Archiver > BRISTOL_AND_DISTRICT > 2009-08 > 1250720603

From: "Nancy Frey" <>
Subject: Re: [B&D] Value of going back beyond illegitimate children.
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 18:23:23 -0400
References: <><878B8A81600547929200F0B3102DB058@acer2b73192757><3E6B13334D7545CDA96B4F0C66EB8976@OwnerPC><B045F17ED3A54C3A93CE450405D03F69@acer2b73192757> <><766BF8C4B3A141B0881617FBC4BDC2A7@acer2b73192757><><4EE84D9964B04B02B61E178A0C0776C4@UserPC>

Hi Liz,

More valid points! I've found a few of those as well -- a child popping up
from nowhere at 12 years of age. Sometimes they are even shown on one
census having a different surname before being amalgamated into the family
and taking on the surname of the adoptive parents.

I have one right now where they were kind enough to point out that he was
adopted. Should I bother to find out who his real parents were? I think
not as he is not in my direct line. But an interesting exercise for when I
run out of real rellies to trace.

But the children registered as a child of the couple shortly after its birth
isn't going to be easy to detect. What are the clues? I have one family
where after the marriage took place, the husband never seems to be there at
census time. A coincidence? Or are the five children not his? The
clergyman actually wrote in the parish registers that one of them wasn't,

Thanks for your input, Liz.


Nancy Frey
Newcastle, Ontario, CANADA
OPC for Ansford & Castle Cary, Somerset
Moderator of Yahoo! Catsash Hundred Group
Moderator of Yahoo! Glaston Twelve Hides Hundred Group
Moderator of Yahoo! NorthWiltshire Group
Moderator of Yahoo! SouthWiltshire Group
Moderator of Yahoo! WestWiltshire Group
Moderator of Yahoo! FULFORD_North Devon Group
Moderator of Yahoo! DAVIDGE Connections Group

----- Original Message -----
From: "Liz" <>
To: <>; <>
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 2:07 PM
Subject: Re: [B&D] Value of going back beyond illegitimate children.

> But that's not quite true either! I spent a Christmas afternoon looking
> at
> my friends' family. The two ladies concerned were sisters in their 80s
> and
> 90s so I had to handle the result quite carefully as it transpired their
> great aunt was actually their grandmother! Fortunately they had a
> suspicion
> and this just confirmed the fact.
> So often families took responsibility for grandchildren when their
> daughters
> or even sons were not actually married. On occasion they even took the
> children of neighbours, especially if they couldn't have children...they
> would then go down to the Registrar and have them registered as their
> own...well, there wasn't legal adoption until late 1920s. There are
> numerous reasons why you cannot even accept that the mother is the mother!
> Think about those children in your own tree, especially those in the
> middle,
> where you can't find the birth, has it occurred to you that this child
> didn't originate in that family!
> Liz
> OPC for Street, Somerset

This thread: