Ha! I'm very impressed by everyone's ingenuity in seeking out all this evidence. I have spent an enormous amount of time researching this family, so do have all the census data, certificates, and much other evidence. I have spent even more time head-scratching!!
I realise it would obviously make more sense to talk about Clarissa Chilvers openly. However, I would prefer to keep any referral to the name of the potential biological father quiet. Thank you
...but did the mother marry in 1892 and have a son prior to the 2 children we are talking about?
The baptism for the child in 1895 names husband as the father.
Can you say why there is doubt he was the father?
Yes, married in 1892, first son born later that year. I have no reason to doubt his parentage.
I descend from Clarissa's later daughter, born in 1902. A combination of family tittle-tattle and DNA evidence has pointed me in the direction of her biological father (although she is officially the daughter of Clarissa and her husband.)
All told, there seems to be a serious amount of cover-up involved. I have no evidence that Clarissa's husband ever left London. She was back with him in 1901, but later ran away with another man. On the 1911 census, her (estranged) husband states they had two children. Hmm, I've counted four so far!
I think the son was born earlier (1892) as he is older on census but why baptise them both in different places within days of each other.
Did the same 2 people baptise them or just give those names. I can see why there is a mystery here.
Wondering if the parents actually were the same or it was to disguise something.
The two baptisms within 3 days are indeed bizarre. When the second child is baptized in Fisherton Anger, she is about 7 months old, and she dies less than a month later in Salisbury Hospital from tubercular meningitis. I wonder if she was already ill, and the baptisms were made in fear. The son's baptism in London takes place on the same day as the child of his landlord, so it could just be an odd coincidence. I presume both parents wouldn't have had to be at the baptism?