Hi Bruce,

So yet another Catherine Joughin with illegitimate children! It looks as though they should all be related, doesn't it?

I researched the two Andreas Joughin families, but only until about 1800 when they started moving to other parishes. There were numerous early connections between Joughin and TEARE including Catherine Joughin who married [1]John TEARE of Lezayre [2]William CRAINE of Lezayre. “John Teare of the Parish of Lezayre & Catherine Joughin of this parish [Andreas] were married in this Church by license this 17 day of Jan 1761...".
She was one of the twins of Chas Joughin & Mary Cleater bapt Mar 9th 1735/6.
A 1771 Petition stated that "... about six years ago [he] became surety… for the goods of John Tear.. to his children who are yet in their non age – the sd goods being in the custody of Cathrine Tear alias Joughin (the widow of the sd John Tear) who hath now married a second husband who hath squandered & lavished a great part of their children’s effects…..."

I wonder whether anyone has investigated these Teare children further. Margery may turn up in the next generation!
John TEARE died 6 Jan.1766. Arch. will Lezayre no.33 ...to wife Catherine Tear alias Joughin… his sisters Jane …Isable …Joney …to his mother [Margaret] …to his Heir [unnamed. John?] …if his wife chanced to be with child [to share exec.] …two daughters Margaret & Esther joint execs …and the young daughter that is yet unborn [Isabel?].. appointed Andrew Joughin & Edward Quayle guardians. Children underage.
Edwd Quayle husband of Ann Quayle als Tear sister of the Decd & Philip Garret husband of Margt Garret als Tear two of the sisters of the Decd….

As for the Daniel Joughin, farmer, father of two illegitimate children, it would be easier if she were the same mother, but it seems not. Philip, your orphan Daniel is possible if it weren't for the "farmer" - and I don't think a Lonan connection is significant. Perhaps one of your well-off and seemingly straight-laced farmers could have had a secret life?
I think the single women would have been more impressed with the farmer, whose occupation they obviously remembered well enough to have passed the information on to their children (who perhaps had been supported by him?).

Sue