Rates of illegitimacy were
apparently rising throughout the early modern period.
It has been calculated that only one birth in 144 was
outside marriage in the first half of the seventeenth
century, rising to one in 33 in the first half of the
eighteenth1 and increasing rapidly from
the mid 18th century,2 with as many as one
birth in ten in the years 1810-1812.3
These calculations are based on entries in parish
registers, and may underestimate levels of illegitimacy,
as it seems that some clergy were reluctant to
baptise such children.
An example of missing
bastards from parish registers can be seen in
eighteenth century Aldermaston, where the complaints
of curate Zacharias Whiting to the archdeacon
illustrate the point. He said that the local
almshouses had been "made little better than
Houses of common Prostitution". The "Morals
of the Parish" were sternly criticised as "In
General excessively corrupt and depraved;
Prostitution connived at and encouraged - Several
Women being suffered to bring Bastard after Bastard,
without ever being punished, and in some Instances
without being called upon to swear to the Father".
The obsession with "lewd Women and Prostitutes
unpunished" continued with a list of what
Whiting saw as the worst offenders: Elisabeth Pike,
Anne and Martha Hitchcock, Mary Gunler, Elisabeth
Read and Margaret Webb,
"The Morals of the
Parish are in general excessively corrupt and
depraved; Prostitution connived at and encouraged -
Several women being suffered to bring Bastard after
Bastard without ever being punished........
with the number of
illegitimate children born to each woman. Mary Gunler
had "3 or 4" such children, Margaret Webb
just one, and the rest two each. Whiting attested
also to the existence of "Others married and
unmarried who are well known to live in a state of
publick Lewdness". The curate complained also at
the practice of Aldermaston parents of "calling
upon the Minister to baptise new-born Infants, on
Pretence of their being dangerously ill - and afterwards in many Cases
the Parents refuse to bring them to Church, tho'
called upon repeatedly to do it". Whiting
concluded his long list of complaints with the
statement that church repairs (perhaps because of the
cost to ratepayers) and the establishment of Sunday
Schools were "Two of the principal Causes of the
Spite, Malevolence and Persecution which Mr Whiting
experiences from his Parish of Aldermaston". The
document is undated but is likely to be between
1768 and 1774.4 It is interesting to see
that the majority of these women and their bastards
do not appear in the Aldermaston parish register.5
One woman does appear in the parish overseer's
records, with the survival of a bastardy
examination of Elizabeth Pike dated May 1769.6
Allegedly married to a seaman, "she has not seen
her husband for three years and says that John
Lampard of Aldermaston, sawyer, is the father"
of her child.
Common law in England
assumed that the child of a married woman was that of
her husband unless there was compelling evidence to
the contrary - as with the long separation of
Elizabeth and William Pike. Technical illegitimacy,
where a couple lived together without being married,
or whose marriage was invalid, may not be discovered
by today's researcher at all. For instance, in
Burghfield we find the parish register records the
baptism of Elizabeth Prince on 29 April 1750, and her
brother John on 17 December 1751, apparently the
legitimate children of Henry and Martha Prince.7
Only the discovery in the Archdeaconry records that
Henry and Martha were later prosecuted for living
together as husband and wife, although Martha was the
sister of Henry's late wife Joan or Joanna (incest
according to the law at that time) reveals the true
story.
Parish register entries of
the baptism of an illegitimate child sometimes name
the alleged father, but may simply say that the child
was a bastard, base born (or abbreviation BB),
spurious or other term indicating illegitimacy,
naming only the mother. This is often disappointing
for the family historian. Some do indeed have to
abandon hope of tracing the father, especially as
only a minority of cases are reflected in parish
records relating to bastardy.9 However,
many cases are represented in these records, and they
are always worth trying because of the potential
value of the information they may contain. For
parishes with records deposited in Berkshire Record
Office, records relating specifically to bastardy
will generally be found in section 15 of the parish
catalogues, but other poor law records may also be
helpful. The parish was concerned about bastardy,
mainly because illegitimate children were more
likely to require financial upkeep by the community.
A bastard was initially chargeable to the parish of
birth, whereas a legitimate child took its father's
place of settlement. One early instance of the
problems this could cause occurred in 1694, when an
unnamed, and apparently abandoned, two year old
girl was brought to Hungerford from Portsmouth "on
the pretense or information that the father was John
Rayley, a soldier in Colonel Hastings' Regiment, then
quartered and legally settled". Hungerford
disputed the case, and returned the child to
Froxfield in Hampshire.10 From 1744 a
bastard was settled in its mother's parish, leading
to cases like that of seven year old Sarah Keen, born
in Northmoor, Oxfordshire, and returned there alone
in 1774 from her mother Martha's new home in Sutton
Courtenay (a settlement acquired by her marriage to
James Napper).11
Examination of Elizabeth Pike - one of the
reputed "lewd women and Prostitutes of
Aldermaston" - 1769 (BRO D/P 3/15/1/5)
An Act of Parliament of 1576
allowed the Justices of the Peace to imprison the
parents of an illegitimate child, and a later Act of
1610 allowed a mother to be sent to prison unless she
could provide securities for her future good
behaviour.12
"Henry
More .... mode yt cursed use of hav[in]g ye
keys of ye Church in his keeping to turn it into a
bawdy house."
Cases of sexual immorality
continued to be brought before the church courts. The
churchwardens of each parish were required to make
annual presentments of such cases to the authorities
at the visitations of the deaneries by the Bishop,
Archdeacon or officials of the peculiar jurisdiction,
and these sometimes give details otherwise unrecorded
relating to bastardy cases. One example of 1673
found a parish sexton, Henry More, having "made
yt cursed use of hav[in]g ye keys of ye Church in his
keeping to turn it into a bawdy-house. One yt charged
him with a Bastard & none doubts ye Truth of it s[ai]d
upon her Oath yl he got it in ye Chancell".13
Sadly the identity of the mother and child, and
location of the parish is unknown. Researchers hoping
to use church court records should be aware that they
are often difficult to use, and as with other
sources, not all cases came to court. Parish
officials encouraged pregnant women to marry, as a
child born more than a month after the marriage was
regarded as legitimate. Where a case involved a
dispute between two parishes as to which was liable,
for instance if the alleged father was himself a
pauper in another parish, records may also survive in
the Quarter Sessions records, though this is rare
before the mid eighteenth century.14
An Act of Parliament Of 1733
first required mothers needing support from the
parish to declare the father's name.15 The
overseers would then attempt to obtain maintenance
from him by way of a bond of indemnity, and on pain
of arrest. For instance in 1761 Jane Dean of Bray,
who had been working in Middlesex, blamed George
Saunders, "late Post Boy to Mr Parker at the
Swan Inn at Egham" for her pregnancy. A warrant
was duly issued for his arrest, even though this
meant bringing him from his new place of employment
in Piccadilly, London.16 We see the stages
which might ensue in the case of labourer John Lucas
of Stanmore, Beedon, who had fathered the six week
old child of Mary Aldridge of Chieveley in 1764. The
Chieveley parish records include both the warrant to
apprehend John, issued on 28 June, and the bond to
indemnify the parish, which he made two days later (he
could only afford a shilling a week).17
Even after the parish overseers were superseded by
Poor Law Unions and Boards of Guardians, this
practice continued. For instance, in November 1843
the Abingdon Board of Guardians applied for a
bastardy order on William Pead of Abingdon, father of
the child of Arm Moore of Culham.18 From
1844, the mother herself was entitled to apply to the
court of Petty Sessions for maintenance from the
father whether she was in receipt of poor relief or
not.
If they were in the
workhouse they might ask the Board of Guardians for
assistance, as did Eliza Cam, Lucy Morgan and
Caroline Garland in 1885. They appeared before
Windsor Board of Guardians "and asked the
Guardians to take proceedings against the putative
fathers to obtain Orders of affiliation", action
which was duly taken.19 An example of
levels of maintenance can be seen in the order made
to labourer John Wiltshire of Chilton Foliat in 1735.20
He was to pay 1 shilling and 3 pence a week to the
churchwardens and overseers of Hungerford until his
child by Elizabeth Baggs of Charnham Street,
Hungerford, reached the age of eight, plus 40
shillings back maintenance. If the child survived to
the age of eight, Wiltshire would then contribute £5
towards the cost of having the child apprenticed.
Another man, George Lyon of Hungerford, a goldsmith,
rather than making cash payments, arranged in 1735
for certain silver watches, rings, ivory knives and
forks to be held in trust for sale, and the proceeds
used for the birth expenses of Esther White, about
seven months pregnant with his child, and for the
upkeep of the infant.21 In another
Hungerford case in 1739, Richard North paid £18 to
the parish authorities for his child by Elizabeth
Bird; the lump sum was handed over to Elizabeth's
father Jonathan, and he and her brother Joseph
indemnified the parish against further charge.22
Some women refused to name the father, for instance
widow Arm Jennings of Burghfield who had a child born
in Shinfield in 1753; one Anthony Palmer (a relative?)
entered into a bond to indemnify the parish in this
case.23 In Wantage in 1776, miller John
Taylor and grazier William Stroud agreed to pay the
costs of the illegitimate child of Sarah Partridge,
"to prevent Sarah from being apprehended to be
examined concerning the child, and to stop all
enquiry and examination as to the father".24
One can only speculate as to their connection with
the unidentified father.
Other details, such as
period of maintenance or amounts payable, might vary.
For instance, John Davis of Hungerford, woolcomber,
and John Edmonds of Marlborough, Wiltshire,
gentleman, agreed privately in 1714 to jointly
maintain Elizabeth, a child born to Davis's wife
Naomi by Edmonds before her marriage, until the girl
was 16. This story is revealed in the bond they made
to parish officials.25 Another person
might indemnify the parish, as when in 1716 John
Clerke of Kintbury, cordwainer, indemnified
Hungerford against the costs of bringing up a boy
fathered by his son Jonathan.26 In Drayton
in 1756, widow Elizabeth Cowley was prepared to
indemnify against the costs of the lying-in (the
birth) in the case of her pregnant daughter Martha,
provided that she was allowed to stay at home.27 (Martha had a legal
settlement in another parish, and the churchwardens
had issued a removal order for her to go there). John
Couldrey of Besselsleigh, labourer, meanwhile,
entered into a bond to pay for his child by Arm
Kimber of Drayton in 1791, but specified that it was
to be void if Arm married before the baby's birth.28
In 1675 John Brakes of Warfield, yeoman, indemnified
the parish on behalf of his servant Elizabeth Blunt,
pregnant by her "pretended husband" William
Blunt, who had deserted her.29 Former
overseer of Warfield William Marlow found himself
liable after he kindly (but wrongly) allowed pregnant
Elizabeth Skull to live in Warfield in 1802 although
she was legally settled in Heckfield in Hampshire.
Facing prosecution by his successors, he agreed to
indemnify the parish against the costs of the child.30
A mother might also contribute if she did not keep
the child herself; for instance in 1775 Elizabeth
Orchard was to pay 6d a week if she did not nurse her
child, whereas the father, John Bourton, contributed
is 6d a week.31 This was common practice.
"Elizabeth Grendall
explained that her unborn child had been 'begotten'
sometime last April on a couch in the hall of the
dwelling house of Mr. Sylvester (her employer) .....
by his son"
Bastardy examinations may
include details relating to the circumstances
leading to the pregnancy. For instance, widow Hannah
Basdell of Wallingford dated the beginning of her
relationship with soldier James Haddock very
precisely to "3 February last [1759] in her
dwelling house".32 Maidservant
Elizabeth Grendall explained that her unborn child
had been "begotten sometime last April on a
couch in the hall of the dwelling house of Mr
Sylvester [her employer] in Waltham St Lawrence, by
his son Mr George Sylvester ... No other person than
George Sylvester ever had carnal knowledge of her".33
A shocking case in Wantage in 1770 saw Gilbert Cooper
junior sleeping with his father's servant [the
nursemaid?] Mary Wedge or Paris, in the bed she
shared with Gilbert's 12 year old sister Mary and 4
year old brother Edward. Mary added that "after
Gilbert Cooper left her she heard the Clock Strike
One".34 Robert Shorter of Wokingham
allegedly seduced Hannah Soaper of Easthampstead in
June 1748 by promising marriage, six months later
eventually had the banns published, but then changed
his mind. Just before the banns were called for the
third time, he appears to have absconded, sending
word by a friend that "he would never marry her".35
One factor which should
perhaps be borne in mind is that the information
contained in parish bastardy records may not necessarily
be accurate. Some allegations were disputed by the
alleged fathers. One example I have come across was
that of John Bayly of Streatley, who in 1715/6
enlisted the support of the vicar and churchwardens
of the parish against such an allegation.36
In 1808 John Hoffman attempted to deny his obligation
to maintain a ten year old child living in Shinfield
on the grounds that he was not the father, although
from associated accounts it looks as if his appeal
was unsuccessful.37 Another incident where
it is not clear
"We present
the Revd John Schults Vicar of Hagbourn for keeping
at his House Rachael Harris a woman of very bad
character who has since she lived with him two
bastards".
what really happened is the
allegation made by Job Lousley and Richard Child, the
churchwardens of Hagbourne, in May 1822 as follows:
"First we present the
Revd John Schults Vicar of Hagbourn for keeping at
his House Rachael Harris a woman of very bad character
who has had since she lived with him two bastards,
the Father of which bastards (or one of them at least)
we have great reason to believe is the said John
Schults; and we beg leave to represent that the said
John Schults do even unto this day persist in keeping
the said vile woman notwithstanding he is well aware
of the scandalous stories in circulation respecting
the same."38
Schultes (as he himself
wrote his name) did not long survive the complaint,
as he was buried in Hagbourne on 26 January 1823,
aged 63.39 The parish registers reveal the
names of Rachel Harris's two children. The younger,
Henry, was born on 27 March 1820 and allegedly
baptised privately by Schultes on 17 April. He did
not however enter the details in the register. The
older child was significantly baptised by the
Christian names of Penelope Schultes on 18 April 1819
(though the evidence of her age at death suggests
that she was actually born in about 1815). She was
also the only child in Hagbourne at that time not to
be baptised by Schultes, but by the Revd John Jones.
On 29 April 1823, barely
three months after Schultes' death, Rachel Harris
married Joseph May, a schoolmaster also living in
Hagbourne. Shortly afterwards, the Revd H L Majendie,
curate of Didcot, who had married them, evidently
made enquiries about young Henry and made a
retrospective entry in the baptism register based
on Rachel's testimony. Sadly the child died in April
1825, a month after his fifth birthday. In 1827
Rachel's son by her new husband was baptised Henry
Howgate, perhaps partly in memory of his late half-brother.40
The couple seem then to have moved away, perhaps to
London, as Penelope Schultes Harris, the elder of the
two disputed children, was buried in Hagbourne in
January. 1830, aged 14, and then resident in London.41
Schultes had been vicar of
Hagbourne since 1791, and patron of the living
probably since 1805, succeeding his father, known as
John Scoolt, in both capacities. He may have been
married when Penelope was born - a Mrs Joann
Schultes, aged 58, was buried in Hagbourne on 5
January 1820, but there is no definite evidence that
she was his wife. Rachel Harris was probably born in
Milton in 1792, the youngest of a sizeable family
mostly given Biblical names. The evidence that
Schultes was the father of Rachel's children is not
absolutely conclusive; one might suggest that he was
merely a benefactor, and that the churchwardens had
some grudge against him.
This article owes much to
the ongoing project of the Berkshire Record Society
and the Berkshire Family History Society to produce
a calendar of surviving overseers' records for the
county, the first volume of which has been published,
covering thirteen parishes in the Kennet
Valley.42 Records for the majority of the
county - in fact for every parish with surviving
records with the exception of the Reading parishes -
are available in the Record Office searchroom in the
form of the "Overseers' Project" typescripts.
Helpful overviews of the types of record thus created
may be found both in Peter Durrant's introduction to
the completed Record Society edition, and in the
paper on bastardy and apprenticeship records
forming part of the Historical Association's series
of "Short Guides"43. One word of
warning: although many individual cases have been
recorded, bastardy records, which tend to consist of
loose slips of paper, have in many cases failed to
survive. Even in parishes with large numbers of
surviving documents, the particular details of the
person you are researching may remain a mystery.
1 Charles Cox, The
Parish Registers of England (London 1910) p72
2 K M Thompson, Apprenticeship and Bastardy
Records (Historical Association Short Guides to
records no. 29)
3 Cox, op cit
4 BRO D/A2 b5A f27
5 BRO D/P 3/1/2
6 BRO D/P 3/15/1/5; calendared in Peter Durrant (ed),
Berkshire Overseers Papers 1654-1834 (Berkshire
Record Society) volume 3 (1997) (hereafter
referred to as Durrant (1997)) p16
7 BRO D/P29/1/3
8 BRO D/A2 d2 ff35-36
9 W E Tate, The Parish Chest (3rd ed. Cambridge
1969) p219
10 BRO D/P 71/13/4/1; calendared in T/B 58
11 BRO D/P 128/13/2/28; calendared in T/B 69
12 Tate, p216
13 BRO D/A2 c174 ffl80-181
14 Tate, p217
15 Tate, p217
16 BRO D/P 23/15/1/16-17; calendered in T/B44
17 BRO D/P 34/15/2/1 and D/P34/15/5/5; calendered
in Durrant (1997) p123
18 BRO G/A1/3
19 BRO G/WI 1/7
20 BRO D/P 71/13/7/8; calendared in T/B 68
21 BRO D/P 71/15/1/21; calendared in T/B 68
22 BRO D/P 71/15/1/24; calendared in T/B 68
23 BRO D/P 110/15/1/9; calendared in T/B 50
24 BRO D/P 143/15/3/41; calendared in T/B 51
25 BRO D/P 71/15/1/3; calendared in T/B 68
26 BRO D/P 71/15/1/6; calendared in T/B 68
27 BRO D/P 48/15/2/2; calendared in T/B 69
28 BRO D/P 48/15/2/3; calendared in T/B 69
29 BRO D/P 144/15/3/7; calendared in T/B 52
30 BRO D/P 144/15/3/32; calendared in T/B 52
31 BRO D/P 71/15/3/7; calendared in T/B 68
32 BRO D/P 138/15/1; calendared in T/B 54
33 BRO D/P 73/15/2/3; calendared in T/B 64
34 BRO D/P 143/15/1/33; calendared in T/B 51
35 BRO D/P 49//15/2/4; calendared in T/B52
36 BRO D/P A2 b5A f358
37 BRO D/P 110/15/5/1-2; calendared in T/B 50
38 BRO D/A2 c118
39 BRO D/P 60/1/5
40 BRO D/P 60/1/6
41 BRO D/P 60/1/5
42 Durrant (1997), OP cit
43 Thompson, op cit
