96 Bastardry in Hoscar Moss Part 1, Section 4: 16 November 2024

William Culshaw and Mary Almond – Parents of Catherine Culshaw

The family of William Culshaw and Mary Almond, parents of Catherine Culshaw looked like this –

 

William Culshaw + Mary Almond

↓

Ann Culshaw Baptised 6 June 1756

Catherine Culshaw Born between 1756 and 1758

Cicely Culshaw Baptised 2 May 1762

Mary Culshaw Baptised 4 August 1763

Mary Almond’s mother was Elizabeth Wilkinson.  There is no surviving record of her birth, but she married Thomas Almond on 1 July 1722.  Records for six children of Elizabeth Wilkinson and Thomas Almond have survived.

·         Mary was baptised on 12 July 1730.

·         Lydia was baptised on 18 July 1731.

·         Ann was baptised on 4 February 1734.

·         John was baptised on 20 July 1735.

·         James was baptised on 11 September 1738.

·         Cicely was baptised on 10 April 1741.

 

****

This is a tabular summary of the family of Thomas Almond and Elizabeth Wilkinson, parents of Mary Almond.

The family of Thomas Almond and Elizabeth Wilkinson looked like this –

Thomas Almond + Elizabeth Wilkinson

↓

Mary Almond Baptised 12 July 1730

Lydia Almond Baptised 18 July 1731

Ann Almond Baptised 4 February 1734

John Almond Baptised 20 July 1735

James Almond Baptised 11 September 1738

Cicely Almond Baptised 10 April 1741

Ann and Cicely Culshaw, daughters of William Culshaw and Mary Almond, were named after two of Mary’s sisters.  Catherine was a Culshaw name and Catherine, daughter of William and Mary, was named after one of William’s Culshaw relatives.

****

Apart from everything else about concerning the circumstances in which Catherine Culshaw’s daughter was born, there is a particularly unsavoury aspect to Catherine’s pregnancy.

By the standards of the time, Catherine came from a very small family.  She was one of only four children and her siblings were all sisters.   Catherine’s mother Mary Almond was buried on 25 June 1767 and there is no record that Mary’s husband William ever remarried. 

By the time James Hankin had sex with Catherine Culshaw in 1775, Catherine’s mother had been dead for 12 years.  When James made her pregnant in 1775, Catherine had been a motherless orphan for 12 years.

****

The close family relationship between James Hankin and Catherine Culshaw meant there was never any possibility of them having a relationship which could result in marriage.

 Catherine’s paternal grandfather was William Culshaw and Catherine’s father William had been named after her grandfather.  Catherine’s grandfather William Culshaw had been baptised on 9 August 1702. 

William Culshaw who was Catherine’s paternal grandfather was also the maternal grandfather of James Hankin, father of Catherine’s child.

****

William Culshaw, father of Catherine Culshaw, was the brother of Elizabeth Culshaw.  Elizabeth Culshaw was the mother of James Hankin.  She was also my 5 times removed great grandmother.

After Catherine’s mother Mary Almond died in 1767, Catherine’s aunt Elizabeth Culshaw, mother of James Hankin, probably became a mother figure to Catherine. 

Legally speaking, James and Catherine were first cousins, but from a practical perspective the relation was probably akin to that of brother and sister.

As if all this was not bad enough, the story is even worse that it might seem.

****

James was at least 26 and possibly 27 when his daughter was conceived, while Catherine was between 17 and 19.  James was at least 27 and possibly 28 when his daughter was born; Catherine was between 18 and 20.

The irresistible conclusion is that a man in his late twenties, took advantage of a girl who was not yet legally an adult and who was at least ten years younger than him.  Either James callously exploited a naïve young girl or else he raped her. 

Given James denied to the Court that he was the father of Catherine’s child, rape seems more likely than exploitation. 

If James felt that admitting his role in the conception of the child was tantamount to an admission of rape, that would explain his denial of paternity. 

Making matters so much worse for James was the inescapable fact that the young girl who had given birth to his child was his first cousin.  She was a woman he was completely forbidden from having sex with – whether inside or outside of marriage.

As first cousins, James and Catherine could not legitimise their relationship – if there ever was one.  But as happens too frequently, the victim of the exploitation – his own cousin - suffered far more than James ever did. 

Catherine not only had to give birth while unmarried, she was also thrown out of the home that she was born in and grew up in – and this all happened during one of the coldest winters in recorded English history. 

As will become clear in later blogs, Catherine’s miseries did not cease after her daughter was born.

The feud between my great grandfather five time removed Thomas Hankin and his brother James Hankin had given birth to bitter fruits for James, the son of Thomas and Elizabeth, and for Catherine, the niece of Thomas’s wife Elizabeth. 

The poison created by the feud infected the next generation – and the poison of the feud infected succeeding generations. 

****

It was as if a hideous game of “Pass The Poison Parcel” had been initiated in the 1740s when Thomas and his brother James had their bitter falling out.

****

Henry Culshaw, a relative of Catherine Culshaw, is remembered on the WW1 war memorial in Burscough.  The memorial is located on Liverpool Road South.  Like Catherine, Henry was an astonishingly brave human being.