Couple married on 18/2/1851 and first child was born on 25/11/1851. Birth was registered with the couple shown as parents.
The father died in 1890 and his will, written in 1888, refers to his 'adopted daughter', to whom he left a property and another property to their son, born 1853. The parents immigrated on the same ship and were married 4 months after arrival, so you could assume that they knew each other.
Curious for a reason that she was called 'adopted', as the pregnancy seems normal length. Could the mother have played away from home so soon after the marriage or did he suspect that she had? Had it been earlier, he might have cancelled the wedding.
I suppose that rape was a possibility and no fault of the mother, but seems unlikely given the timing.

amasser - 2019-09-16 10:03:00

The child may not have been the mother's natural born child either. There were children secretly born out of wedlock who were adopted within the family unit, or by sympathetic friends and neighbours which may have been the case here.
NZ was the first Commonwealth country to introduce adoption legislation but it wasn't until 1881. It was recognition that informal adoption, or a “system of voluntary guardianship”, was already taking place.
It was reasonably common when I was younger, in the 1950's / 60's for an unmarried mother's child to be 'adopted' (or raised) by the mother's parents, married sister, etc. There was quite a shock to the poor child, as an adult, to discover the his / her 'sister' was actually the mother, and their 'parents' were actually the grandparents.

Edited by h28skipper at 11:46 am, Mon 16 Sep

h28skipper - 2019-09-16 11:38:00

She may not have been their child at all. I've been helping a friend sort out a family member. On the birth certificate, parents are a couple who immigrated from Ireland. Son is half Maori. Mother was the local midwife and DNA has shown no relationship to the "official" parents.

Does it clearly say adopted? No chance it's some other word?

rednicnz - 2019-09-16 12:47:00

h28skipper wrote:

The child may not have been the mother's natural born child either. There were children secretly born out of wedlock who were adopted within the family unit, or by sympathetic friends and neighbours which may have been the case here.
NZ was the first Commonwealth country to introduce adoption legislation but it wasn't until 1881. It was recognition that informal adoption, or a “system of voluntary guardianship”, was already taking place.
It was reasonably common when I was younger, in the 1950's / 60's for an unmarried mother's child to be 'adopted' (or raised) by the mother's parents, married sister, etc. There was quite a shock to the poor child, as an adult, to discover the his / her 'sister' was actually the mother, and their 'parents' were actually the grandparents.

Oh - it probably occurs even in these enlightened times, particularly when the 'mum' is either very young or does not want the child or has 'other' issues that preclude good parenting. Most likely more by 'default' eg it is most likely easier in many social situations to refer to the 'seen' parenting person(s) as mum or dad than gran or aunty and then have to negotiate the whole web of wheres your mum etc etc.

brouser3 - 2019-09-16 12:51:00

sounds like to me that the Mum was pregnant when they got married and it wasn't his but he could well have married her to save her the embarrassment of being an unmarried mother and he adopted the child after it was born to give it his surname

crab2 - 2019-09-16 13:50:00

Good points raised;
The mother immigrated with a sister, who married 1 week before her but had no children. The sister's husband had already settled in N.Z.
As the parents came on the same boat, there seems little likelihood of a 3rd party being involved but always could be. Could be so for the sister?
Neither woman would have known if pregnant at their marriages, given the dates but, if aware of another possible conception, the father might have assumed that as a probability.
Will says 'adopted daughter' very clearly. Probate was not settled until 1899, the year that the wife died, but executor/s had died in the interim - 1888 to 1890 (Will to his death). There may be something more to that delay after his death and can't locate a will for the mother.
Another mystery to add the family histories. The possibility of a different father could be assumed if the parents had delayed registration of the birth to a more seemly date.
As there are living descendants of the daughter, will not look much further.

amasser - 2019-09-17 10:09:00