Yes, agree Goldie. This discussion on illigitimency has been informative.Kirk Session records have helped me. I have been fortunate to be able to verify a 'reputed father' ? . On the St. Nicholas death cert. of my g..g.granfather, James McIntosh, Illegitimate, 21 Feb 1872, age 49., reputed father was given as James McIntosh mother May Burgess. From his age at death and that on the 1851,61,and 71 census I looked for a baptism in the Cromdale PRs for 1823 but was unable to find anything. When Scotlandspeople came online I found a baptism for him in 1830 McIntosh  James son of James McIntosh Merchant in Grantown in fornication  Burgess   with Marjorie Burgess in Grantown was born 10 May 1823 and baptised                  25 july 1830 After mention on the list about Kirk Session records I got in touch with the Highland Archive Centre who said they had Kirk Session records for Cromdale for that time period. I paid for a search,( which was not too expensive) and this is what they found, 4 July 1830, James McIntosh Merchant in Grantown appeared before the session requesting absolution from church scandal in order to entitle him to church privileges. This was granted on payment of the usual fee and the account ledger shows that 16 shillings was paid that day.. James McIntosh merchant in Grantown fornication. No mention of May Burgess. I thought that he had done this to enable his son to be baptised but then I found an entry in the Cromdale PRs three weeks later 5 Aug 1830, James Mcintosh merchant in Grantown and Christian Grant were married. What I cannot understand is why this was not sorted in 1823 when his son was born. Could May have said she would name and shame him when he expressed his interest in Christian? I can find the family of James and Christian in the 1841 and 1851 census but not after this. Would the group consider this as proof of the father even tho his death cert. said 'reputed father' or would his son who registered the death not have known whar was written in the records? > >For what it's worth...I have a case where the father was severely >reprimanded and rebuked by the Kirk Session.  The process started in May and >didn't get put away until almost Dec.  They did marry a few weeks before the >babe was born.  I say babe...Kirk Session got their justice when the babe > >

THIS thread I am going to be watching carefully. Thanks, Alison for your input. IF I could possibly break thru my brick wall, I might be able to take my INNES family further back...But, I'm happy with 1740, with the except of the Kirk Session Minutes. I can't help, and have said this before, saying that 'those among us without sin should cast the first rock', and in my very humble opinion that's what the Kirk Session in Gartly did...threw rocks. They were the judge and the jury which I have a hard time swallowing; were they also not human, and did the babe deserved to be held responsible for ITS own appearance or not included in 'human'? Now, I have to give you this...They married about 3 weeks before the babe was born, and lady in question delivered about May 20, 1740 after a lengthy session of being summoned to appear. One excuse after the other, and sometimes Old John didn't show up either, so I can understand the frustration the Session Members would have had. Sorry, but in my view they were miserable men....There are other cases of which I took copies of when in Edinburgh; same parish. However I got so excited about finding the info on Old John Innes, I should have printed off more pages of the Minutes and maybe been able to satisfy myself with when he died. Oh, oh, why is hindsight always so 20/20? Lesson here for anyone going to search in Edinburgh...take a 'grocery list', copy all you can and then digest it. It's amazing what you learn, some of it between the lines....Goldie -----Original Message----- From: ALISON BROOKS Sent: Monday, August 05, 2013 1:37 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [ABERDEEN] Kirk Session Records Yes, agree Goldie. This discussion on illigitimency has been informative.Kirk Session records have helped me. I have been fortunate to be able to verify a 'reputed father' ? . On the St. Nicholas death cert. of my g..g.granfather, James McIntosh, Illegitimate, 21 Feb 1872, age 49., reputed father was given as James McIntosh mother May Burgess. >From his age at death and that on the 1851,61,and 71 census I looked for a >baptism in the Cromdale PRs for 1823 but was unable to find anything. When >Scotlandspeople came online I found a baptism for him in 1830 McIntosh James son of James McIntosh Merchant in Grantown in fornication Burgess with Marjorie Burgess in Grantown was born 10 May 1823 and baptised 25 july 1830 After mention on the list about Kirk Session records I got in touch with the Highland Archive Centre who said they had Kirk Session records for Cromdale for that time period. I paid for a search,( which was not too expensive) and this is what they found, 4 July 1830, James McIntosh Merchant in Grantown appeared before the session requesting absolution from church scandal in order to entitle him to church privileges. This was granted on payment of the usual fee and the account ledger shows that 16 shillings was paid that day.. James McIntosh merchant in Grantown fornication. No mention of May Burgess. I thought that he had done this to enable his son to be baptised but then I found an entry in the Cromdale PRs three weeks later 5 Aug 1830, James Mcintosh merchant in Grantown and Christian Grant were married. What I cannot understand is why this was not sorted in 1823 when his son was born. Could May have said she would name and shame him when he expressed his interest in Christian? I can find the family of James and Christian in the 1841 and 1851 census but not after this. Would the group consider this as proof of the father even tho his death cert. said 'reputed father' or would his son who registered the death not have known whar was written in the records? > >For what it's worth...I have a case where the father was severely >reprimanded and rebuked by the Kirk Session. The process started in May and >didn't get put away until almost Dec. They did marry a few weeks before >the >babe was born. I say babe...Kirk Session got their justice when the babe > > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message