Lynne Kemp wrote: > ... Do you know who Thomas' (who married Sarah > Archibald in King in 1873) father is? It just > gives his mother, Sarah's, name on their > marriage registration. ... Just weighing in here, but I've noticed that generally when only the mother's name is given on a vital statistics registration, that the father is "unknown." Although he evidently knew the mother, she bore the child illegitimately, and the father chose not to acknowledge it. That may not be the case in this instance, but it's a possibility that should be considered. Patricia (in Yellowknife)

Patricia, and Lynne ... Thanks for the input ! The thought of illegitimacy crossed my mind, and I put it forward as a distinct possibility. It seems strange , that a young man getting married, would not know his fathers first name !!! Another possibility is that the Church, where they were married, did not want a record on their books, of a (base-born child - as the English described it) being given sacraments in their faith. Thomas Simpson gives his birth date as August 22, 1854, on the 1901 Census. He should be shown as 6 years old on the 1861 census .. which makes him too young for either of the two possibilities that turn up in Flos Township Census of 1861 .. working with Mother SARAH and son Thomas. Birth certificates in ONTARIO, as recently as 1940, bore the words ILLEGITIMATE , if such was the case. I know of one fellow who only found out , of his status, WHEN HE APPLIED FOR A BIRTH CERTIFICATE UPON JOINING THE ARMY .. Probably to prove his age. He received it as a hard blow, not knowing the truth up until that point. We have a case, within our family tree, of two children, dying as teenagers, buried with their parents, but the parents are referred to on the tombstone with the parents MIDDLE NAMES. We were a long time sorting this one out .. until it was discovered that the parents were not legally married, until several years after the children's births. The later born children were buried under the parents FIRST NAMES. The CHURCH OF ENGLAND COMMUNITY, of which the family was part, probably assumed that the older children were a niece and nephew !!!!! But, I digress ... thank Goodness that enlightenment has come to this Corner of Simcoe County ! Paul Robins -----Original Message----- From: can-ont-simcoe-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:can-ont-simcoe-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of software@yellowknife.com Sent: November-26-07 4:45 AM To: can-ont-simcoe@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [CAN-ONT-SIMCOE] Simpson Family Lynne Kemp wrote: > ... Do you know who Thomas' (who married Sarah > Archibald in King in 1873) father is? It just > gives his mother, Sarah's, name on their > marriage registration. ... Just weighing in here, but I've noticed that generally when only the mother's name is given on a vital statistics registration, that the father is "unknown." Although he evidently knew the mother, she bore the child illegitimately, and the father chose not to acknowledge it. That may not be the case in this instance, but it's a possibility that should be considered. Patricia (in Yellowknife)