Last Name

[AnneM]

Hi

I would not get too worked up about names as in the Scottish context they don't mean a lot. There are no hard and fast rules about who is called what.

My great great granny was born illegitimate, no father's name on the BC and registered as Anne Miller. Her mother subsequently had another illegitimate child John, also registered as Miller. Very shortly thereafter she married John Shedden and these two children appear on all subsequent censuses and certificates as being called Shedden. I am reasonably convinced that John S was John's father but whether or not he was Anne's I'll never know.

Funnily enough the mother Elizabeth previously had another illegitimate child, also called John, who lived with his maternal grandparents. Despite there being no trace of his father he appears on the census and on his DC as John Brisbane. Who was Mr Brisbane? I wish I knew. John was born in 1853 before statutory registration and died in 1871.

All in all the names are not a lot of help.

Anne

[MaryB]

Marilyn - I was told by the registra that you can call yourself anything in Scotland as long as it was not for fraud purposes - that was in 1977 not sure what the scottish law was way back in your time period.

My ancestors will have great fun with myself personally.

1. birth cert - Mary Maria Patterson

2. marriage cert - Mary Marie Beaton

3. daughters birth cert - Mary Paterson (1 T)

4. census - I guess I won't be around to see what name I am listed on in the census


school - listed as Mary Beaton

medical records - Mary Patterson

[DavidWW]

Marilyn - I was told by the registrar that you can call yourself anything in Scotland as long as it was not for fraud purposes - that was in 1977 not sure what the scottish law was way back in your time period.

That is and has always been the case in Scottish law.

For those not aware of the situation, Scottish law is and always has been fundamentally different from the system in England. In the 1707 Treaty of Union between the previously separate English and Scottish parliaments, provision was made that for all time several areas of Scottish life would remain separate and inviolable, including the church, education, and the law.

Scottish law is heavily based on Roman law, and also owes much to the Code Napoléon of the early 19th century. The Scottish legal system differs fundamentally from the English system in several areas, including the provision that no-one can ever be convicted on the basis of a single piece of evidence. There must always be corroborating evidence.

In Scotland there are not just two verdicts, but three, - Guilty, not Guilty and Not Proven! The origin of this situation is ill understood !!

Originally in the Scottish system there were two verdicts, - Proven and Not Proven, the logic being that a court case could not decide guilt or otherwise, but only that the charge was proven or not proven..........

Some time after the Treaty of Union in 1707 it was decided that the verdicts of Guilty and Not Guilty should be introduced, but some parliamentary clerk omitted to include a clause in the relevant legislation cancelling the Not Proven verdict.

In today's society in Scotland a verdict of "Not Proven" is generally taken to mean "We know that you committed the offence in question, but cannot prove it to the level of proof required for a "Guilty" conviction under Scottish law, so go away and don't do it again"

Orraverybest

Davie

[mesklin]

Another little quirk of Scots Law

A couple who live together and pass themselves off as husband and wife become legally married, providing that...
They do it in Scotland.
They do it for a reasonable period of time (usually more than a year)
Most ImportantThey must conceal the fact that they have not been married by more conventional means.
And, of course...
They are not already married.

There is no requirement to go to a Sheriff or High Court to ratify it!

dave

[StewL]

After reading this topic, I now realise why my father used to say to me that I could used any of my given names, and even my mothers maiden name if I wanted to. Although I dont know if what he told me would have still been legal in Australia.

I can't remember if what he said about using grandmothers maiden names would apply also??

[NancyinNJ]

Anne M wrote

My great great granny was born illegitimate, no father's name on the BC and registered as Anne Miller. Her mother subsequently had another illegitimate child John, also registered as Miller. Very shortly thereafter she married John Shedden and these two children appear on all subsequent censuses and certificates as being called Shedden. I am reasonably convinced that John S was John's father but whether or not he was Anne's I'll never know

I have A Shedden in my Caldwell tree
Robert Caldwell born 19 April 1776 in Beith to parents David Caldwell and Jean Shedden

[AnneM]

Hi Nancy

There are definitely a good few Beith Sheddens. I mistakenly thought one was mine because there was an Anne Shedden born in Beith in 1855 and at that time the 1855 BCs were not online. I've not found a connection between the Beith Sheddens and my Saltcoats lot. However I did look back a bit on the Beith Sheddens for someone else who contacted me through genesreunited. I'm not sure whether I saved what I found for her but I will have a look.

Anne

[NancyinNJ]

Thank you...if you have anything I would appreciate it....
I guess we're not related then...but stranger things have happened.

[G.Love]

I never knew that you could give a child any surname you liked, even if it's not the name of the mother or the father.
But a friend in England, lets call her Miss Smith, married a man called Mr Jones, and she kept her maiden name both professionally and personally. So even though she was legally married she was always just Miss Smith (it's not me by the way - I too kept my own name after marriage, but that's another story). Anyway, Miss Smith and Mr Jones have a baby, and they registered it as Baby Smith. Miss Smith had a very unusual name, and didn't want it to die out, she also didn't much like her husband's. But a second friend, living with her partner but unmarried, gave their baby her own mother's maiden name. So mother father and child all have different surnames.

[AnneM]

Hi All

All this discussion about the different histories of Scots Law and the English variety moved me to start to brush up my knowledge of legal history, which was never that extensive in the first place. though I find it fascinating.

While it is true to say that there is a major Roman Law constituent in Scot's Law it is not accurate to describe it as a pure roman law based (civilian) system. It is more properly described as a mixed system along with such jurisdictions as South Africa, Sri Lanka and the state of Louisiana. That is to say that it has aspects of Roman Law and 'English-type' Common Law in its development. .

In the mediaeval and early modern times Scotland had a customary law system based partly?largely on Norman/English common law and some surviving Celtic and other local practices, together with some Roman Law imported through the law of the Roman Catholic church. Most of it was not written down. However, unlike in England, the common law failed to develop adequately to meet the needs of the growing population and increased sophistication and in the 16th and 17th Centuries the emerging legal profession turned to Roman Law, as taught in the continental universities which most of them attended, to fill the gaps. The Roman Law provided many of the solutions on which some aspects of Scots Law are still based

Following the union of the parliaments in 1707, however, most continental influence ended and throughout the C18 and C19 the Scots looked increasingly to their more powerful neighbour jurisdiction for legal solutions in those circumstances where their own were not available. The Code Napoleon, end C18 beginning C19, definitely post dates the period of continental influence on Scots Law.

That is not to say that English Law and Scots Law are not very different. In many aspects they are but they share rather a lot of history.

I am not a legal expert. I have culled this much from books written by those who are and talking to my husband who undoubtedly is, though he would never refer to himself as such.

This is also a very rough tour and leaves lots out. There is much more to it that this. What I'll do when I have time and if it would not bore everyone to death is read the stuff in more detail and produce a potted history which will owe nothing to my own knowledge but everything to those who do know. However I'll try to make sure it is in English and not in legalese!

Anne