Can someone take a look at this. I have the following information

1809 12 November

Father - Domenico Valente
Mother - Rosa Rizzo

Child - Caterina Rosa Rizzo

The child has the surname of Rizzo but I don't see anywhere on the document where Domenico Valente does not recognize the child. So far all of the 1809 documents list the childs name and after it the surname. So is this telling me that Domenico Valente did not acknowledge this baby?

img406.imageshack.us/i...ideub5.jpg

Thanks
Elizabeth

Usually after naming the father and mother it says 'his legitimate wife' obviously in this case the mother of the child was not his wife. Hence the child bears the surname of the mother. He acknowledged the child, but since he was not married to the mother the authorities would not give it his name. If they were married later the child would be acknowledged on the marriage certificate and thus legitimized.

Thanks. In later years birth acts I've had the same situation, unmarried couple, but the child had the fathers surname. The only birth acts I had come across where the father was listed and the mother listed - child having the mothers surname was when the father did not acknowledge the child - but the birth act also stated that the father listed did not acknowledge. I just learned something new!

Thanks again
Elizabeth

Your record also states that Domenico actually presented (took to the office to show them) the baby when he registered the birth. Its also possible he stated that he wanted the child to have the mother's surname, especially if he was already married!

Hi Ann

Yes I saw he was the one that went to the registrar with the child that's why I thought it a bit strange.