Jacqui Simkins wrote: > Not unless the vicar went along with it. The girls were having > illegitimate babies AND having them baptised AND shown as being > "single woman" (or other phrases!). Both Williams claimed the same > father on their marriage lines - though that would be the case if > they were "absorbed" to hide illegitimacy. How a child was baptised (probably correctly since the incumbent would have known for sure whose child was whose <G>) wasn't necessarily how the child was registered, if it was a post 1837 birth. > Family history is full of oddities... Would we have it any other way though? :)) -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk