No, it is dangerous to speculate that Joseph may have been the father. Although it is not stated what these "papers" are, I suspect these records are bastardy bonds. Joseph was simply a bondsman.
Bastardy bonds existed to prevent the parish from having to pay for the upkeep of an illegitimate child. Typically the bastardy bond would bind the reputed father (as well as additional bondsmen as surety) to pay for the upkeep of the child. In the event that the mother did not know or state the father of the child (as seems to be in this case), the mother herself, a relative, employer, or friend might provide surety. Joseph may have been any of these.
To provide a proper interpretation of this record you really need to see the original document.