Another interesting register snippet

[Wilkes_ml]

from the parish register of St. Nicholas Witham, Essex 8th February 1769

John Crosby (son of Elizabeth) RICHARDS born October 9th 1768

with a note added: It has since been discovered that this child was born in the parish of Bocking October 5th 1768 and privately baptised there on the 5th of November following, by the names of Robert Marshall, consequently this second baptism which was procured by the false assertions of the sureties is entirely void with respect to the names of the child and every other purpose.

Which made me wonder, firstly how did the curate of the town of Witham even find out that it was the same child ( unless the mother had told people about it, and they reported her)? And also was this some sort of fraud or was the mother just wanting to change her son's name and innocently thinking a second baptism was the way to go?

I think that the fact that she gave a different date of birth (though only out by four days) and the fact she travelled 5 miles to another larger town does suggest some kind of deception.

[Peter Goodey]

was this some sort of fraud?

Probably. An illegitimate child gained settlement in the parish of birth. So this child was legally the responsibility of Bocking. I'm guessing the mother probably had settlement in Witham and was trying to ensure that the child followed suit.

Although the Poor Law was not an ecclesiastical responsibility you can often spot evidence of vicars doing their bit to protect the interests of the ratepayers of the parish.

[Wilkes_ml]

Although the Poor Law was not an ecclesiastical responsibility you can often spot evidence of vicars doing their bit to protect the interests of the ratepayers of the parish.

Yes, I do get the general impression that the church probably worked quite closely with the overseers, and maybe they were aware of this sort of thing happening so were suspicious of certain illegitimate births. I hadn't realised that illegitimate children gained settlement from birth and not from the mother's place of settlement, as they would do their father's if they were legitimate.

I always wondered why my ancestor gave birth at the workhouse in 1785 and had her child baptised & buried at Stisted in Essex, when I'm sure her mother was from Bocking. But that also explains why unmarried girls were sent off to other counties to have their illegitimate babies, so that the child would not be a burden on the mother's home parish.

But for those children born far away, in another county, what if something happened to the mother? for example, she died in childbirth having another (probably) illegitimate child, would the child be sent back to it's birth parish even if it was miles away?

[Guy Etchells]

Yes, if the mother died the child was walked back to its parish of settlement. A similar thing happened if the husband died. His wife and children were walked to the husband's parish of settlement, a place the wife and children might never have been in their lives.
Cheers
Guy

[susan-y]

When I see a 2nd name of Crosby or Marshall I wonder if it was the father's surname. Maybe she changed her mind about who the father of the child was... maybe she thought in 2 different towns she could go after 2 different chaps for support?