The crossed out father of Margaret Steele (b.1794)

[sfhouldsworth]

My 3x great-grandmother, Margaret Steele, was baptised at St. Peters in Addingham on 21 Dec 1794 with a birthdate listed as 19Nov 1794.  Her mother is clearly identified as Ellen Steele, daughter of Thomas Steele, and I have been able to trace that line back a number of generations.

The issue is who is the father.  In most baptismal records of my illegitimate ancestors, the description of the father is left blank or sometimes listed.  In this case, something is written in the space for the father's description and then later crossed out.  Has anyone else seen this crossing out before?  What might be the explanation for it?

This is one of my most frustrating brickwalls, because, clearly, something was known about the father at the time, but, it got crossed out!  Any suggestions?

Margaret's mother Ellen Steele went on to marry Robert Roe in 1796 in Kildwick with whom she had 5 additional children.

Margaret married John Houldsworth in Kildwick in 1815 and eventually moved to Rochdale, Lancs where they and their children are listed in the 1841 census.

[emeltom]

I presume you are looking at the entry in the Parish Register. There is no crossing out in the Bishops Transcript, it reads

Margaret Steele daughter of Ellen Steele of Huffa Bank, daughter of Thomas Steele of Huffa Bank. Born Dec 3rd baptised Dec 21st. Spurious.

I take the word spurious to mean illegitimate.

[arthurk]

It's quite well obliterated, but as far as I can tell, it looks as though Ellen (the child's mother) and her father's details were written in the space for the child's father by mistake, then crossed out and written in the correct place.

The occasional ascenders and descenders that can be made out in the father's box seem to match what's written in the mother's box.

[dobfarm]

I presume you are looking at the entry in the Parish Register. There is no crossing out in the Bishops Transcript, it reads

Margaret Steele daughter of Ellen Steele of Huffa Bank, daughter of Thomas Steele of Huffa Bank. Born Dec 3rd baptised Dec 21st. Spurious.

I take the word spurious to mean illegitimate.

Unless proven otherwise: I would think the information, given to the person who entered the fathers name in the parish register was information from the mother at the time of entry. The mother knew the fathers name at the time of entry (Question asked - what is the fathers name) from her info by which the pre 1812 PR only required :


Baptismal Registers may include:
Parish of Baptism ( this was for baptism info entry only ! not whether the parents where married or not)
Date of baptism
Given name of child
Full names of parents (not married parent fathers name required only or depended on the vicars view at a later date to cross out or alter)

If the couple were married the father would supply the information to the register keeper or vicar.

If the unmarried father gave the information for the register baptism-  then the child (or adult self informant) would only carry his surname with his first name(s) ( and may have the single mothers name entered in the register with entry saying child born out of wedlock.[earlier registers))

[arthurk]

The Addingham baptism register at this date follows the Dade pattern, so entries can contain a lot more information. For example, the previous entry, for a George Hartley, has for Father:
"Peter Hartley of Addingham Woolcomber son of George Hartley of Howorth Woolcomber by Elizabeth Dau: of John Utley of Howorth Weaver"
and for Mother:
"Mary Dau: of Isaac Atkinson of Addingham Woolcomber by Elizabeth Dau: of Tho^s Harrison of Middleton in the Parish of Ilkley Farm^r"

(Not all entries are as full as this - presumably the facts weren't always known.)

In this case,
(a) does the lack of information about Ellen Steele's parents indicate a lack of knowledge, or a feeling that the mother of an illegitimate child doesn't deserve to have her full lineage recorded (or had they disowned her?)?
(b) if the vicar had gone to the trouble of finding out who Margaret's father was and written his name etc in the register, then in view of the obligations that would place on the father, is he likely to have later obliterated it - unless it had subsequently been shown to be incorrect?

It would be interesting to compare this entry with any other baptisms of illegitimate children around that time.

I still feel that any close inspection of the register (image at Ancestry) will show that the Father box contained not Margaret's father, but her mother Ellen and her father, entered there by mistake and then transferred to the Mother box.

[sfhouldsworth]

If it was the mother's information in the wrong box, it would actually be a relief.  I have let go of finding the fathers of other illegitimate ancestors.  Perhaps, eventually, DNA might provide answers, but I content to say I will be unlikely to know in my lifetime.  This one has always pulled at me because I have assumed it was the father's information, which was entered and crossed out.  I thought if I could just get to the original record with the right kind of light source, I could figure it out.  If it were the mother's information, crossed out because it was in the wrong box, I could let it go.

[Redroger]

Yes, I have seen this before on a record from 1777 on the baptism of the best candidate for my 2x great grandfather, John Luffman. Its a long from Yorkshire though, Henstridge Somerset. It reads 7 July 1777 John (Luffman) base son of Betty Meechard baptised.
The surname though crossed out is clearly readable.
It was in Somerset Record Office and I immediately asked one of the archivists its meaning. "When the person conducting the baptism knows or thinks he knows the identity of the father".
I have still after over 20 years been unable to confirm the relationship.
Betty usually recorded as Meatyard had up to 10 or more illegitimate children and claimed against the parish for none. It is fairly obvious how she got her living. DNA has thus far failed me, though there is oddly a Yorkshire connection. His military discharge says he was born in York.
Hope you have more success!!

[arthurk]

Betty usually recorded as Meatyard had up to 20 or more illegitimate children and claimed against the parish for none. It is fairly obvious how she got her living.

You might be right about what she did for a living, but not necessarily.

One of my wife's female ancestors had a string of 7 illegitimate children while apparently living a fairly settled life and not claiming any kind of relief. While investigating the lives of these children, my wife came across a marriage licence application for one of them (still a minor) which included a statement from a man who said he had been appointed the lad's guardian in the will of the biological father, describing him as the "natural and lawful Father". However, as an illegitimate child had no lawful father, the application was refused and the lad had to apply again.

Further research revealed that the biological father's will described my wife's ancestor as "now living and cohabiting with me as my housekeeper", and it went on to name the 7 children and make provision for them. To cap it all, my wife has a DNA link with descendants of other (legitimate) children of the man in question. So things aren't always what they might at first appear.

Edited:
Added "descendants of" in final paragraph

[Redroger]

I have just amended the "up to 20 children" to "up to 10" (fat finger and not read post!)
Of the other 9 one (Robert) was baptised as Luffman, the other 8 were all named Meatyard or variants. As I said earlier I have so far failed on DNA(No Luffman 's).