consent of parents

[kylejustin]

i have a bit of a hiccup i could use some extra thoughts on. for many years i have been trying to sort out mary pratt's birth.

mary pratt married simon coates at grinton, yorks on 19 jan 1813. wittnesses john raw and edmund coates. they are both listed as "of this parish" and the entry states married "with consent of parents".

simon coates was ch.7 nov 1791, grinton. parents simon and hannah of kearton. i have him sorted, and he is 21 by nov 1812.

1851 feetham, yorks- simon 59, b.1782 melbecks, mary 60, b.1791 melbecks. listed with children.
1861 feetham, yorks- mary 69, b.1792 melbecks. (widowed)
1871 richmond, yorks- mary 79, b.1792 grinton. with son and his family
mary dies in feetham, 1876 age 84, b.1792.

i have two candidates for mary's birth in grinton 1785-95.

1) marey pratt ch.9 aug 1789, dau of michal pratt of healaugh.

2) marey pratt ch.28 aug 1791, dau of thomas pratt of kearton. (possible dau of thomas pratt and hannah raw m.23 dec 1788 grinton)

both of these candidates would be over 21 by jan 1813. so was 21 the age of consent?

[Olde Crone Holden]

Yes, 21 was the age of consent. Possibly neither of them knew exactly how old they were, quite common in those days. Possibly you have the wrong couple. Possibly the vicar's arithmetic was rubbish!

OC

[AntonyM]

Canon law decreed that those under 21 needed parental consent to be married, was it by banns or licence ?

Is the "with consent of parents" written next to just one or both of the parties ? (sometimes the entries don't make it very clear)

[larkspur]

The pre-printed marriage certificates at that time consisted of-
"were married by ___________, in the presence of _______________ ,"

The Vicar possibly filled in the details even if they were not legally required.

[Olde Crone Holden]

Slightly off topic but I have a lovely one in my family "married with the consent of her good friends". She was an orphan. The same vicar sometimes wrote "married with the consent of those whom the law requires" which I assume means the parents were dead.

OC

[larkspur]

The pre-printed marriage certificates at that time consisted of-
"were married by ___________, in the presence of _______________ ,"

The Vicar possibly filled in the details even if they were not legally required.

Sorry should read " were married in this Church by (Licence-Banns) with consent of------"
Just double checked.

http://www.lincstothepast.com/Records/RecordDisplayTranscript.aspx?oid=563114&iid=85904

example here.....

[kylejustin]

printed form "married in this church by banns with consent of parents". my thoughts are maybe one or both had no idea how old they were. but the parents surely would have signed the register?

definitely the right couple, three simon coates' in a row, not a common name in grinton. mary pratt on the other hand......and the registers are not detailed for distinguishing individuals with common names.

[AntonyM]

The new form with the "with consent of.." line was introduced in 1813, and doesn't usually make clear which party is the under-age one (or if it were both). Parents would not normally sign the register, unless they were being the witnesses.

[Olde Crone Holden]

Although it is not relevant in this case, I do believe that the church could dispense with "consent of parents" if the bride was underage but pregnant. (Before 1837)

OC