial entries in the parishes. Also the fire of London destroyed London Bridge and many of the records of London destroyed at that time. | ||
| Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
'''1680''' Charles 11 passed an Act requiring all corpses to be buried in wool, to bolster the woollen industry. affidavit required only from Minister. | '''1680''' Charles 11 passed an Act requiring all corpses to be buried in wool, to bolster the woollen industry. affidavit required only from Minister. | ||
'''1631-1706''' fee of 6d introduced for registration of births which was generally ignored. People were not having their children christened. Minister was fined if he did not record the vital records and people | '''1631-1706''' fee of 6d introduced for registration of births which was generally ignored. People were not having their children christened. Minister was fined if he did not record the vital records and people were fined if they did not bring their children in. This was hard to enforce so did not last long. | ||
In '''1694''' the government thought it a good way to raise money for the crown to carry on the war against France, a duty of 2s per birth, 2s 6d per marriage and 4s per burial of all non-paupers with a sliding scale rising to 30 lb. for the birth of the son of a Duke, 50 lbs for a dukes marriage and burial. All births were to be notified to the rector or vicar within five days, under a penalty of 40s and he was to record them for a fee of 6d under a like penalty. It was specially provided that a birth should not be exempt from tax merely because the parents failed to have the child christened, but nevertheless it seems likely that in many parishes such births were not registered and presumably no tax was paid. In other parishes, however, there is clear evidence that the parson in his capacity of tax-collector looked up the neglectful parishioner and collected the tax, plus, his six pence. Many pleaded poverty at the time of burial. | In '''1694''' the government thought it a good way to raise money for the crown to carry on the war against France, a duty of 2s per birth, 2s 6d per marriage and 4s per burial of all non-paupers with a sliding scale rising to 30 lb. for the birth of the son of a Duke, 50 lbs for a dukes marriage and burial. All births were to be notified to the rector or vicar within five days, under a penalty of 40s and he was to record them for a fee of 6d under a like penalty. It was specially provided that a birth should not be exempt from tax merely because the parents failed to have the child christened, but nevertheless it seems likely that in many parishes such births were not registered and presumably no tax was paid. In other parishes, however, there is clear evidence that the parson in his capacity of tax-collector looked up the neglectful parishioner and collected the tax, plus, his six pence. Many pleaded poverty at the time of burial. | ||