In this tale, our hero and heroine must come together to save a newborn child’s life. They do not adopt the child, however, for there was no formal adoptions in the Regency Era.

There was no legal adoption until 1826. Before that time, it was just an agreement between the people. Bastards were legally the children of no one, and, after age seven, the  mother was not required to support the child. If the children agreed to stay with the family, no one cared to intervene, as long as the child did not depend upon the parish for support.

There was no legal process of adoption in England before the early 20th century. However, the custom of sending a child of the family to live with and often become the heir of another family was an old one.

That was true for Jane Austen’s older brother Edward. When Edward was twelve years old he was presented to Thomas and Catherine Knight, who were relatives of his father and were wealthy. Thomas had given George Austen the living at Steventon in 1761. They were childless and took an interest in Edward, making him their legal heir in about 1783. When Thomas died in 1794 he left the Godmersham Park estate to his wife for her life, with the remainder going to Edward. She left Godmersham before her death to move to Canterbury, and gave up the estates to Edward. Remember that was not a peerage, simply the estate of a landed gentleman. The rectory at Steventon, where the Austen family had spent their time growing up, and Jane is said to have written the first drafts of several of her books, was severely damaged by flooding and was knocked down by Edward in about 1823, and a new rectory was built by Edward for his son, William Knight, who had taken on the living.

As it was with Edward Austen, the disposition of what to do with the child was to send him to live with another family who saw to his training as a knight or an orphan taken in by a relative.

When people spoke of someone being “adopted” in the past it causes confusion today because the word has changed its meaning over the centuries.

Previous to 1926, the child was considered the child of the birth parents until he died.  If the child wanted to marry while still a minor, it was the birth father’s permission which would have to be sought. I solved that problem in the book, for both parents die, and our hero and heroine can see to the child’s upbringing.

So, though we speak of Edward Austen being adopted by the Knights, he was never legally considered their son. Jane Austen mentioned adopted children in several of her books. The best known is probably Fanny Price in Mansfield Park. There is no hint that Fanny was promised any legacy from her uncle nor anything at all except an education and a place to live. 

In a book called  The Watsons, an unfinished by Jane Austen, Emma Watson was adopted by an aunt. The expectation was that the aunt would provide for Emma and give her a dowry or possibly leave her a greater legacy. The aunt decides to marry, and Emma has to return to her family, living out her days on the edge of poverty.

Frank Weston, in Emma, was taken over by his aunt and uncle after his mother died and his father did not have the means to support him at that time. He was called Frank Churchill, and not Frank Weston. However, he is not assured of a legacy from his aunt and uncle, as he would have been if he had really been their son.

The argument has been made that in the past that nobles have had their peerages and property go to someone not related by blood. Quite often it was the child of a sister or the husband of a daughter or some distant relative that a peer had “adopted.” There were many oddities and odd circumstances  through history. Usually what happened in such cases was that the peer died without an heir to his title, but with daughters who receive his money and property. In such a case, one of the husbands petitioned the King and was granted the title. Some peerages have been recreated several times. In no case did a peerage automatically go to an unrelated person.