RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => The Lighter Side => Topic started by: coombs on Friday 06 May 11 11:42 BST (UK)
-
Hi
A thread was posted on the Common Room and the beyond reasonable doubt thing and it has encouraged me to post my story on the father of my 2xgreat grandmother. I can never be 100% sure of this and have known it all along but am 99.5% sure Thomas was the father. Here goes:-
My great, great grandmother was born Mary Ann Walder on 31 December 1863 in Warninglid, Sussex not far from Cuckfield. No fathers name on her birth cert. She was the illegitimate daughter of Mary Ann Walder, the local wheelwright's daughter.
In the spring of 1864 Mary Ann Walder and a much older servant called Thomas Roberts moved to Stoke Newington in London. They wed at West Hackney Church on 25th July 1864. The baby was then baptised as the daughter of the new husband at the very same church on 6th November 1864. "Mary Ann Kate, daughter of Thomas and Mary Ann Roberts". They wed when the baby was almost 7 months old and had the baby baptised when she was 10 months old.
A few years earlier in the 1861 census Thomas Roberts was aged 47, living in Brighton, a footman and servant. Living with wife Esther and daughter Ann aged 9. Mary Ann Walder was living 12 miles away in her usual village of Warninglid. That villages is quaint and was surrounded by manors.
Mary Ann Walder fell pregnant in the spring of 1863 if she had her baby on 31 December 1863. Now I then found that Esther Roberts died on the 14th November 1863 in Brighton, aged 42, wife of Thomas Roberts a servant and footman. She died of "phthisis, several years certified". Thomas's next wife Mary Ann Walder was about 7 and a half months pregnant when Esther died. She gave birth on 31 December 1863, 6 weeks after Esther Roberts died. Mary Ann Walder's grandad John Walder died on 31 January 1864 and buried on the 6th Feb 1864 in Warninglid. Thomas and Mary then moved to London, married and then had the baby baptised.
Although it is hard to prove beyond possible doubt but I think with the evidence I can say I am 99.5% sure Thomas Roberts was the father of the baby born 31 Dec 1863.
Ben
-
I would be inclined to agree with you.
I believe that parents getting married legitimised a child, even if the child had been born out of wedlock.
I have a few instances in my tree where they waited until they had married to get the chil baptised.
-
I believe that parents getting married legitimised a child, even if the child had been born out of wedlock.
Not until the Legitimacy Act 1926 came into force... ;)
-
Although it is hard to prove beyond possible doubt but I think with the evidence I can say I am 99.5% sure Thomas Roberts was the father of the baby born 31 Dec 1863.
I'd agree that seems most likely (though I'd go for "on balance of probabilities" rather than "beyond reasonable doubt"!).
-
Hi avm
What is the difference between balance of probabilities and beyond reasonable doubt?
Ben
-
I believe that parents getting married legitimised a child, even if the child had been born out of wedlock.
Not until the Legitimacy Act 1926 came into force... ;)
Oops, one day I'll manage to remember the acts and rules and regulatuions in the right order... then again I probably won't unless I start a chronological list :P
-
What is the difference between balance of probabilities and beyond reasonable doubt?
The balance of probabilities means it's "more likely than not". In your case I think it's probably well over this threshold - much more likely than not.
Beyond reasonable doubt is the required standard of proof for a criminal conviction in England & Wales - the jury has to be sure of the accused's guilt in order to convict.
But this is all a bit academic and legalistic - for the purposes of your family tree I don't think you have to approach it like a judge or a member of a jury. You just have to be satisfied for your own purposes. In circumstances such as you have described there will be probably always be room for a bit of doubt (as you have acknowledged by saying you are "99.5% sure") but you are entitled to reach your own judgment as to whether to ascribe paternity to Thomas.
-
Yes I am 99.5% sure. I think "beyond reasonable doubt" is probably a rare phrase in fathers of illegitimate children. I would say balance of probabilities for any suspected dad of a base baby. A poor law document is no more proof than a suspected father being named on a baptism as there is always that small doubt he may have been covering up.
I have an ancestor born in 1771 and a man owned up to being the father in a bastardy bond. No guarantee he was the real father but like the Roberts case I am 99.5% sure.
Thomas and Mary Ann had their baby baptised at the same church they wed at.
-
I would agree that you have built a
pretty very strong case to establish the correct parentage
Not until the Legitimacy Act 1926 came into force... ;)
Just as an aside for those who come under Scottish legislation --- the position in Scotland has always been that if there was no impediment to the marriage of the parents prior to or at the time of the birth of the child the subsequent marriage legitimised the child
-
It is best to just take the case that he was the father of the baby which is the very likeliest. Searching for the exact truth on fathers of base children is impossible in any case. If you find strong evidence on the paternity of a base child then it is best to just take it that man was. 99% or 99.5% is good enough.
-
I'm interested here as my grt grt grandmother Elonor Munro(as it is spelt Eleanor )was the illegitimate daughter of Mary McDonald and William Munro .born around 1843 in Pitsligo Scotland .I could never find a marriage for Mary and William .However it worked out William was working on a farm owned by Marys father and Mary and William were both about 15 to 16 years old at the time of the Elonors birth ,I entered this into rootschat some years ago and I think it was Gadget who put me on the right trail in finding out more
Elonor was brought up by her grandparents Mary went on to marry a Peter Barclay and William never married
Elonor married William Watson and all her married life she has her father William Munro living with her living with her. So in Scotland did the baby have to carry the fathers surename as my husbands grandfather was names reputed son of ........... this means I cannot go no further with this side of the family
Elizabeth
-
I've got illegitimate children in Scotland (well not me, personally) and they have their mother's surname, so I don't think it can be a rule that they have their father's surname.
I think it is the same (as England) in that if the father of an illegitimate child is present at the registration, he can be named on the birth entry.
Just to make it harder to find marriages in Scotland...
http://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/content/help/index.aspx?406
Irregular Marriages
Bear in mind that 'irregular' marriages, by exchange of promises before witnesses, by betrothal and consummation, or by cohabitation and repute, were forms of marriage recognised by Scots Law, yet may have taken place without any official record of the event.
-
I read the story with great interest.
My grandfather was illegitimate (this was never mentioned in the family) so until I started researching our family history did not know this story. My grandfather was born in 1898 his mother Eliza was 38 years old and had been a widow for 5 years (she already had 11 children when she was widowed) my grandfather had an older brother James who was 13 months older than him and according to my father they were very close all their lives. The birth certificate of James was signed by James Brook who was the lodger to confirm that he was his father, I also believe he was a relative of Eliza's late husband as they share the last name of Brook. On the 1901 census James Brook is living with my g grandmother his name comes after hers on the census, James his son and my grandfather now aged 3 are living there too. I believe that James Brook must be my g grandfather, the fact that he signed the certificate of his son James, the fact that my grandfather was born 13 months after his brother, and lastly that James Brook was still living with my grandmother in 1901.
I would like to know anyones opinions on this and what they think.
By the way the reason that it was never talked about I found out was that James Brook was married to Eliza's sister and was having children with her too!
-
"Mary Ann Kate, daughter of Thomas and Mary Ann Roberts". They wed when the baby was almost 7 months old and had the baby baptised when she was 10 months old.
I would agree with you chronologically with the death of his wife it makes sense, and the recording above is the clincher for me. After all baby could just have been recorded as the child of a previous marriage, Thomas chose to marry Mary Ann and acknowledge his daughter.
Looks like Thomas was having an affair with Mary Ann when it was obvious his wife was dying, as they say "life goes on" and who could blame him.
PS We should remember that a fair number of births are allocated to the wrong father even within marriage. Our family trees rely on the honesty of the mothers.
-
PS We should remember that a fair number of births are allocated to the wrong father even within marriage. Our family trees rely on the honesty of the mothers.
This trend continues. There is a university near me that, a few years ago, decided one of their introductory medical classes should study DNA by asking the students to bring in hair samples of mother, father, and themselves. They had to halt the project when early findings were that upwards of 35% of the students were not related to the fathers that they thought were theirs. :o :o :o
-
Also even though I am not sure if the parsons of the church knew of this, but when the babe Mary Ann Kate Roberts was baptised she was almost a year old and she was baptised at the same church her parents wed at just 3 and a half months before the baptism. I think there were 2 or 3 regular parsons there so maybe they knew they had a baby beforehand. Many people lied to a registrar but less people lied to a man of the cloth.
Thomas having an affair was not great but we must see it from an 1860s point of view not a 2011 point of view. As said 99% evidence is good enough for me. Also on the subsequent censuses she is listed as daughter and in an 1878 poor law record where the family applied for poor relief after losing money on a beer house business.
-
less people lied to a man of the cloth.
Would they even have had to lie? I've seen children baptised as legitimate on the same day as their parents' marriage, presumably by the same clergyman.
-
Once the parents marry the child is legitimate...
-
Once the parents marry the child is legitimate...
Nowadays and since 1926 that is the case but before then if the parents married after the birth then in the eyes of the law the child remained illegitimate.
-
I think I spend too much time an money in pursuit of trying to trace fathers of illegitimate children. Sometimes they are fairly easy to trace (see aspins comment regarding the Munros), but sometimes it is near on impossible. For example...
In September 1879 my great great great grandmother gave birth to illegitimate twins James and Samuel Garden. Their father was not stated on birth certificates, but it became clear through subsequent years that they were children of a Mr Dalgarno. When James Garden married, he gave his name as James Dalgarno, and registered his son as a Dalgarno too before changing his mind and reverting back to Garden. Samuel stuck to Garden, but on his marriage record it was stated that his mother was previously Mrs Dalgarno (which she never was).
Anyway...
I am a big fan of tracing fathers though the name of the illegitimate child. Thus I thought I'd see if there were any James or Samuel Dalgarnos in the Peterhead area as potential fathers to the twins. There were no Samuels, but two Jameses of interest.
In the first instance, James William Dalgarno had an illegitimate child with Jane Garden - the aunt of Samuel and James - in 1877. As you can imagine I thought I was in luck as there was a direct link to my family (possibly too direct). William married Jane in 1879, the year the twins were born. He became the most likely candidate until last night.
Last night I found the second James Dalgarno...
This second James Dalgarno lived at 31c Broad Street, Peterhead, in 1879. Margaret Garden - the twins mother - also lived at 31 Broad Street (it appears to be a block of flats). The twins place of birth in September 1879 was given as 31c Broad Street. Then it gets interesting. James Dalgarno's wife died in January 1879 1 1/4 months after child birth. Thus if he was the father of the twins, they would have been conceived when his wife was about 7 months pregnant (assuming both pregnancies lasted 9 months). So with a wife 7 months pregnant, may he have looked next door?
Of course I would never document either of them as the father as there is simply not enough evidence to suggest that either are definately the father. Makes you think though... ;)
-
I'm LOL here Windsor husband says there was tellie in those days ...
Did James pop next door for a cup of sugar I wonder
Yes you know the story of our Mary and William
It took me a long time to find that one out
Elizabeth
-
I'm LOL here Windsor husband says there was tellie in those days ...
Did James pop next door for a cup of sugar I wonder
Yes you know the story of our Mary and William
It took me a long time to find that one out
Elizabeth
Well they had to do something to keep themselves occupied lol.
I must admit that finding William to begin with was a bit of a nightmare, but at least we were able to know beyond reasonable doubt that we tracked down Elnor's father - because we discovered he lived with her later on in life.
Sadly with the Dalgarnos there is nothing which allows me to definatively say that 'this one is the father'. In reality, if it is neither of the two I mentioned, it could be any of uncle James's male relatives or any of the male Dalgarnos next door, or any other Dalgarnos in between.
-
Hi There
My Great Grand Mother was the Margaret Garden in your post
My Grand Father was one of the Twins James Garden born 1879 in Peterhead
Would like to share info with you sometime .
I have just set up a website called bluetoonroots.com maybe you can check it out and help me to fill in the blanks
Kind regards
Lester Garden
-
Welcome to rootschat :) Lester.
Everyone who posted on this thread should get an email notification of your reply. Once you have made 2 more posts [you can just reply twice to this thread] you will be able to send a personal message to Windsor87 by clicking on the text icon under their name & clicking 'Send personal message'. Only by personal message can you mention the names of living people or your personal email address. Good luck.
-
The illegitimacy issue is a mixed one.
I have a gt grandfather cited as the putative father in September 1817, the child was christened (and recorded as illegitimate) in October with his mother`s surname and the parents married in December. He appears on all the records with his father`s surname.
I have another one where the child was christened as the illegitimate son of both his mother and father. 3 months later the parents married but the child continued using his mother`s surname, as did all the following generations.
-
How can I work this one out
Birth cert states fathers name, dec, although I know he wasn't, then a few months later the mother takes a man, not recognised as a family member to court, she was awarded maintenance from him, no DNA in those days , I really do not know how she got away with it
Louisa Maud
-
Aspin here this is another story but cannot name anyone I had my DNA done nearly two years now on Ancestry . An email came though to me as a relative a name that I didn’t think was in my family tree but it did work out that one of my great great uncles Mr X had fathered a boy in 1891 . The point I had to make was that I had to tell MrX ‘s great great granddaughter. Who like me thought it couldn’t be . So those who have had a DNA test watch out you might find another story to tell . Photographs tell tales too these two men did look alike Elizabeth Hi Windsor how are you all keeping up in Scotland
-
How can I work this one out
Birth cert states fathers name, dec, although I know he wasn't, then a few months later the mother takes a man, not recognised as a family member to court, she was awarded maintenance from him, no DNA in those days , I really do not know how she got away with it
Louisa Maud
An awkward one.
The man paying the maintenance is as far as the Law is concerned is the biological Father.
I would include him in the tree as Father and any other men in a relationship with the Mother simply listed as Step-Father if they married the Mother or Unknown if they were not married to her. Adoption is another listing option if this is known to have been the case.
The Mother possibly made a false declaration when the birth was registered as to who the Father was, so in this case I would contact GRO and advise them of the findings and the error in their records.
-
Don’t always assume convenience leads to conception! My great grandfather was illegitimate, born 10 months after the 1861 census. His mother was a servant in a household of an elderly couple and there was also a farm servant, age 21 to her 19. Hello! I thought, he might have been the father of young William. When my DNA results, along with my brother’s, came in, there was absolutely no matches to the young man’s line. I have however, quite a few matches on a couple of other surnames in the village, and hope to work it out soon. I have some suspicions that the father was also named William.
My mother was also born to a single mother and with the DNA testing I am quite confident I have identified my grandfather was one of three brothers (from that same village).
-
An awkward one.
The man paying the maintenance is as far as the Law is concerned is the biological Father.
I would include him in the tree as Father and any other men in a relationship with the Mother simply listed as Step-Father if they married the Mother or Unknown if they were not married to her. Adoption is another listing option if this is known to have been the case.
The Mother possibly made a false declaration when the birth was registered as to who the Father was, so in this case I would contact GRO and advise them of the findings and the error in their records.
Not always I have a bastardy bond where two men are responsible for paying the maintenance or either of them or either of their heirs executors or administrators.
In other words even someone not living at the time the order was made could be responsible for paying the maintenance.
Cheers
Guy
-
How can I work this one out
Birth cert states fathers name, dec, although I know he wasn't, then a few months later the mother takes a man, not recognised as a family member to court, she was awarded maintenance from him, no DNA in those days , I really do not know how she got away with it
Louisa Maud
After 1874 any father named on a Birth Certificate (England & Wales), who wasn't the husband of the mother, had to be present at the Registration AND give his permission.
When a married woman registers a birth, it is always assumed that the father of the child is her husband. Unless the Registrar is told otherwise.
-
If the husband is shown as deceased the woman gets away with it, no proof
Louisa Maud
-
I would only make the point that we can never know now the precise circumstances of our ancestors, and our assumptions are just that.
I am just as guilty of imagining what events might have been, but given (often) very poor domestic circumstances, the cultural status of women, ignorance of simple birth control procedures and so on, we are unlikely to be able to make satisfactory judgements.
-
If the husband is shown as deceased the woman gets away with it, no proof
Louisa Maud
Is it not possible that the man died before the birth, but AFTER impregnating his wife?
-
I would only make the point that we can never know now the precise circumstances of our ancestors, and our assumptions are just that.
I am just as guilty of imagining what events might have been, but given (often) very poor domestic circumstances, the cultural status of women, ignorance of simple birth control procedures and so on, we are unlikely to be able to make satisfactory judgements.
I couldn’t have said it better! Thank you.
-
I would only make the point that we can never know now the precise circumstances of our ancestors, and our assumptions are just that.
I am just as guilty of imagining what events might have been, but given (often) very poor domestic circumstances, the cultural status of women, ignorance of simple birth control procedures and so on, we are unlikely to be able to make satisfactory judgements.
I couldn’t have said it better! Thank you.
You're most welcome :)
-
We cannot change history as I remind myself from time to time,
Louisa Maud
-
Louisa, sadly there are many supporters of the trendy political correctness of today who seem to be very much set on rewriting history, removing old statues, and rewriting the history books. I think it is imperative that we stand up to this shameful process.
Martin
-
Louisa, sadly there are many supporters of the trendy political correctness of today who seem to be very much set on rewriting history, removing old statues, and rewriting the history books. I think it is imperative that we stand up to this shameful process.
Martin
Hi Martin - can you clarify what you and Louisa are referring to as it applies to this thread?
-
I have to admit I liked the idea on Scotlandpeople birth certificates where the father sometime is shown ( Not always ) but my family tree maker make's them the husband of the mother then I add
that the mother is a single mother .This is for whoever takes on my tree after me .
I did have a birth of a baby boy born 1921 when I got a reminder telling me the father was dead yes he was killed in 1918 poor lad , but I would say it was correct to give the baby her married name at the time this was in England
Elizabeth
-
No wonder we cannot always find ancestors, if they were born illegitimate and the mother wed someone soon afterwards (the father or a different man), or a baby born to a previous marriage, the father died and mother remarried and the children took the stepfathers surname.
DNA testing is getting more commonplace and it opening up Pandora's Box, I am yet stil on the fence about DNA and genealogy.
-
I've found a few relatives through my DNA and find its great
Elizabeth