Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wedding Licence circa 1878.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wedding Licence circa 1878.

    Can anyone advise under what conditions a Wedding Licence would be issued in this time frame. I am assuming, rightly or wrongly, that they had to be bought but given the circumstances of my Church Register entries ( which I'm transcribing), I dont know how they would pay.

  • #2
    Alan

    TheBishop or Archbishop is the one who issues licences, so the records of that transaction don't appear in a church register.

    OC

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks OC...............Happy New Year.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by AlanC View Post
        Can anyone advise under what conditions a Wedding Licence would be issued in this time frame. I am assuming, rightly or wrongly, that they had to be bought but given the circumstances of my Church Register entries ( which I'm transcribing), I dont know how they would pay.
        Do you mean WHY would a licence be needed Alan? (Maybe I have misunderstood you). The two main reasons for issuing a licence were/are either that neither the bride nor groom are resident in the parish of the church in which they marry and/or they want to marry more quickly than the calling of banns over 3 weeks would allow.

        Both of these scenarios are avoidable! ie. get married in you own parish; wait until the banns have been called. I don't know what the cost would have been but I'm sure there were some just as there are today.

        Anne

        Comment


        • #5
          I have one who married by licence in 1798 and it cost £100 so I do not think getting married by licence was ever a cheap option. In the main most people married by licence because the bride was pregnant or the man was going overseas to war, or just that the couple had plenty of money and wished to show that they had money by exercising their right to marry by licence. I do have many who married by licence in the parishes in which they lived and/or in the close adjoining parishes and the main reasons seem to be just that they wanted to marry by licence though one was clearly pregnant. However, only in the instance I have given above did I find a cost of a licence.

          Janet

          Comment


          • #6
            Janet

            I'm not sure of my facts here, this is out of the back of the attic in my brain, lol, but wasn't the cost of a licence more in the form of a Bond than a fee, if you see what I mean.

            I think that originally licences were issued where neither bride nor groom could account for themselves as far as the church went - in other words, they were neither rsident in the parish, nor known to it. In this case, they had to get someone to give them a reference and a Bond. I am sure there was also a non-returnable admin fee, but that would be separate to the Bond.

            As I say, I may have remembered this wrong, but that's what popped out, lol!

            OC

            Comment


            • #7
              I'm pretty sure the documents I've seen are marriage bonds or marriage licence applications, rather than licences themselves. Wasn't the licence itself handed over as evidence of entitlement to marry?

              In each case, one (sometimes two) bondsman was named, and also a sum of money - as OC says, this was the bond, forfeited if the marriage didn't take place. The sums specified varied and I couldn't come up with any pattern. (Many of my farming gang married by licence.)

              I'm sure there was a fee incurred by applying for a licence (didn't marriage by banns incur a fee?) but have never seen the sum recorded anywhere.

              Jay
              Janet in Yorkshire



              Genealogists never die - they just swap places in the family tree

              Comment


              • #8
                Janet

                Yes I am sure there would have been an admin fee, but this would appear in the Bishops/Archbishops Accounts, I think, or in the Diocesan records.

                And yes, now you mention it, some of my farmers married by licence. There appears to be no reason for it, especially as this family were historically church wardens at their parish church!

                OC

                Comment


                • #9
                  I am almost certain mine are Marriage Licences and not Bonds but I will have to check my file! Will hope to do so sometime today!

                  Janet

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The Licence would be the thing which allowed a marriage. The Bond would be the thing that allowed a licence, but not all licences needed Bonds, perhaps?

                    OC

                    OC

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Thank you Anne, Janet and OC for your input. I've been transcribing Parish Records for 18 months or more and not come across 'Bonds' before. I did assume the Bride's condition may require a speedy marriage rather than wait for Banns. Mariners often married by Licence and certainly 'Gentlemen' and the better-off also did. I thought perhaps that it would provide an element of Privacy for the Upper Crust but I'm guessing. Farmers marrying by Licence could be something to do with crop & weather conditions although in my experience, their Licences are not particularly noticable.
                      Happy New Year to everyone.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Apologies if I am hijacking this thread but now I am confused, whereas yesterday I felt quite confident in what I had.

                        I do have several copies of these documents of Marriage Licences/Allegations/Bonds, call them what you will, which I photographed from Northants CRO and found in their Marriage Licence Archives, not in their Bonds or Allegation Archives! However, looking at them all carefully there is no mention on them as to what they are! I found the marriages first in the parish registers before I went looking for the "Licences" so I know all of them with one exception went through with the marriage. The one exception is a commonwealth document. Looking at Mark Herber's "Ancestral Trails" it does tell you the difference between Allegations and Bonds and gives you examples so I have looked carefully at mine. None of them are Allegations but the others look like Bonds, but appear to have more information than the Bond example I am looking at in Ancestral Trails. I did note one interesting point as follows:

                        "A statute of 1822 required an affidavit to be sworn (until March 1823) if a couple wanted banns to be called. The act imposed similar provisions from 1 Sept 1822 for the issue of marriage licernces. It is unfortunate for genealogists that this provision was also repealed in March 1823. For seven months, every intending spouse (who required a licence) had to swear an affidavit as to his or her own age , marital status and belief as to the age and marital satus of the person they intended to marry. If either of the couple were under 21, they had to swear that the minor's parents or guardian had consented(and exhibit a written and witnessed consent). Importantly the couple's ages had to be proved by exhibiting copies of baptism entries. from parish registers. If ther had been no baptism, an intending spouse had to procure a certificate as to their age, provided by someone who had known them for a long time. If ancestors married by licence between 1 Sept 1822 and 26 March 1823, an allegation for the licence will provide a great deal of genealogical information."

                        There are two types of Licence:

                        Special usually granted by the Archbishop of Canterbury where the couple could marry anywhere.

                        Common where just one or two parishes were named where the marriage could take place. The restriction was often ignored! These licences could be issued by archbishops, bishops, some archdeacons, ministersv in some parishes(peculiars) or by their surrogates.

                        To help me distinguish what I have (and I know what a Bond and Allegation look like) so can someone please tell me how a Marriage Licence differs from a Bond and what does a Marriage Licence look like??

                        Janet

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Janet View Post

                          There are two types of Licence:

                          Special usually granted by the Archbishop of Canterbury where the couple could marry anywhere.

                          Common where just one or two parishes were named where the marriage could take place. The restriction was often ignored! These licences could be issued by archbishops, bishops, some archdeacons, ministersv in some parishes(peculiars) or by their surrogates.

                          To help me distinguish what I have (and I know what a Bond and Allegation look like) so can someone please tell me how a Marriage Licence differs from a Bond and what does a Marriage Licence look like??

                          Janet
                          Here's a link to a site showing images of a special licence and a common licence from late 1800s, early 1900s


                          Judith passed away in October 2018

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            There seems to be confusion as to what a marriage licence is and the cost.

                            First a marriage licence cost a little more than banns, if the couple lived in separate parishes the cost of a marriage by licence often worked out less than the cost of having the three announcements in both parish churches.

                            To marry by licence three items had to be obtained.
                            The allegation.
                            The allegation was a document announcing the intention to marry and alleging that there were no canonic impediments to the marriage.

                            The Bond
                            Up until 1823 a bond was required in case it was later found that there was a canonic impediment, it also acted as an assurance for the incumbent insuring they they would not be guilty of an offence by marrying the couple.
                            Note;
                            Some people think the bond had to be paid before the marriage could take place this is wrong.
                            Some people think the bond had to be paid if the marriage did not take place this is wrong.

                            The bond was only payable if there was a legal impediment to the marriage.

                            The last item was the the licence itself a document authorising the marriage to take place, many licences were simply disposed of as there was no requirement to keep them. A few survive.
                            Cheers
                            Guy
                            Guy passed away October 2022

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Thanks Guy................you always seem to make easy to understand.

                              Nearly all of OH's family married by licence and the Borthwick Institute has told me they have two there I can buy. They just haven't answered my email about how I actually buy them and pay for them....lol

                              A job I'll sort soon.

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                Judith

                                Thank you for the link.

                                Guy

                                Thank you for your succint way of putting things. It is now clearer to me the sorts of copies of documents that I possess! The CRO's should make this clear when we are seeking information on Marriage Licences after finding ancestors married by licence in the Parish Registers. I have never seen lists of Allegations and Bonds, only lists of "Marriage Licences". And there is nothing on the document to say what it is. So many thanks for your clarification.

                                Janet

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  Just as an aside .... my daughter and her husband had to get a licence from the Archbishop of Canterbury for their marriage at Carlisle Cathedral. We all ring the bells at the Cathedral but there is no parish as such at all. The licence could only be applied for a maximum of 3 months before the wedding - not much time in these days! What would happen if it wasn't granted with everything booked?!!

                                  After the wedding the couple were given the licence document to keep. I suspect this may always have been the case, which is why few actual licences survive.

                                  Anne

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    How easy it is to take Records for granted. Thanks to Judith for posting the link to Cerificates. In my Tree, no-one married by Licence so in my transcriptions of thousands of marriages, I never considered that Licences would be by way of Certificates and would be issued with a Record of them held somewhere............all the failings of an old man's brain. I appreciate very much the responses to my thread.

                                    Comment

                                    Working...
                                    X