on baptismal records, was father's name shown if he was deceased?

[nicholastolson]

Whenever I've come across a baptism with no father named, I've assumed the mother is unmarried. Is it possible, though, that the father had died before the child was baptised, and that the mother is his widow? The period I'm thinking about is roughly from 1750-1837.

I'll give one example: Bridget, baptised on 12 October 1806 in All Saints, Dewsbury, as the daughter of Priscilla Tolson. Some trees show her as the daughter of James Tolson and Priscilla Richardson, presumably on the assumption that James had died before Bridget's baptism.

My own sense is that, in such a case, the church would still have shown the father's name, even if he was deceased. Am I correct?

[BumbleB]

Looking at the image for the baptism entries in 1806 it is interesting to note that there are a number of entries where only the mother is named.  If they were all illegitimate then Dewsbury was 

Not sure why each of these entries also has a "tick" in the margin. 

[J.R.Ellam]

Hi

Sometimes, (depending on church) they would put widow beside the mothers name so I would look for a baptism for a female with same name 16+ years before the birth. If that fails I would look for and marriage around the time of the baptism, (before and after).

John

[BumbleB]

There is a marriage at Dewsbury in 1803 for James Tolson (Clothier) and Priscilla Richardson - licence says that James is 37, plus there is a burial for James Tolson, son of Richard - 17 September 1804.

[LizzieL]

I think it would be usual to include the name of a deceased father (with a note to say he was deceased), to indicate the child was legitimate. As long as the named father had not died so long before that he could not actually be the father.
I have one baptism where mother was shown as widow, nut the child was noted as base bor. The mother's husband had died a couple of years earlier and the widow had a relationship with another man. She subsequently married my relative, but given the childs middle name, I don't believe my relative was the natural father.
I also have a case where a woman had her two children baptised at the same time. The older one was two years old and was baptised as the son of her and Charles Livermore (deceased), the younger one (a few weeks old) was baptised as the child of her and a different man.
On the face of it the record implies that she was the widow of Charles Livermore and she was baptising their child of that marriage and also the child of her new marriage.
In fact she was never married to either man, both were married to someone else at the time of this double baptism. Charles Livermore was alive and well and living with another woman.
The vicar or clerk who fills in the records only records what he is told unless he has good reason to believe otherwise.

[WhataPratt]

I can only speak to the one example of this I have in my own tree, which is a little later than your period (1856), but in my case the deceased father was listed on the baptism record with no indication that he was deceased (9 months after he died!). This threw me off for a while before I ordered the birth certificate, which confirmed that he was deceased. Pre-1837 that's not an option, of course.

[LizzieL]

I can only speak to the one example of this I have in my own tree, which is a little later than your period (1856), but in my case the deceased father was listed on the baptism record with no indication that he was deceased (9 months after he died!). This threw me off for a while before I ordered the birth certificate, which confirmed that he was deceased. Pre-1837 that's not an option, of course.

The vicar may just have asked the mother what the father's name was, and she didn't mention he had died or wasn't asked.
Like marriage records often don't record that a deceased father of one party has died. It all depends whether bride or groom are specifically asked or actually think to mention it.

[WhataPratt]

Like marriage records often don't record that a deceased father of one party has died. It all depends whether bride or groom are specifically asked or actually think to mention it.

Indeed! Like in the case of the marriage certificates of this same deceased father's two children, one of which states that he was deceased, one of which does not. 

[J.R.Ellam]

Hi

Just had a look for Pricilla Tolson on Ancestry and a Pricilla Tolson shows up in the Bastardy records in 1815 (but could be 1812) Dr. William Fawcet and then 1816 Josh Scott.
A Pricilla Tolson aged 66 was buried in 1841, widow of James Tolson, (so would have been born about 1775.)
It would all depend on when James Tolson died?

John