97 Bastardry in Hoscar Moss - Part 5: 17 November 2024

Who Was baby Culshaw?

The Court Orders state that James and Catherine’s daughter was born on 8 January 1776, but do not name the child.  The baby is merely called “the bastard child”.  Who was this child and what happened to her?

There are no surviving records of the birth of any children around 8 January 1776 with Catherine Culshaw as the mother or James Hankin as the father.  Perhaps the records did not survive, but it is certain that Catherine’s baby was baptised. 

Although conceived through serious sin, if the child was not baptised, she would according to the Church, spend eternity in Hell after death.  The Church said even illegitimate children had souls and had to be baptised to avoid eternal suffering in Hell.

James obviously took no steps to have his child baptised; he denied that he was the father.  Catherine or someone close to her had to make the baptism happen.

****

If her baby was to avoid lifelong blight and ostracism, Catherine had to do something.  

Such situations were not unique and some “solutions” were available.

****

Informal adoption of children by close family members still occurred in England and Ireland until the mid 1950s. 

Informal adoption did not require a Court order declaring someone had become the legally recognised parent.  A close relative such as a grandparent, a married brother or sister or cousin, could accept the responsibility of raising a child and treat it as their own. 

The identity of the biological parents was often made known to the adopted child at an early age.  Although reared by the adoptive parents, the child often knew and maintained a relationship with the biological parents.  By being adopted, the child might sidestep the stigma of illegitimacy, while maintaining a relationship with his or her biological parents. 

In 1776, informal adoption was the only plausible avenue available to Catherine to ensure her daughter’s life was not permanently blighted by birth outside marriage.

****

The then prevalent naming traditions can be used to guess the name of Catherine’s baby. 

The first two daughters in a family were usually named after their grandmothers.  Catherine’s mother was Mary Almond and James’s mother was Elizabeth Culshaw. 

Given the conduct of James Hankin, his daughter was probably not called Elizabeth.  Catherine probably named her daughter Mary because this was the name of the maternal grandmother.  

Because James Hankin denied being the father of the child, the original surname of baby “Mary” was probably Culshaw rather than Hankin.

Is there a baptism record for a child called Mary Culshaw shortly after 8 January 1776?  

If there is a record, is there a credible connection the named parents of that child and Catherine Culshaw?

****

Mary Culshaw was baptised on 23 June 1777.  The record claims Mary was the daughter of William and Margaret Culshaw of Burscough. 

Was this Mary Culshaw actually the daughter of Catherine Culshaw and James Hankin?

****

William Culshaw, the named father of Mary Culshaw, was baptised on 30 April 1749.  

His father was Thomas, his mother was Mary and his parents lived at Burscough.  

William had been named after his paternal grandfather William Culshaw.  

Thomas, father of William, had been baptised on 11 April 1725 and his father was also William Culshaw of Burscough. 

Thomas, the son of one William Culshaw and the father of another William Culshaw, who was named as the father of Mary Culshaw in 1777, was a brother of Elizabeth Culshaw.  Elizabeth Culshaw was the great grandmother of baby Mary and the aunt of Catherine Culshaw. 

William Culshaw the nominated father of Mary Culshaw, was Catherine Culshaw’s first cousin.  It is very plausible that he and his wife might have adopted Catherine’s baby.

William Culshaw the nominated father of Mary when she was baptised on 23 June 1777, married Margaret Holcroft of Burscough through marriage banns on 1 April 1766.  Marriage by banns meant William (baptised only 18 years earlier in 1749) was at least 21 when he married in 1777.  

****

Margaret Holcroft was at least 25; she was baptised on 11 May 1740. 

Margaret was the daughter of Roger and Ann Holcroft of Lathom.  

Records have survived for the following children of William Culshaw and Margaret Holcroft.

·         Ann was baptised on 8 March 1767.  She was buried on 1 March 1771. ·         Roger was baptised on 12 November 1769. ·         A second child called Ann was buried on 17 July 1774. ·         Nanny was baptised on 28 June 1772 and buried on 18 July 1774. ·         A second Nanny (or Nancy) was baptised on 13 August 1775. ·         Mary was baptised on 23 June 1777. ·         William was baptised on 17 October 1779. ·         Margaret was baptised on 26 April 1782

The first four daughters of William and Margaret were called Ann after Margaret’s mother Ann Holcroft.  Out of their first four daughters, three were dead in 1777. 

Their first son was called Roger, after Margaret’s father Roger Holcroft.  He was still alive in 1777. 

Immediately prior to the baptism of baby Mary in 1777, William and Margaret’s family was tiny.  If they hoped to have any children who might still be alive when they grew old and needed children to support them, William and Margaret urgently had to have more children.  Viewed this way, Catherine’s child would have been a blessing.  

****

This is a summary of William Culshaw and Margaret Holcroft’s family immediately prior to the baptism of baby Mary.

 

William Culshaw + Margaret Holcroft

- Before Mary Culshaw’s Baptism in 1777 -

↓

Ann Culshaw   Baptised 8 March 1767   Buried 1 March 1771

Roger Culshaw   Baptised 12 November 1769

Ann Culshaw   Buried 17 July 1774

Nanny Culshaw   Baptised 28 June 1772   Buried 18 July 1774

Nanny Culshaw   Baptised 13 August 1775

 

Mary Culshaw was baptised only eighteen months after the birth of Catherine’s baby in January 1776.  

When Mary was baptised, William and Margaret had only two children – and they desperately needed more children. 

Catherine was the first cousin of William and she desperately needed to find a home for her baby if she was to have any chance of a normal life.  

Given the circumstances, It is certain that Mary Culshaw was the biological daughter of Catherine Culshaw and James Hankin.

Logic says Catherine’s daughter was adopted by her cousin William Culshaw and his wife Margaret Holcroft.

****

Adding William in 1779 and Margaret in 1782, William and Margaret’s family looked like this.

 

William Culshaw + Margaret Holcroft

↓

Ann Culshaw   Baptised 8 March 1767   Buried 1 March 1771	Roger Culshaw   Baptised 12 November 1769		Ann Culshaw   Buried 17 July 1774	Nanny Culshaw   Baptised 28 June 1772   Buried 18 July 1774		Nanny Culshaw   Baptised 13 August 1775
Mary Culshaw   Born 8 January 1776   Parents James Hankin; Catherine Culshaw   Adopted by William Culshaw and Margaret Holcroft   Baptised 23 June 1777		William Culshaw   Baptised 17 October 1779			Margaret Culshaw   Baptised 26 April 1782

 

Perhaps Mary Culshaw could have a normal life.

****

Hoscar Moss Road looking east (2018).  Except for the obvious modern features, James Hankin was very familiar with this view