[Opengenalliance] Update from Cornwall

[Guy Etchells]

On 19/01/2013 12:04, Alexandra Eveleigh wrote:
> Hello
>
> GRO are right about one thing though - this is indeed an old chestnut, 
> as any local archivist will sigh and tell you (although the confusion 
> does usually focus on access and copying of the registers themselves, 
> not the local indexes). The argument has been ongoing for at least 30 
> years, to my knowledge. Every so often, GRO gets hot under the collar 
> about it, or a local Diocesan archivist attempts to get some kind of 
> clarity. The issue was last discussed on the UK archivists listserv in 
> late 2011, and the final message on the thread (this time last year) 
> was from TNA saying they had been looking into the legal aspects and 
> promising imminent advice on the subject. I haven't seen anything (and 
> can't immediately find anything on TNA's website) but I'm no longer 
> working at a Diocesan Record Office, so may have missed it. But if you 
> are looking into this too, it might be worth contacting the relevant 
> people at TNA.
>
> The listserv's new interface is confusing me this morning and I cannot 
> work out how to link to a whole thread - but if you go to 
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=ARCHIVES-NRA and search 
> for 'marriage registers' you will find all the relevant messages.
>
> Alexandra
>
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Francis Davey <fjmd1a at gmail.com 
> <mailto:fjmd1a at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Michael,
>
>     A legal observation: the relevant section of the Marriage Act 1949
>     is gives members of the public a right to certified copies of
>     entries in the index. What it does not do is prevent copies being
>     taken of the index or entries in it for other purposes or in other
>     ways. That means that this particular provision does not stop the
>     Registration Office giving you what you want.
>
>     It sounds to me like this is something that the OGA could take up
>     at a higher level and if law is quoted to them by officials have
>     ORG's legal advisors read, advise on and (if necessary) talk to
>     the officials.
>
>     Francis
>
>     2013/1/18 Michael J McCormick <michaeljmcc at gmail.com
>     <mailto:michaeljmcc at gmail.com>>
>
>         Hello folks
>
>         We now have over 2.3 million records online, having just
>         transcribed our one millionth CoE baptism. Although we
>         remained targeted on our primary aim of transcribing the
>         parish registers, we are also looking for other sources of
>         data useful to Cornish family historians. Currently we are
>         photographing and transcribing the 19th century prison
>         registers for Cornwall.
>
>         For the last six months I have been exchanging emails with the
>         Registration Office in Cornwall, trying to persuade them to
>         let us photograph and transcribing the indices to the 19th
>         century local BMD registers. The indexes, not the registers.
>         Yesterday they said no.
>
>         They quoted from the Policy Dept of the GRO as follows:
>
>         “This query is linked to a wider issue relating to access to
>         records by family history societies, Ancestry, Find my past
>         etc. We are still seeking a resolution to this query and while
>         I am unable to provide a definitive answer at present, I will
>         advise you as soon as I am aware of the outcome.
>         In the interim, you may wish to advise the parish clerks that
>         the public may only have access to the indices in the manner
>         provided for by statue, i.e. in accordance with s.64 of the
>         Marriage Act 1949, where you will note that there is no
>         provision to transcribe or photograph the indexes, see link below.
>         http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/12-13-14/76/section/64“
>
>         Does anyone know what the policy is?
>
>         Any helpful suggestions on how we might proceed?
>
>         Rgds
>
>         Michael
>         TfC
>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Opengenalliance mailing list
>         Opengenalliance at lists.openrightsgroup.org
>         <mailto:Opengenalliance at lists.openrightsgroup.org>
>         http://lists.openrightsgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/opengenalliance
>
>
>
>
>     -- 
>     Francis Davey
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Opengenalliance mailing list
>     Opengenalliance at lists.openrightsgroup.org
>     <mailto:Opengenalliance at lists.openrightsgroup.org>
>     http://lists.openrightsgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/opengenalliance
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opengenalliance mailing list
> Opengenalliance at lists.openrightsgroup.org
> http://lists.openrightsgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/opengenalliance
The above is simply the GRO trying to create a monopoly of the indexes.

The GRO index (or as it used to be called the St Catherine's marriage 
Index) used to be for sale on microfiche and microfilm for many years.
When the GRO (illegally) removed public access to the index by closing 
the FRC they "replaced" access by allowing the public to view it at a 
few locations across the country.
At the same time or slightly before, they withdrew the microfiche/film 
versions of the index which had been on sale to organisations for many 
decades.
Cheers
Guy