Illegitimate child baptised by their grandparents?

[NigelWells]

Has anyone else come across the situation where it appears that an illegitimate child has been baptised by their grandparents?

I have a couple of cases where I'm pretty sure this has happened. One example

Thomas Harrid (1788) and Mary Perkins (1787) have a Daughter Ann (1812).

I think Ann has 2 children out of wedlock before she marries Joseph Matthews in 1840
John Harrad in 1832 and Sarah Harrad in 1837.

In 1841 John and Sarah are living in the same household as Thomas and Mary
In 1851 John and Sarah are living in the same household as Ann and Joseph, with a relationship to the Head (Jospeh) as "Wife's Son and Wife's Daughter"

Sarah states she is Illegitimate on her marriage certificate, and there is a matching Baptism record which lists Ann as her mother - no father.

However there is a Baptism record for John (1932) on Family Search with Thomas and Mary as his parents. Mary would have been 47 years old when she had John, so it is possible.

I'm more inclined to believe the 1851 census, partly because I have a similar case in another part of my tree.

The other case is based on oral history. My grandmother always insisted that her "brother" wasn't really her brother, although the records show him has being registered as a child of her parents (my great grand=parents). My grandmother maintained that he was really the illegitimate child of her mother's younger sister who became pregnant while working as a servant in a large house and that her parents took this child in and "adopted" him.

I was therefore wondering if others had come across this situation?

Nigel

[SmallTownGirl]

Could there be more than one Thomas/Mary Harrid couple in the village and that the John who was baptised in 1832 (not 1932) is the son of the other couple?

Whereabouts in the country are we talking about?

STG

[SmallTownGirl]

Found them now on the 1851 census, living in Burton on Trent. Says that John was b. in Birmingham and Sarah in Burton.

STG

[Olde Crone Holden]

Yes, I have this quite a few times in my tree. It was quite common for grandparents to take on the raising of their illegitimate grandchild and that might also include baptising them. I think in some cases the Vicar accepted that these people were going to be the child's parents in practice, so put them down as parents - remember this was before legal adoption. Also, the church was interested in who was going to be responsible for this child's upkeep, so the concept of "parents" could be quite flexible.

I have one case where I know that the grandmother took the illegitimate grandchild to be baptised because the mother had flitted off into the night with some sailor, lol. This is noted in the margin of the register.

Another - my direct ancestor of course - was registered as the child of James and Hannah, a respectably married couple. It was many years before I looked at his baptism, which revealed he was actually the illegitimate son of Ellen, sister of James. Ellen died and James and Hannah took the child on and brought him up as their own.

OC

[GallowayLass]

Yes, even as late as 1924.

[Olde Crone Holden]

It might be worth looking for a bastardy order too. My 3 x GGM was a very naughty girl and had three children out of wedlock, 1820,1822 and 1824. The first child was named in a bastrdy order and her FATHER (not the father of the child, who had absconded) promised to have financial responsibility for this child. He was a farmer of reasonable means and therefore a Bastardy Bond was accepted.

Babies two and three were too much for her father and she was on her own with them. The father did pay some maintenance here and there but I am left with an impression of a chaotic way of life and the mother was in and out of the workhouse, leaving me a very nice paper trail!

OC

[JudithM]

How about this confusing family then:
Joseph Luke TWEED baptised 22nd March 1861 in Cheveley Parish Church, Cambs - son of Philip and E TWEED
Joseph Luke TWEED birth registered March quarter 1861 in Newmarket district

census 7th April 1861
Joseph TWEED shown as son, aged 1 month in household of James and Hannah TWEED (these were parents of Philip TWEED)
Emma TWEED shown as daughter aged 1 month in household of Philip and Emmeline TWEED

Emma TWEED birth registered in June quarter 1861 in Newmarket district
Emma TWEED baptised 18th August 1861 in Cheveley parish church, daughter of Philip and Emmeline TWEED


Emma dies in 1862, Joseph again shows up as son of James and Hannah in 1871

My theory is that Emmeline had twins, the little girl was sickly, or perhaps Emmeline was poorly after the birth, so grandparents offered to take the boy, registered him, had him baptised (but because it was a small village the vicar knew Joseph was Philip's son and recorded this in baptism register) and brought him up as their own. Meanwhile Philip and Emmeline kept Emma, registered her birth and took her to be baptised a little later, perhaps the delay caused by Emmeline being poorly. This of course is just a theory and though I've seen baptisms I haven't bought birth certificates to check who was shown as parents.

[NigelWells]

First of all to answer a question from STG. I've fairly sure that there is only one Thomas and Mary GHarrad in Burton upon Trent at the time of the baptism.

But it is good to her that others have come across this practice of the grandparents baptising their illegitimate grandchildren. With regards to the Bastardy Bond, it's definitely worth looking into when I can plan a trip to the CRO.