Comments

Thank you both for your responses. As ever, there is food for thought in there. I’ll try to deal with each point in turn:

1.     Yes, my original thought was that Luffman was a clue to the true identity of Sarah Luffman BATT’s father. But I couldn’t find anyone that fitted the bill so to speak.

2.     I haven’t been able to find Congresbury Overseers Accounts online. Are they?

3.     Yes, Edward PAIN had a brother called George. He was about 9 years younger. Interestingly two of my DNA matches are to his descendants. But we share very little DNA. So little, that I doubt that George is a direct ancestor of mine. I think it more likely that our most recent common ancestor is a generation or two further back. I have DNA matches with 2 other descendants of Edward PAIN through children born after Edward’s marriage to Mary BATT and I share almost twice as much DNA with them. I recognise that this is not an exact science, but it does seem more likely that Edward, rather than George, is my direct ancestor. What would be helpful is if I could identify a DNA match to someone who is a direct ancestor of Edward through his first marriage.

4.     Mary SHENTON was baptised at Yatton on 12 June 1770. Her brother, Thomas, was baptised the same day. I believe that she was the Mary SHENTON who married Henry BATT at Yatton on 7 May 1805. Henry was buried in Yatton on 16 February1837. Mary was still in Yatton in 1851 and her place of birth was recorded as Kenn.

5.     I have Thomas SHENTON marrying Mary MARCH at Worle on 25 March 1767. According to the marriage record he was “of Kenn”. There is no baptism record for him there. The reference to Street in the newspaper report is intriguing and it does look like the baptism record of 7 October 1739 is probably the right one.

I think it is probably Thomas Shenton (Mary's father) that is from Street (baptised 7 October 1739 at Street). So the child is wherever the father comes from - They were strange times.

Hi Pat and Dave,

I looked at a few trees on Ancestry and they all give Henry Batt and Mary Shenton as Mary's parents (married at Yatton on 7 May 1805). I was wondering if this might be where things go wrong? I think their marriage is reported on page 4 of the Bath Chronicle and Weekly Gazette, Thursday 16 May 1805 edition. "MARRIED  … At Yatton, Henry Batt, esq; Miss Mary Shenton, of Street, near Glastonbury".

This is quite interesting (and confusing) as it suggests Henry is quite well-off (esquire and a notice in the paper) and that Mary came from Street (whereas most Ancestry trees seem to think she came from Yatton/Kenn or thereabouts). There are numerous Shentons at Street but I could not find a Mary Shenton baptised with anywhere near her supposed birth date.

So, this is probably quite unhelpful (!), but perhaps the Henry Batt and Mary Shenton married at Yatton are not the correct ancestors, and if you did find the right one, then perhaps that middle name might make sense (maiden name of an ancestor?) However, of course, you might have a different/correct ancestor to everyone else!

Best regards,
Richard

Where did your family live in Weston?   Do you know of any organisations or churches they might have belonged to which might have organised a Christmas Party?

As you know, the most common reason for an unusual second name for an illegitimate child is that it signifies the father's surname.  There is a vague possibility that the Overseers Accounts for Congresbury might have some information about any payment made to support Mary BATT which might name putative father.

When she gave the name George BATT as father - it could be that the clerk assumed the surname was BATT - Have you found a George PAIN in your researching which could support the DNA connection?