Non-Conformist Records - The East of London Family History Society

Non-Conformist Records

What do we mean by ‘Non-Conformist’ ?• Essentially ‘Non-Conformism’ refers to religious practices thatdeviate from those of the ‘Established Church’ of the day.• “The Church” originally meant just the Church of Rome, butafter Henry VIII broke ranks with that and instituted theChurch of England that then sur-planted the Church of Romefor the rest of his reign, followed by a state of turmoil whereeach kept replacing the other as the official religion of thestate; the term “Established Church” became used to describewhatever was the then ‘flavour of the month’ – so thehistorical records are in fact a mixture of records pertaining toboth the Church of Rome AND the Church of England.

The Extent of Non-Conformity• After the advent of the Baptist Movement, other followed -such as Presbyterian, Wesleyan, Congregational, andothers.• By about 1800, about one third of the entire populationwere reckoned to be some form of Non-Conformist, plusothers observed few religious practices at all.• It is estimated that about half of the population were notpractising members of the Church of England – so could notbe relied upon to have Baptised their children - so therecording process had seriously broken down. The fact ofthis breakdown is rarely adequately reflected inGenealogical instruction.

What are Non-Conformists? - 1• I don’t intend to try to define such from an ecclesiasticalviewpoint – but merely try to define to what I’m restrictingmyself in this presentation• I’m concentrating upon records within England, butsimilarities exist for Wales and Scotland – but probably notfor Ireland• I’m attempting to address records of Birth or Burial that failedto get incorporated into the usual Parish records – ignoringInter-Regnum peculiarities when recording often ceased.• I shall also include other records that are useful specifically inrespect of Non-Conformists. In this presentation, I’mincluding essentially any religious sect that does not adhere tothe doctrines or procedures of the “Established Church”

What are Non-Conformists? - 2• Religions practiced within England and Wales, Scotland,Ireland, and the Colonies as well were all essentially Christian,as the Jews had been excluded by Henry II and other practiceshad not yet surfaced. Jews re-appeared from about 1730.Jewish records are quite different, and won’t be fullyaddressed here.• Most Non-Conformist religions are therefore merely based onminor procedural differences of no real significance – but aswith most such differences, the various participants and nonparticipantswere involved in heated ‘debates’ about these,and legislation was enacted to try to suppress the variousdeviant practices – that now included Roman Catholicism,once the Anglican Church finally attained stability as THEEstablished Church.

Does your family have any Non-Conformists?• Almost certainly – but you may not havefound them yet• Does it matter? – almost certainly yes• My researches took a long time to get reallystarted; one of the difficulties was me notaddressing the Non-Conformist issues

Why ‘religion’ matters inGenealogy• Different religious sects have different customsregarding the recording of acts of Baptism, Marriage,and Burial• Determining the religious denomination of one’sancestors can therefore be key to finding the recordsof their existence, and their parentage.• Sometimes, the present holds the key to the past inrespect of religious practices, but when ‘mixed’marriages occur then often the practices of just oneof the parents may govern the subsequent practicesof the children and their offspring

Non-Conformist Records• There’s a tendency for Genealogists to bebrainwashed by the plethora of instructions asto how to find one’s ancestors, by the waythat the GRO, IGI, and Parish Record data areintroduced.• Most approaches never mention Non-Conformist records, seemingly treating theseas if they are applicable to just an insignificantminority of people.

1837 and the General Register Office• Prior to July 1837, almost the only fairly reliable records that existed toshew that a person had ever lived, were the Parish records of Baptism,Marriage, and Burial.• The GRO system of recording Births, Marriages, and Deaths came intobeing because by the early-Eighteenth Century, the ‘old’ system hadseriously broken down because ever increasing numbers of thepopulation could not be relied upon to use the Church of England Baptismfeature, and the certificate recording such event was prior to 1837 theonly means of demonstrating a person’s identity – and the Parish in whichthey were entitled to settlement, and hence Parish relief when necessary.• Of these features, the Baptismal records are the most important, because– in theory – everyone should have had such an entry, and these ought tohave recorded the parental details, whereas not everyone married, andalthough – in theory – everyone would have a burial record, suchgenerally provided very little useful data other than an often incorrectguess at a person’s age, and burials could for many reasons have takenplace far from those places revealed by other research – so often verydifficult to locate, and gave no indication of parentage except for children

The GRO Records• Whilst the records of Marriages and Deaths under the GROSystem may be assumed to be very nearly complete, this isnot so for Births, as registration was not “compulsory” until1888, so Parish Records and records of other types are stillimportant up until at least that date.• However, ignorance and poverty still prevailed, andregistrations often did not occur because the applicationswere ‘out of time’, or because the parents wished to avoidthe fees. Sometimes the birth date was falsified, to appear tobe “in-date”. I have some relatives, where I was told that thebirth of an individual had never been registered, and that thecertificate of a sibling was produced instead if a certificatewas ever required.

Hardwick’s Marriage Act of 1754• The quality of details recorded in the Parish records of Baptism, Marriage,and Burial events frequently left much to be desired. For Marriages, notonly was the recorded detail often inadequate, but various types of“irregular” marriages occurred, performed by priests that were notattached to a specific Parish; some of these clandestine arrangementsinvolved non-consenting brides and children as young as 12 or 14.• Hardwick’s Act tried to rectify the position – at least as far as Marriageswere concerned – by obliging everyone that wanted to have a ‘legal’marriage to perform this under the auspices of the Established Church.However, this displeased those that were not of that religious persuasion,but it did much to ensure some integrity of the records then produced.There were always some, that declined to get married in a C of E church.Quakers, and subsequently Jews, were permitted to conduct their ownmarriages, and records of those are kept separate – if they actuallysurvived. Some of these have got into the IGI – but many have not.• Records of marriages for Jews are retained by the appropriate Jewishorganisation. However, these records are not made available for publicsearch, and are of course in Aramaic. Many registers have beentranscribed, but I have found no definitive list that indicates howcomplete – or otherwise – those transcriptions have been, and NONE ofthese are in the IGI – because the IGI records relate solely to Christians.

Dissenters and Hardwick’s Act• Some dissenters disliked Hardwick’s Act so much, (in thatattempted to force them to marry in an Anglican church), thatthey were prepared to go “abroad” to defeat it.• Large numbers went to border towns in Scotland – such as(but not limited to ) Gretna Green – that were of courseoutside of English Law• Until 1856, no residence qualification was required to marryin Scotland• Other dissenters located with easier access to Man, a ChannelIsland, or Calais may have used those instead, or even Ulster• It may be wise to check the on-line index of Scottishmarriages for suspected Non-Conformists

Burial Records• Burial records remained relatively complete, because originally the onlyplace to bury a body was in a Parish churchyard – apart from a relativelyinsignificant number of interments on private land. However, burialscould take place in distant Parishes that a researcher would not easilyassociate, and may therefore be almost untraceable.• With the rise of Non-Conformity in religious practices, even the burialrecording became unreliable, because newly-formed religious groupsbegan to acquire their own land for burials, and these being beyond thenormal statutory controls were usually recorded, but the records notnecessarily preserved. Such record books that existed, frequentlycontained other information, and were often regarded by the ministers astheir own property and may have been retained by them when theyceased to officiate.• Records of Jewish burials do exist, but are relatively difficult to locate. Inthe event of a mixed marriage, the spouse of the non-Jew was entitled toburial in the Jewish Burial Ground, but was normally interred separately.

Baptismal Records• Frequently, a Baptismal record was the onlyrecord that had provided any sort of reliableevidence as to the existence of a person, and inparticular documented the Parish to which they“belonged”.• In the rural areas, Parish priests generally tookthe trouble to seek-out the parents of childrenthat had not been Baptised, and so the recordsfor small Parishes were generally mostly‘complete’, but as the population grew, the holdof the priests on the population began to fail.

The ‘Baptist’ Movement - 1• The uncertainties caused by Henry VIII inabout 1538 breaking away from the Church ofRome, followed by subsequent monarchsreinstating the old faith and rejecting it againseveral times, gave rise to a widespread dissatisfactionwith religious procedures, and in1622 the Baptist movement was one of thefirst groups recognised as going it’s ownseparate ways – contrary to the laws of theland.

The Baptist Movement - 2• Non-Conformity in general, wasn’t confined toa specific class of people, but generally tothose that had some degree of independencesuch as tradesmen that were not dependanton the patronage of specific landowners, butlandowners were also involved.• A hotbed of Non-Conformity arose particularlyin Bedfordshire, and in the adjoining areas ofHertfordshire. King’s Walden in Hertfordshireis the village from which my ancestors hailedin the 17C, 18C, and early 19C.

The Baptist Movement - 3• It is not clear to me whether the Baptists ever tried toinstitute their own marriage ceremonies; somecertainly made their own arrangements for burials.• However, the most important change that wasinstituted was the discontinuance of Infant Baptism bythe Baptists – and other Non-Conformist sects. Ofcourse, some Non-Conformists still went through themotions of having children Baptised by an AnglicanParish priest, but most abandoned the practicealtogether – with the result that very often nostatutory records were produced that recorded theexistence of the children.

Quakers• Quakers were another small group of nonconformists,that kept their own records ofbirths, marriages, and burials.• Quakers, and subsequently Jews, were theonly break-away groups permitted to conducttheir own marriage arrangements.

Baptist’s Records• Although the Baptist movement rejected Infant Baptism, they stillperformed the Baptismal process – but upon mature adults as amark of their admittance into the Baptist movement, in a processlogically equivalent to the combined processes of infant baptismplus the ‘confirmation’ process that followed Baptism in earlyadulthood within the Anglican Church.• Most Baptist organisations maintained a Meeting Book, in whichrecords of ‘admissions’ were recorded, and sometimes evenrecorded the birth of children to members, and also marriagesperformed in an Anglican Parish Church – but these records werenot conforming to the legal requirements for Parish Records, havenot necessarily been retained for us to examine today, and werenot necessarily in ‘register’ format.• Some meetings did decide to maintain a register of BIRTHS, andthese may have been preserved by the GRO in their category RG6to RG8 records.

• What does concern us here, is that ALL of theNon-Conformist practices were essentiallyoutside of the Law, and did not adhere to therecord-keeping requirements for thesacraments of Baptism, Marriage, and Burial.

Absence of Records for Birth Events• Although the GRO began recording Births from July 1837, registration didnot become compulsory until 1888, and even after that registration wasnever 100%. Fortunately, the LDS continued their transcription ofBaptisms after 1837, and into the twentieth century – but purely forreasons of their own.• Another problem arose from the Birth registration process, in that whilstBaptisms could be performed at any time within a person’s lifetime (butindexing problems would arise), Birth registration had by Law to beperformed within a specified few weeks of birth, failing which the birthcould then no longer be registered EVER – so a certificate never thenobtainable. The only legal substitute for a certificate of birth is a‘Statutory Declaration’ for the event, and there is no process forregistering those; we have also had immigrants entering Britain, for whomthe birth records (if indeed any) are located elsewhere.• This means that between 1622 and 1888, as many as half the births ofchildren may be entirely unrecorded, and significant numbers continue togo unrecorded to the present day.• This may well explain why you as Genealogists may experience difficultieslocating many births.

My Personal Experiences - 1• Although I had overheard comments made by myFather’s family, about them being ‘Wesleyan’ or‘Chapel’, I really wasn’t too certain what that meant,so when I began my Genealogical research, I had noidea whatsoever that this would necessitate acompletely different approach as opposed to myMother’s family that were typical ‘Church of England’people.• Moreover, none of my ‘instructional’ material seemedto even hint that I would need to be using a largelytotally separate and different set of records (pre-1837)to find my Father’s family, because at that time I wasmeeting with ‘brick walls’ no matter where I searched.

My Personal Experiences - 2• I began my Genealogy by looking for my namesake, thatwas granted the Freedom of the City of Great Yarmouth in1813. I hold the original document, but was unable toplace the man, because there was no record of his birth tobe found – and seemingly none for his marriage either.• That start was of course quite wrong, as I should havebegun from myself and worked back methodically fromthere – but I thought that I could use a ‘short-cut’.• Although I have now documented my main line back toaround 1661, I still have no documentary record for thebirth of the holder of that Freeman’s Certificate, or directevidence of his parentage – simply because the Family wasNon-Conformist.

My 3x GGF• This is the fellow that began my interest in Genealogy, notjust because he was another John Goodwin, but because atage 14 I was given a certificate granting the Freedom of theCity of Great Yarmouth to him• This document – though verified now as valid – caused me noend of difficulties, because he was supposedly apprenticed (inhis early to mid twenties) to William Palgrave the Younger,that was the head of Customs & Excise at Great Yarmouth;however, during that period, John occupied a large house inthe Mile End Road, and was having his family there!• Had I not been given the certificate, I would probably havenever associated John with Yarmouth.

Freeman’s Certificate - 1

Freeman’s Certificate - 2

My Personal Experiences - 3• I wasted much time trying to locate the person that I now know to be my3x GGF, looking for him in East Anglia, because of the Freeman’sCertificate, and because of enumerator fraud on the 1881 Census thatshewed my GGF to have come from that area also – when in fact neitherdid! (At that time, I presumed these to be father & son).• It wasn’t until in desperation and having looked at seemingly every set ofrecords available, that I purchased a set of CDs of the BVRI and eventuallylocated there a set of 8 birth records that appeared to relate to my family,and I furthermore shewed that one entire film for Marriages at St.Dunstan’s Church had been omitted from the IGI (they were on Paillot’sIndex), that I eventually began to make some headway and placed thefamily in East Middlesex.• The BVRI (first edition) identifies certain entries as ‘Dr Williams’s Library’entries, but this annotation is omited from version 2, and when I firstencountered such entries the name meant nothing to me. Subsequently,the ‘Non-Conformist’ involvement became apparent to me.• In sheer desperation, I’d searched all sorts of records, checking every‘Goodwin’ entry. I did spot a ‘John Goodwin’ entry on a PCC index for1849, but as this was at Hitchin – out of area – I ignored it.

Doctor Williams’s Library - 1• The Non-Conformists realised that certain difficulties couldarise for members not having any sort of personaldocumentation – such as a certificate of Baptism, so if theyfell on hard times it was difficult to claim ‘settlement’ in theParish of their birth.• From 1743 to 1837, the Library operated a registrationfacility to enable Non-Conformists to avoid having toundertake Anglican Baptism to obtain a certificate ofBaptism. They issued BIRTH CERTIFICATES at a charge of2/6d each! Backdated submissions exist from 1715, andthere was a sudden peak in the demand immediately priorto July 1837 for reasons that are not apparent to me, butpossibly because the new system did not accept backdatingand possibly prohibited the older forms ofregistration.

Dr Williams’s Library - 2• Each Birth Certificate was signed by the surgeon,midwife, father, and all persons claiming to havebeen present at the birth – including in one of mycases the nine-year-old brother of the infant.• Certificates stated the date and time of birth, the,the child’s name, mother, and father. Latercertificates named the mother’s parents, gave theiraddress, the address of the birth, and the father’soccupation.

Dr Williams’s Library - 3• The actual Birth Certificate records are now heldby The National Archives catalogued as RG-5,with RG-4 as the index. These are both paperrecords.• The index has been transcribed like a ParishRegister by the LDS, but with frequent errors. Itis not included in the published IGI, but isincluded as an extension as part of the BritishVital Records Index (versions 1 & 2) and is thusincluded in the pilot version of the new IGI.

Records from Dr. Williams’s Library

My certificate for John Goodwin

My certificate for ThomasGoodwin

Other IGI Inclusions• Contrary to the general understanding, the IGI is not just anaccumulation of Parish Register transcriptions; there arealso transcriptions of some Non-Conformist registers thereas well.• The included Non-Conformist registers, are mostly thosethat were submitted to the GRO in 1837, and constitute theRG-4, RG-6, RG-7, and RG-8 categories in the archives nowheld by the TNA. Theoretically, you can call for the GRO toproduce certificates for these RG4-RG8 entries.• The problem with being able to use these transcriptions, isbeing able to form the link that leads to those records, asthese are not Parochial records and so there may be no‘obvious’ connection with people living in an apparentlyunconnected village. In my case, the registers were for aMeeting House in Hitchin, whilst the residence was atKing’s Walden – several miles away – and my connectionwas via “London” and without baptismal or parental data.

Other Non-Conformist Traits• You may find – like me – that not only can younot find Birth/Baptismal records, perhaps alsoMarriage, and even Burial records for yourNon-Conformist relatives• They may have gone to great trouble toexclude themselves from the Censuses, theDeath records, and even the regular form ofProbate!

Children of my 3x GGPs• 1811 Mary Ann - the Spinster• 1815 Clementia - the Governess/Nurse• 1818 Samuel - my 2x GGF• 1820 John - the Chemist• 1824 Daniel - the Ironmonger• 1822 Joseph - the Schoolmaster• 1828 Ann - Married circa 1850?• 1829 Thomas - the Architect

Census Records• My 3x GGF and his immediate family thatwere still at home, appeared as a group in1841 , but useful data was not obtainable• My 3x GGF and wife died between the 1841and 1851 Censuses, so the family becamefragmented; of the eight children, despitehaving eight sets of birth records, I trackedjust my 2x GGF Samuel moderately easily• Samuel was discovered in the 1881 Census,after I had fully documented his eldest child –John Henry – my GGF

1881 Census - 1• It took a long long time to find my GGPs in the 1881Census; this was due to enumerator FRAUD.• The enumerator for Islington, tried to do as littlework as possible; he did not deliver the schedules forcompletion by the householder, but filled these induring the day at the door on his single visit; herecorded details just for persons actually seen –except the absent head of household, for whom hefabricated details• For my GGPs, two children (unseen by theenumerator) were omitted, and my GGF wasrecorded as born Ipswich 1836

1881 Census - 2• I found my 1x GGPs and family, only by a record-by-recordsearch of all of the surname GOODWIN for the whole of“London”, subsequently shewn to be necessary just becausethe enumerator had written-up the entire area by omittingforenames• Because the search had now homed-in on just “my” people, Ifailed to note the anomaly that about half of the heads ofhousehold in Islington had apparently been born in Ipswich• Six months of abortive research on Ipswich records, finallyrevealed the fraud; he had actually been born in Mile End in1842 – just like his wife; up until this point, I was workingsolely from my own original documents, as I had yet todiscover the GRO.

1881 Census - 3• 1881 Census records were eventually found for four other great-greatuncles and aunts – but still not for Daniel, Thomas and Ann• Ann could be “missing” due to a marriage as yet unidentifiable; Danielappeared in 1851 living with Joseph and family, but since then hasdisappeared “without trace”• Joseph is not to be found in 1861, but emerged on a PCC Will in 1870 –witnessed by Thomas (giving an address in Clapton); Thomas was also notrecorded in 1861 - or subsequently• Joseph’s two male children ‘disappeared’ after leaving college• Did these people intentionally get omitted from the Censuses, or is theresome other explanation such as travelling abroad still to emerge? Thomasis believed to have participated in the Crimean Wars, but as his medalspassed to Samuel is presumed to have pre-deceased him in England.These medals are in an assumed name.

John Goodwin’s vital records• No birth/baptism record has yet emerged, so I haveno direct evidence of parents.• His marriage was apparently unrecorded – or so Ithought until I demonstrated that serious omissionshave occurred in Phillimore’s records of IGI content;St. Dunstan’s (and other East End Churches) haveNOT been fully transcribed (Paillot’s Index shewedthis to be so)• He did not die in “London” – so death details hard tofind.• Because he was a non-conformist, he or his executoropted to prove the Will at the PCC!!!

Prerogatory Court of Canterbury• Prior to 1858, Wills were proved by Ecclesiastical Courts – different onesbeing prescribed according to where the deceased’s property was located• The term ‘property’ here relates to anything owned – not just to realestate – so even Ag. Labs. could have had ‘property’ to leave, but ofcourse if their possessions were merely household effects and clothing,then it’s unlikely that they would have made a Will, and the family wouldprobably have avoided the expenses involved in ‘proving’ any Will made.• If all the property was located in one Parish, then a Will could be provedin the Archdeaconry Court; if held in more than one Parish, then theBishop’s Court was required; if held in more than one County, then thePrerogative Court of Canterbury was required for the South of England (orthe corresponding court for the North of England).• The executor could opt to have a Will proved in a higher court than strictlynecessary, if so desired.

John’s Property• Shortly before his death, John moved to Hitchin inHertfordshire – events unbeknown to me at the timeof researching, although I had actually seen anddismissed the index entry for this because it was ‘outof area’• John owned household effects etc., but also held realestate in the form of ownership of the land in whichhis wife’s remains had been interred• Consequently, his Will had to be proved at Doctor’sCommons in “London”

The need or wish to use the PCC• In John’s case, he held property in more than one County, sothe Will had to be proved at the PCC. However, the holdingof a grave deed relating to another County is the sort of‘property’ that researchers might easily overlook. (I wonderhow many grave deeds technically come under YOURresponsibility?)• More importantly, non-conformists frequently CHOSE to usethe PCC Court, because they didn’t want the local C of Eclergy to have access to their personal details• The latter is a very important point to consider, as thepossibility of a PCC Will existing for persons of relativelymodest means is easily overlooked

PCC Records• The PCC Record Indices have been available on microfiche for many years,and the actual probate register on microfilm, but in about 2001 the TNAbegan to transfer these to an on-line database – with copies supposedlyof the “Wills” as well• The Probate Records had sometime earlier been filmed, and were allavailable for reference at the Family Records Centre and the TNA. TheFRC had an index of these, whereas the TNA fraudulently deny access tothis and oblige researchers to pay for access to the digital records.• The records were “digitised” on a piecemeal basis, so a new index wasprepared on an ongoing basis as the records became available on-line.Unfortunately - or in my case perhaps I should say fortunately – some ofthe entries were mis-transcribed. In my case, John’s Probate wasrecorded under ‘Mile End’ (where he lived when it was made) whereas itshould have been shewn as ‘Hitchin’ (where he actually died). I hadpreviously seen the ‘Hitchin’ entry on the microfiche index – but ignoredit!

John’s PCC Will - 1• I couldn’t sleep one night, when worryingabout ongoing work in The Court ofProtection. This was at the time that the 1901Census data was supposed to be available online,so I thought I’d try to get on-line (notknowing then why it had been blocked). Inoticed the new site, and thought that I’dlook.• I now found the ‘Mile End’ entry, andwondered why – but eventually I chose tolook.

John’s PCC Will - 2• Having forked-out the £3, I was most annoyedby what I got appearing on-screen. Thedetails were almost totally illegible.• However, knowing his name plus that of hiswife and eight children, I managed to “read”this into the garbage that appeared on screen.• I dashed off to the FRC to view the Will onfilm. To my horror, I found that the “digitised”entry was unreadable, because the filmversion was similarly unreadable!!!!!

John’s PCC Will - 3• From there, I had to order the original of the Will tobe taken to Kew, and there I was able to read thedocument.• In a way, it was a good thing that I had been obligedto obtain the original document, because the copythat I had tried to view was NOT of course theoriginal Will, but a transcript from it as copied intothe probate register (all these records are such).• Going to Kew, not only produced the originaldocument of the actual Will, but also a previous Willattached to it, plus another document.

John’s Wills• By viewing the TWO Will documents, this broughttogether all the previous uncertainties that I wasfacing. These linked him with William Palgrave (thenhead of C & E Ireland) so proving the Yarmouth linkas factual.• Perhaps the best part was that John expressed adesire to be buried at the Particular Baptist ChurchBurial Ground – near to his three named cousins! –so despite me to this day not having a document toprove his birth and parentage, I went through theChurch Records and traced the family back to LawHall in about 1661.

The Particular Baptist Records• On visiting the Church, I had hands-on access to alltheir original records going back to the early 1600’s.These recorded the births of the children, andinterment of the deceased. The births had actuallybeen entered onto the IGI, but of course my 3x GGF’sentry wasn’t there, and without that link there wasno way of connecting to his ancestors. There werealso the corresponding marriages recorded from theregisters of the Parish Church at Hitchin and King’sWalden, as well as some of the earlier burials.

To where – from here?• My records at King’s Walden ran out after 150 years.Not altogether unexpected, as families apparentlyrarely stay in the one place for more than around100 years unless they hold huge tracts of land.• I’ve found more non-conformist Goodwins at NorthBurlingham, Norfolk – but nothing yet to link themexcept two co-incidences.• 1) The Palgraves held land adjoining Burlingham• 2) Another Goodwin descended from the Burlinghambunch held land just four miles from King’s Waldenpriorto emigrating to America.

To Conclude• Pre-1837 data for Non-Conformists, does exist– but may be quite hard to tie-in with yourancestors• You perhaps need to look for evidence of Non-Conformity from the recent past, as a clue toearlier Non-Conformity, if you can’t find anyrecords for a particular branch of your family.