I have the following case in my line. 
 
Plea 1/113 1753  It is stated:  Susannah Carr, Defendant vs John  Owens, 
Plaintiff
John Owen and Thomas Calloway Churchwardens for the Parish of Antrim  against 
Susannah Carr.  Plaintiffs came with Thomas Nash attorney and also  Able See 
and Robert Wilkins and have become security for the Defendant for  payment of 
50 shillings or 500 lbs tobacco at the laying the next Levy of the  said 
Parish being the fine by Law imposed on Defendant for her Bastard child and  
thereupon the said suit is dismissed.
 
Sometime ago Anita Wills posted the following "Laws Relating to Out of  
Wedlock Children During the 1700-1800".  I think it is an excellent bit of  
information pertaining to this subject.
 
It seems that Hening's Statutes does have a number of laws regarding  
bastards.  The laws had to do with the financial burdens of raising a  child.  In 
early Virginia, as in England, care of the poor fell to the  parishes, and it was 
an expensive problem.  
 
If the woman was a servant, she had to serve her master another year after  
her term expired, or pay him a certain sum.  The father, if free, gave  
security to the church-wardens of the parish to indemnify them against the cost  of 
the care of the child.  If he also was a servant, he had to pay the  parish 
after his term of service expired.  If the reputed father was the  woman's 
master, after her term of service expired the church wardens would sell  her again 
for a term of one year unless she paid the set fine (in 1752 it was  1,000 
pounds of tobacco).  The fine or the proceeds of her payment to the  parish.  If 
the father was a Negro or mulatto, she would serve her extra  year's term to 
her master, and then pay a fine of 15 pounds current money of  Virginia to the 
parish, or be sold by them for a further five years.  
 
A free white woman who had a child by a negro or mulatto had to pay to the  
church wardens 15 pounds current money of Virginia.  In both os these last  
cases (where the woman was servant or free, and the father was Negro or  
mulatto), the child was bound by the church wardens into service until the age  of 31. 
 This was changed in 1765 to 21 years for make children and 18 years  for 
female.  
 
A law of 1710 prescribed a fine or shipping for a free white woman giving  
birth out of wedlock.  It does not mention a fine on the father.  In  1769 the 
whipping was abolished, though the fine for the woman remained.   The father 
was to be brought to court and examined.  If it seemed likely  that the child 
would become a charge or the public, the father was to pay a bond  to the parish 
to indemnify it against that cost.  this was only for as long  as the parish 
had to care for the child.  The child was apprenticed until  the age of 21 for 
boys and 18 for girls.  I believe that until the child  was old enough to be 
apprenticed, the mother and child were maintained by the  parish vestry.  You 
can see this charge in the vestry minutes  sometimes.  All of this was only 
for children who were on the public  charge.  
 
The vestry minutes for St. Georges's Parish in Spotsylvania are fairly  
complete.  I believe they are on microfilm somewhere; you might check the  Library 
of Virginia.  You might be able to get the film on ILL.  

 
 
In a message dated 6/25/2008 12:29:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[log in to unmask] writes:

Not to  be overlooked is the fact that in those instances where the male
refused to  help, finance or acknowledge the paternity in any way, the court
acted as a  powerful tool by which to gain at least the medical and "laying
in"  expenses for the mother.  Of no small importance in such matters,  there
was (and probably remains) a legal presumption that a mother KNOWS  who was
the father of her child.  

So it was that if a woman  (or her parents) were of even lower or moderate
standing in the community,  upon the designation by the woman of a certain
man as the father of her  bastard child, it fell to that male to establish
that he was NOT the  father.

Though I have no information as to the reasons or legal actions  surrounding
the matter, a year or so after the birth of a child, a NC court  ordered that
a direct ancestor of mine should so pay.  He seems to  have done so, since
the records do not reveal any further courts' actions  in that matter.  It is
thought probable that the woman in this  instance was a neighbor. 
***************         

Subject: [VA-ROOTS] Informing of Bastardy

Why would someone  inform the court of a woman's bastardy?  Would there be
any  implication of paternity?  

To subscribe, change options, or  unsubscribe, please see the instructions  at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html





 
____________________________________
 Gas prices 




**************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for 
fuel-efficient used cars.      (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007)

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html