ENG-MANCHESTER-L ArchivesArchiver > ENG-MANCHESTER > 2004-03 > 1079557769
From: "Bellringer" <>
Subject: Re: [ENG-MAN] null and void...?
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 10:09:30 +1300
Many thanks for your very kind response, with my apologies also to the
having not mentioned that the area in Lancashire, where the marriage took
was in Salford, ENGLAND.
----- Original Message -----
From: "The Wilsons" <>
To: "Bellringer" <>; <>
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 6:58 AM
Subject: RE: [ENG-MAN] null and void...?
> You don't say whether the marriage took place in England or the Isle of
> I think I am correct in saying that any marriages which take place on the
> Isle of Man are not recorded in the GRO indexes. The Isle of Man has a
> separate legal and registration system from England.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bellringer [mailto:]
> Sent: 17 March 2004 04:47
> Subject: [ENG-MAN] null and void...?
> >From :
> Re : GRO Index / BMD ... ?
> Date : Tuesday, 17th. 2004
> Dear Listers,
> I have received a modern day hand written copy of a Marriage certificate
> which took place in Lancashire,
> in September, 1877. but the maiden name of the Bride, is not that which
> appears on the birth certificates
> of her children. The first child was born on the Isle of Man, September,
> 1878. and her three other
> children were all born in Openshaw, Lancashire. The birth of her last
> was in May, 1885.
> The GRO marriage Index, gives the same maiden name ( of Manx origin) as
> which appears on all her
> childrens birth certificates. But according to the Local Registry Office,
> it is claimed in the year 2003 that
> the Deputy Registrar, is confident that her maiden name isn't what I,
> and a professional Manchester
> researcher requested.
> Therefore, I was sent an inappropriate marriage certificate issued
> to the GRO Index / BMD
> which as a result of a Rescissory action, taken by the Local Registrar,
> now become a subject of
> total discrepancy which consequently is implying that the maiden name on
> the Isle of Man, and the
> Openshaw, birth certificates are null and void.
> I have since received a photocopy of the original marriage certificate and
> its perfectly clear to see that the
> Vicar's handwriting leaves no doubt whatsoever as to the brides correct
> name, as recorded by the GRO index,
> which therefore rules out any theory suggesting the Vicar, at the time
> have been deaf, and thus wrote
> down what he thought he heard, or that the bride, may have been so
> deferential that she would say that the
> entry was wrong. Or one who could read what was written and therefore
> couldn't object. The fact is that
> although the Bride's mark on the certificate appears as a cross her
> ( my Gt.Grandfather ) could read
> and write and would have been quite aware that her maiden name was
> and not CULLIN.
> I would be grateful if someone could please advise what can be done to
> correct this seemingly preposterous
> and controversial attitude pertaining to certification information.
> Kind regards to all.