Common Law Wife as *Visitor* on census?

I have a birth cert for an illigitimate child born in 1896 who naturally
does not have a father's name listed.

I had correctly assumed the child's third forename (Dodson) was the surname
of his father, as was common practise. His birth was registered under his
mother's surname of HUNNS.

However, in the 1901 census the child is shown living with one William
Dodson and listed as being his son aged four years. His name is listed as
Dodson not Hunns.

However, the child's mother is listed as a visitor. Would this mean that the
guy was not prepared to lie and say she was his wife? I have often seen

Eve McLaughlin...

possibly so - there was a fine for incorrect (deliberately so)
information, and the man may have been known to the enumerator.

*common law wife/husband* on censuses and wonder why it was not used in this
instance

Eve McLaughlin...

It is not a legal; term, and -personally - I have never seen it in a UK
census. 'Housekeeper' yes, often; mistress, yes, sometimes. 'concubine'
yes twice' blank, yes frequently.

Would he have been too embarrased to suggest she was his partner? Was it

Eve McLaughlin...

no such term except for business colleagues.

really that uncommon and shamful to live together at such a late stage in
Victorian society? He was aged 60, so perhaps he was a little old fashioned
in his thinking?

Or was she really was a visitor and he had custody of the child?

Eve McLaughlin...

Maybe she did not normally live in? Or maybe it was rather a long
visit, like 'the man who came to dinner'.

.

Any ideas?