ILLEGITIMATE ANCESTORS

There are many ways that a researcher can open up their paternal line; there will be many clues to follow to discover who the father is. However, circumstances or lack of records could mean you may not find out for certain who the father of an illegitimate child actually is, but ask yourself the following questions...

Does the child have an unusual or distinctive second forename that possibly identifies someone associated with the family or a neighbour?

Was the mother working for someone, perhaps as a domestic servant? If so, could her employer or a male member of that family be a possible father?

If the mother married soon after the birth of the child, could her new husband be the biological father?

Did the suspected father leave a will? It might indicate if he has left money to an illegitimate child or their mother.

The father of an illegitimate child could be sued for maintenance, but if he was unknown then the parish was responsible for the child's maintenance - unless of course the birth mother's family took the responsibility. The overseers of the poor were required by law under the Bastardy Act of 1575 to find out the father’s identity and so shift the burden of maintenance from the parish to the father. In order to achieve this, the mother may have been summoned before a local Justice of the Peace and required under oath to give them the name of the child’s father and sometimes other details about the circumstances. These records are known as bastardy examinations.

Following the examination, the parish would then pursue the reputed father who would then be expected to either marry the mother or pay a weekly maintenance sum to support the child. The document showing this was a Bastardy Bond. It was normal for a guarantor to countersign the bond and the guarantor became liable if the father defaulted; in many cases, this was a relation. It was not always the child’s reputed father who entered into the bond; sometimes friends or benefactors may have done so. The bond remained effective until the child was old enough to be apprenticed out or could earn their own living.

If the man denied being the father of the illegitimate child and refused to sign a bastardy bond, then the overseers applied to a Justice of the Peace for a Bastardy Warrant. Once a warrant was issued, the local constables were then able to apprehend the reputed father for an appearance at the next Quarter Sessions court. Bastardy warrants were also issued if the father absconded or failed to pay the agreed maintenance. When the reputed father appeared at court, he had to admit paternity and either marry the woman or sign a bastardy bond.

A couple may have intended to marry but circumstances may have genuinely prevented that happening; the man might have been called into the army or lost his livelihood so they could no longer afford to get married - despite the woman being pregnant.

If women were unemployed they may well have turned to prostitution as a source of income and this in turn may lead to an unwanted pregnancy. In such circumstances the outcome might have been more sinister - to cover up the birth and associated shame, some women committed infanticide to hide the fact. 

It is possible that a marriage may not have been legally recognised therefore the children of the partnership were not legitimised. For examples, the marriage may not have been recognised if it had taken place in a nonconformist chapel. During the time of Hardwicke’s Act, it may not have been legitimate because the marriage was not in an Anglican church and the birth of a child was therefore deemed illegitimate.

If a man married the sister of his deceased wife, which was not unusual, then the children of that union were deemed to be illegitimate because the marriage was not considered to be valid according to consanguinity.

A woman who gave birth to an illegitimate child was more likely to bring shame on the family in a village than in a town because the village was a more close-knit community. It was also easier for the woman to remain anonymous in a town than in a village.

Another reason that a woman may have had an illegitimate child is that the father was in the army, perhaps billeted nearby and then abandoned her after a casual sexual encounter or he may not even have been aware that he had fathered a child. This is sometimes referred to as the woman catching scarlet fever, referring to the colour of a uniform. Many redcoats behaved irresponsibly toward women and had no respect for marriage. If you do suspect such a scenario, it is worth investigating further to find out which regiment was stationed nearby when the woman was likely to have become pregnant; this could lead to unearthing more information about the supposed father.

If a woman gave birth to an illegitimate child, it does not always follow that her family subsequently disowned her. There are plenty of situations where this was clearly not the case. In such circumstances you will not normally locate any bastardy documents and may never know who the father of the child is. Not all illegitimate children were the subject of a bastardy bond because it was only issued if the child was likely to become chargeable to the parish.

The illegitimate child may have been mentioned in a will because the father may have provided for the child in any possible will. This is often the cast-iron evidence you need to identify the father. It was not unknown for the wealthy father who knew his son was the father of an illegitimate child, to provide for that child in his will.

The bastardy examination was conducted before two Justices of the Peace who enquired into the circumstances surrounding how the woman became pregnant.  A woman was required to attend the hearing in person and this usually occurred after the birth of the child.

Paternal responsibility for illegitimate children could include arrangements for their future livelihood. Payment of premiums for apprenticeship was sometimes required of the father and could appear in the parish apprenticeship register or within the overseers' accounts. The actual apprenticeship indenture may also have survived.  Illegitimate children were frequently apprenticed by the parish and, even though an indenture did not normally name the father, clues from indemnity payments or a notation on the indenture may exist.

The law denied unmarried mothers any rights over their illegitimate children when they reached seven years of age and if they claimed poor relief, they were obliged to hand them over to the father if he so desired.

in 1834 when the new Poor Law came into existence, it grouped various parishes into Poor Law Unions, and the Union Board of Guardians assumed the functions previously undertaken by the parish overseers. So their minute books are a further source of possible information.

In 1839 the powers previously administered by the Justices of the Peace in the Quarter Sessions were transferred to the petty sessions. An amendment Act in 1844 allowed the mother of an illegitimate child to apply to the petty sessions for a maintenance order against the child's father. The maximum she could seek was five shillings a week for the six weeks before birth and then two shillings and sixpence a week afterwards. In cases where the support of a pregnant woman or her child had become chargeable to the union, the guardians could seek similar orders. The father had a right of appeal to Quarter Sessions. By the 1890s the maximum amount for the maintenance and education of the child had been increased to five shillings a week

Under the 1844 Act clerks of the petty sessions had to make annual returns, listing applications heard, summonses issued and maintenance orders made. They had to send copies to the Secretary of State at the Home Office together with lists of any appeals and their results. The bastardy returns included the name of the mother, the date of the summons and hearing, the result, the name of the father, and the amount of maintenance to be paid. Bastardy returns normally survive for the period covering 1845-1860s and can be found in county record offices. Some related correspondence is also available in MH12 at The National Archives.

The birth certificates of illegitimate children normally only show only the name of the mother who is usually the informant. On rare occasions the name of the father may also be shown. After 1875 the registrar was not allowed to enter the name of the father, unless he was also present and signed the register. When an illegitimate child married, the father's name was often left blank but the father's name may have been included if it has been learned in the meantime.

In some cases It was easy to register the birth of an illegitimate child as though it were legitimate by providing a fictitious father. A late birth registration by a mother may indicate that the child is illegitimate, particularly if a marriage cannot be found or if her husband's surname is the same as her own. In such cases, the baptism of the child may reveal the true position and should always be located if possible. 

Technically the property of an illegitimate child who died before 1927 without a surviving spouse or legitimate issue was vested in the Crown with grants of administration prior to 1858 in either of the Prerogative Courts. After 1858 they are with Principal Probate Registry (London). Following the establishment in 1796 of the Estate Duty Office, bequests to illegitimate children were taxed as though they were bequests to. persons who were not blood relatives.

A child described in a will as natural and lawful is legitimate. The use of the word natural means real son and not an adopted son. Where the issue was sensitive, an illegitimate child may sometimes be named but without a relationship being stated. By the 1926 Act an illegitimate child could be legitimised after 1926 by the subsequent marriage of the parents, provided that they were free to marry when the child was born.