>To ensure the welfare of the child but more definitively to ensure that the child did not become a burden of the parish, Margaret's child, as all illegitimate children of indentured servants, was bound out. Margaret had no way to support the child since she was being supported by her master. Several good answers have been provided to the original question. The above well applies to white children born of white indentured mothers. However, the original question stated that Margaret Shaw's child was "mulatto," a description that changes the situation radically. The Library of Congress has an easily accessible essay that relevant to this issue, in its "American Women" module of _American Memory_. http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/awhhtml/awlaw3/slavery.html . "Slavery and Indentured Servants" "Virginia passed its first miscegenation law in 1691 as part of "An act for suppressing outlying Slaves." "Another section of the law closed the loophole created by the 1662 birthright law, which mandated that children born of a free white mother and Negro father were technically free. This amendment stated that a free white woman who had a bastard child by a Negro or mulatto man had to pay fifteen pounds sterling within one month of the birth. If she could not pay, she would become an indentured servant for five years. ****Whether or not the fine was paid, however, the child would be bound in service for thirty years.***** The law is cited here as follows: "Act XVI, __Laws of Virginia,__ April 1691 ( __Hening's Statutes at Large__, 3: 87). This section of the law with its amendments remained in force until the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the law unconstitutional in __Loving v. Virginia,__ 388 U.S. 1 (1967)." Elizabeth ---------------------------------------------------------- Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG Tennessee To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html