Illegitimate birth questions

[Erato]

Now that I know where Charles Duddridge was in 1841 (thanks to Joburg for the speedy reply to my query) and who were the members of his family, even more questions have arisen.  I suppose this is inevitable.  In 1841, Charles was living in Stogumber, Somerset with his parents John Duddridge and Sarah (Humphries) and seven younger siblings.  The christenings of all seven siblings are recorded in the parish register; only Charles is missing.  Apparently, this is because John Duddridge married Sarah Humphries shortly before the birth of the second child (the marriage is recorded), meaning that Charles’ birth was illegitimate.

Since Charles used Duddridge as his surname, can one assume that John was, in fact, his father and recognized Charles as his son when he finally got around to marrying Sarah?  Or was it common for illegitimate step children to take the step father’s surname?  If John really was the father, could he have had Charles christened later once he and Sarah had regularized their situation or was church policy “once a bastard, always a bastard?”

[Gardener]

I think it was fairly common for a child to take their step-father's surname. Sometimes they revert to their mother's name later, sometimes to that of their real father I think. Any combination!
I don't think the church refused to baptise bastards everywhere - I've seen plenty of examples of that happening. Also late baptisms for various reasons.
Have you looked for Charles baptised elswhere? Or did Sarah always live in Stogumber - sounds like a small place. My gtgrandparents seem to have pretended to be married and had two children baptised as a married couple but that was in Dudley so I suppose no-one knew any better!

[KernishKim]

2 of my ancesters had unmarried mothers, from different branches of my family.
Both had their mothers maiden names, even when Mum married, neither of them took their stepfathers surnames!

[Erato]

Charles was always known as Duddridge, as far as I know, from 1841 until his death in 1909.  I have looked for Charles birth elsewhere because on one census he claimed the neighboring village of Bicknoller as his birthplace, but he wasn't recorded there either.  Stogumber was a pretty small place and it appears that Sarah Humphries' family were long time residents; I have found her parents and grandparents in the records there.  The Duddridges were also long time residents and they account for a very large proportion of the population.

There were no Charleses of any surname christened in 1821 in Stogumber (nor in 1820 nor 1822) however, a Charlotte Humphries was christened in 1821 and her mother was a Sarah Humphries, with no father listed.   So maybe this is Charles and some error has him recorded or transcribed as Charlotte.  But I don't know if she was the same Sarah Humphries.  It seems half the women in that time period were named Sarah.  Too bad everyone in every line of my family was unimaginative in naming their children - I'd be rich if I had a nickel for every Mary, Elizabeth, Sarah, John, Wiiliam, George, Charles, etc.

[KernishKim]

I know where your coming from!!!!
What I want to know is why ive never come accross the name Victoria in all my months of searching (my daughters name)
Queen Victoria was on the throne for about 1000 years!!
Why didnt anyone call their daughters after her?

[windeatt]

1.  I have an illegitimate birth where the child was recorded with his single mother's name in the 1871 census but after his mother married, he always used his stepfather's name (and lived with them as part of their family).  Of course, it is possible that the stepfather was his real father but it seems unlikely given that the child was born hundreds of miles away in the mother's home town and I suspect the mother didn't meet her husband until she moved north much later.  N .B. it is not illegal to change your name in England.  Anyone can change their name at any time - your legal name is what you are known by.

2.  There are large numbers of illegitimate children who appear in the baptism registers so there doesn't seem to be any reason at all why an illegitimate child would not be baptised just like any other? (On the parish bapism register pages I have seen there is usually at least one illegitimate child's baptism recorded per page).

3.  If you can't find the baptism in the local parish there could be several reasons - one, of course, being that the mother didn't have the child baptised.  It also seems likely that your Charlotte is, in fact, the Charles that you found.  Sometimes the clerks and clergy were barely literate themselves or none too careful in their recording of events and errors crept in.  Other reasons might be that Sarah was away from home and in service at the time - if they were an ordinary family of ag. labs. she is highly likely to have been working in another parish as some sort of servant or farm servant - people were often hired by the year.  And she could have had the baby there.  Have you tried searching the A2A site for a bastardy or settlement record?

[Gardener]

Might the marriage certificate for Charles help? 1Course he may have grown up believing that John was his father even if he wasn't. Or did John leave a handy will making all clear?
You will probably never know so either you carry on with this line, bearing in mind that it might not be "yours", or you just leave it with the option to return later - I chose to do that with my gtgrandmother but as her mother was a Smith and there was no father in sight I think it was the wise option

[janan]

Hi Erato,
Just a thought - have you checked the original entry of the baptism of Charlotte to see if it wasn't actually Charles wrongly transcribed  regards Jan

[Shaztoni]

My grandfather took on his step father's  name it wasn't until after his death that the family found out that he was illegitimate, he was five when his mother married his step father before that he had his mother's name.
Sharon