Hi,

I recently did some research on an Irish immigrant* family who settled in the Vauxhall district of Liverpool in the mid 1850s so I offer the following comments.

This family were not married when they arrived from Dublin although they already had a daughter (born in Dublin c 1855). I suspect they told everyone they were married, as the priest who baptised their second child in 1857 at Our Lady de La Salette in Eldon Place recorded them as married. In fact they were married in the Liverpool Register Office in November 1858 and don't appear to have had a church blessing for their marriage, which may indicate they didn't want anyone to know that they were not already married. 

On the subject of workhouses, don't forget that the workhouse was also the local hospital for those who could not afford to pay for their treatment, so if the two Ellens were shown in the medical or surgical parts of the workhouse, it was much the same as staying in hospital today and certainly would not have any real stigma attached to it, at least among their neighbours. Also the role and ethos of the workhouse changed considerably in the second half of the nineteenth century, as society in general became more benevolent. That is not to say that the workhouse was a fun place to be, but it wasn't as bad as it had been in the time that Charles Dickens wrote about it in Oliver Twist.  Lots more about the Liverpool workhouses here.

* Immigrant is not technically the correct description as, from 1800, Ireland was part of the United Kingdom, and so Irish incomers were merely moving from one part to another part of the same country, much as a Yorkshireman might move to London.

Welcome to the forum! I believe Andy has covered most of the points you raised, however if there is any further clarification we can help with don't hesitate to ask.

Hope this helps,

Early civil registration | The National Archives

Hope this helps,

Early civil registration | The National Archives

Genuki,

"What a Certificate Contains

The information entered on a certificate was supplied by those applying for it. No data was verified, no ages checked for marriages, etc.

Birth Certificates: During the early years of registration many births were not registered because it was not compulsory and there was no penalty for failure to comply. This was especially true for children of illegitimate birth. In 1875, it became compulsory. There was a six week (42 days) time limit in which to register a birth. After six weeks and up to six months the birth could be registered on payment of a fine. After that time, with very few exceptions, a birth could not be registered. It was fairly common for parents to adjust the birth date to within 42 days. Also, as part of the 1875 changes, a mother, when reporting an illegitimate birth, could not name the father; he had to be present and consent to his name being entered."

I was under the impression that the registrar had to scurry round and find the parents of new born, register the birth and collect a charge, however, the snippet in the 1838 Liverpool Mercury suggests otherwise. The parent only had to seek out the registrar and it was free with in the time limit. At 7s 6d after the six weeks no wonder children went unregistered.

It was always my understanding that children out of wedlock would be 'shunned', cast out of society, children given up etc. So I'd appreciate any thoughts here? Was it a case of 'we look after our own?'

From all the research I've done with my family history I have found that illegitimate children were not treated any differently by the family. My Paternal Great Grandfather was born out of wedlock, cared for by his Grandmother and following her death his Aunts. His mother died when he was 20 and he had a relationship with the family she had following a marriage with another person. He went on to work as a clerk on the Railways and achieved a high level. A Maternal Great Grandfather became a highly respected - and head hunted - coachman to a local MP.

I have many instances of illegitimacy in the families I research, and certainly within those families they are counted in amongst the rest, and it would appear within society also. Baptisms, registrations etc. The only thing is that on their marriage certificates their fathers are always non-existent and dead.

Following on from Shelagh's comments, I suspect that as a good Catholic, Ellen Shevlin was much more likely to come under pressure from her priest to 'regularise'  her marital condition, given that matrimony is an important Catholic sacrament. However the children born before the parents married would have not suffered any stigma was far as the church was concerned because they had been baptised.