RootsChat.Com

General => The Common Room => Topic started by: brigidmac on Sunday 27 November 22 16:59 GMT (UK)

Title: Affiliation orders " on the oath of "
Post by: brigidmac on Sunday 27 November 22 16:59 GMT (UK)
I've been looking at some Lancashire affiliation orders for illigitimate babies around 1800

The language is similar in all

 Mr X of ...parish
Adjudged to be the reputed father of
 Yz born upon the body of miss z of parish


To pay unto the overseers of the poor
for the lying in of miss Z  and maintenance

Weekly amount ..one shilling

But last sentence is

Proved upon the oath of ....and then the name seems to be different in each case

Who could be swearing to a paternity of a child ??

Any ideas
Title: Re: Affiliation orders " on the oath of "
Post by: brigidmac on Sunday 27 November 22 17:10 GMT (UK)
With thanks to amongdog for making me aware that these are available on Ancestry

Some of the orders are to remove a single woman and her children to a different parish.it was in each counties interest to reducee
 Number of parish dependants

The oaths are all of men  some occur more than once

could it be local vicars ? For example William Hart in Ince
David corner in whiston + prescott
Title: Re: Affiliation orders " on the oath of "
Post by: Bookbox on Sunday 27 November 22 19:07 GMT (UK)
Who could be swearing to a paternity of a child ??

I think you may have misread it?

It is not paternity that’s being sworn to, but simply the fact that the magistrate’s order has been served on the appropriate person – on the alleged father (for a bastardy order), or on the overseers of the other parish (for a removal order).

The named person swearing the oath will have been a parish officer, most likely one of the overseers.
Title: Re: Affiliation orders " on the oath of "
Post by: brigidmac on Sunday 27 November 22 19:35 GMT (UK)
Thank you bookbox

That makes sense now .

It was seeing pages with 4 cases but 4 different people swearing oaths that led me to the incorrect assumption.

Fascinating reading