I admit to being confused. BUT I agree there must be a connection. I am going to start from the beginning, so you should not have to refer to any earlier posts from me in this thread.
I have James BAXTER married to Pheobe BROCK 14th Jan 1814. I am comfortable he is the father of Frances 1815-1877, Harriet 1820-1895 and Emma 1826-1905. I am also comfortable he was the convict (c1828) who died in Sydney 1842. There are no hints in Australian records that he married or had children in AU.
In the marriage record, the groom is from WINGFIELD.
James' birth/Chr is not confirmed to link. To marry in 1814 he had to have been born before 1796 (an arbitrary idea of mine that 18 is as young as a groom would be. I know it was legal to marry younger than this, but I would expect at least a note in passing on a marriage entry if this was the case).
I have one reference to age in his convict records, and this gives a YOB as 1791. I have another reference to age. James' burial in Sydney, where he was 56 (making YOB 1786), but I would not put too much faith in an age on a death record where the person died without any family present.
In summary, he is unlikely to have been born much before 1791.
I have chosen as the Chr 21st Nov 1791 in Cratfield. (reasoning below). The Parish register says James was named 'BAXTER or PHILPOT. This Chr occurred 8 years BEFORE Ann married Samuel PHILPOT, and I have not found any other children named similarly, but the inclusion of the name Samuel PHILPOT must mean his father was known to the Parson.
My reasoning to link James the groom to the james who was Chr is based on age, and location -- but note I have not found any Mary BAXTER linked to him.
The only other James BAXTER Chr around 1791 in the area was 26th Jan 1791 in Bury St Edmunds, Parents Robert and Susan ALDRIDGE.
AND ruminating on possible siblings named BAXTER, I make the following - unconnected - statements.
1. There is plenty of time between James' birth as BAXTER, and when Ann BAXTER married Samuel PHILPOT for siblings named BAXTER to have been born.
2. Samuel PHILPOT was named as James' father by the parson in the PR. Then 8 years later Ann married Samuel PHILPOT. This indicates to me they had an ongoing relationship during the intervening years.
3. After the 1799 marriage, Ann had 4 children in the next 9 years. Meaning that both she and Samuel were fertile.
4. If the ongoing relationship mentioned in (2) was physical, then you would expect the stork to have visited.
5. I note that Samuel and Ann were buried by the Independent Congregationalists. It is possible that for religious reasons, an earlier marriage between Ann and Samuel was NOT recorded in the CofE church records, and/or births to Ann and Samuel after James and before an 'official CofE' marriage were also not reported to the CofE parson.
Please do note that (5) is pure speculation, made to give suggestions on where to look.
Leaving aside that speculation - as your Mary BAXTER was older than James, but Ann would have been about 20 when Mary was born, so could have been her mother. Are you sure the Chr you have is the right one for the bride in the marriage witnessed by James and Pheobe? If yes, then she is not the illegitimate d of Ann. She could be Ann's sister? I do not have Ann's birth or parents.
Ann and Samuel are my 5GGP, with James the convict being my 4GGF.
BTW I have a DNA test on Ancestry which has been uploaded on other sites. It is a few years since I played around with DNA, but if you have also tested I will be glad to work with you on results.
