Are these the same people?

[XPhile2868]

I've been searching on FamilySearch, and i found a coupld of records which are confusing.

The first one is James Rogerson. There are two James Rogersons being born to a Richard and Mary Rogerson in Preston, one in 1811 and one in 1809.
Then there is an Alice Rogerson, born to the same people in 1797 and 1799 - a two-year gap again.

There is one marriage between two people from Preston called Richard Rogerson and Mary, in 1798.

The second record isnt a christening, as both James have different birth and christening dates.

Is this one couple with at least two children, or two couples with two children in the same city, with the exact same names?

[Little Nell]

Hi there,

I've looked at the records in question. You need to be aware that many records on the IGI/FamilySearch site are member submitted and this can result in duplications with extracted records.  Extracted records from the parish registers usually have a batch number like C007132 (christenings at St John Preston) or Pxxxxx(also christenings).  Marriages would begin Mxxxxx.  You also find Jxxxxx or Kxxxxxx.  These are also extracted.

Batch numbers which are Axxxxx or all numbers (xxxxx) are member submitted entries.

This couple appear to have had the following children:
Alice (1797 born before they married and probably died before 1799 - check for a bastardy bond if possible)
Alice (b 1799 d 1802)
Ann (b 1800 d 1816)
James (b 1802 and died c 1807)
Richard (b 1804)
Henry (b 1806)
James (b 1808 d before 1811)
James (b 1811)
William (b 1813)

It would be worth looking at the original parish register if possible for further information.  The earlier children have the dates of birth entered as well as the baptism dates.  It is common to find names reused for children who are born after a sibling of that name has died.

Good luck

[KA]

Sorry to jump in here, but could you explain what a barstady bond is please?  And how ones goes about checking for one.  Never heard of them before.

KA

[Little Nell]

Hi KA,

I'll do my best.

Pregnancy out of wedlock was as much a hazard in the past as it is now, but frowned upon, naturally.  Sometime the parents of an illegitimate child would marry at a later date, but not always.  If the mother seemed likley to "fall on the parish", she would be questioned by the Overseer of the Poor and the churchwarden about the identity of the father.  The resulting examination paper would be part of the vestry minutes or the Workhouse minutes.  The alleged father would then be required to enter into a bond to pay for the woman's lying-in and the support of the child.  This paper is the bastardy bond and if they survive, are lodged with the parish records.  Basically the parish officers did not want to get caught looking after the baby and so loked for the father to do his duty.

Hope that helps.

Nell

[KA]

Crickey,

So the Child Support Agency was alive and well in the Victorian times!  Nothing new under the sun, as they say.

Thanks for that excellent explanation. Looks like I've got quite a few to look for.

Regards

KA