The Reformed Parliament and Civil Registration of Births and Deaths

Abstract

Public AdministrationVolume 8, Issue 3 p. 323-334 The Reformed Parliament and Civil Registration of Births and Deaths Mabel C. Buer D.Sc. (Econ.), Mabel C. Buer D.Sc. (Econ.)Search for more papers by this author Mabel C. Buer D.Sc. (Econ.), Mabel C. Buer D.Sc. (Econ.)Search for more papers by this author First published: July 1930 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1930.tb01988.x Thomas Cromwell, in 1538, directed that the parson in each parish should keep a record of Weddings, Christenings and Burials. From this dates the keeping of these records upon national lines, though individual parishes have records dating from before this year. Under Cromwell's decree the parson was liable to a fine of 38. 4d. if he neglected this duty. In 1563 there was, however, already discontent with the way the registers were kept and Parliament attempted to pass a Bill to regulate the matter, but owing to the opposition of the clergy it was dropped. In 1590 Burleigh made and attempt at regulation, but the Archbishop of Canterbury appears to have intervened but himself issued a precept enjoining the proper keeping of registers. During the Commonwealth civil registration of births (not baptisms), marriages and burials was in force. Opinions differ as to its success; it probably varied in different parts of the country. The old ecclesiastical system was restored at the Restoration. Note. The Wesleyan Methodists established a voluntary register of baptisms upon the same model in 1818. The registrations amounted to something over 400 a year, said to be a small number relative to membership. But, of course, it would only have been to the better-to-do that such a register would appeal. Further, the Wesleyans often had their children baptised in the Established Church: they had no strong doctinal objection to this and the worldly advantages of church baptism were considerable. Note. It was introduced by Lord John Russell in the Commons and Lord Melbourne in the Lords. Note. The office of Registrar of Marriages was separate from that of Registrar of Births and Deaths, though the two offices could be held by the same person. Chadwick's biographer states that Chadwick obtained the appointment of Farr, but the notes on Farr in the D.N.B. say that Farr owed his appointment to Sir James Clark. The two statements are not necessarily incompatible. AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Volume8, Issue3July 1930Pages 323-334 RelatedInformation