Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Reason Marriage not taken place

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

  • Reason Marriage not taken place

    I have a copy of wedding banns for a couple in 1911, nobody has signed it and its been crossed through, and a little note saying This marriage did not take place.
    What I wonder could be the reason for this, as they did eventually marry in 1926, after having 4 children.

  • #2
    could one of them have been married before and no divorce?

    could one of them have been under age?

    could they have had a row and "called the whole thing off"?
    My grandmother, on the beach, South Bay, Scarborough, undated photo (poss. 1929 or 1930)

    Researching Cadd, Schofield, Cottrell in Lancashire, Buckinghamshire; Taylor, Park in Westmorland; Hayhurst in Yorkshire, Westmorland, Lancashire; Hughes, Roberts in Wales.

    Comment


    • #3
      Ha ha! Any of those. Who knows what might happen. About 20 years ago we were booked to ring the bells for a wedding. The congregation were there, the organ played, the bells rang the bride was about to arrive when the groom asked the vicar if he could have a word ........ he had changed his mind and the wedding did not happen.

      Quite a few couples seem to have 'on off' relationships as shown by people who remarry each other after previously divorcing.

      Anne

      Comment


      • #4
        One of the first weddings I did as a registrar (at a very expensive venue) was delayed for about an hour whilst the bride's family tried to talk her out of it and my colleague and I, and the best man, had to act as mediators ......went ahead eventually though, with her mother and father looking very miserable in the front row.
        Retired professional researcher, and ex- deputy registrar, now based in Worcestershire. Happy to give any help or advice I can ( especially on matters of civil registration) - contact via PM or my website www.chalfontresearch.co.uk
        Follow me on Twittter @ChalfontR

        Comment


        • #5
          I know a couple who have just got married after 50 years of being together! Neither has been married before. They said they didn't need a bit of paper but I suspect the groom has always been keeping his options open in case something better came along!

          OC

          Comment


          • #6
            In a marriage register I was viewing, the vicar had filled in all the details in advance and the entry was just awaiting all the signatures following the ceremony. It was then crossed through and the vicar had recorded "marriage cancelled - groom cleared off to sea" and initialled the entry. I think the anticipated groom may have been pressurised as a while later there was a baptism record at the same church for a child of the would-be bride, who was recorded as "single woman."

            Many years ago my cousin went to a church to attend a wedding and just before the bride arrived, the vicar entered and stated that he was unable to perform the ceremony and so the marriage would not take place. Apparently the bride was divorced, but as she'd wanted a church wedding, she had not declared her true marital status. With only an hour or two to go, someone had phoned the vicar to advise him of the facts. The couple later married at the registrar's office.

            Jay
            Janet in Yorkshire



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

            Comment


            • #7
              talking of weddings. I arrived at my wedding and got old feet and as my fiancé put his hand on the door handle of the car ,I said drive on. much to the horror of my husbands friends .They drive me around the block saying Why WHY . I said /hold on a minute we need to think about this. They drove me back and half way through the wedding When we started arguing, the registrar closed the book ,and said Marriage is a really serious decision. We grew up inn a split second. That was nearly fifty years ago and he s a darling most of the time. call it nerves. my dad was 91 when he married my mum ?

              Comment


              • #8
                Mistake. I meant to put cold feet. but hey lets leave it at the other spelling now.

                Comment


                • #9
                  How would they know if the couple were under age ??
                  The bride did have their first child 8 months after the wedding did not take place.was , they then had 3 more before they married in 1926, 1914 1916 and 1918.
                  Am trying to find the Grooms Birth.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Val wish Id never started View Post
                    How would they know if the couple were under age ??
                    The bride did have their first child 8 months after the wedding did not take place.was , they then had 3 more before they married in 1926, 1914 1916 and 1918.
                    Am trying to find the Grooms Birth.

                    Someone found out and told the vicar?
                    My grandmother, on the beach, South Bay, Scarborough, undated photo (poss. 1929 or 1930)

                    Researching Cadd, Schofield, Cottrell in Lancashire, Buckinghamshire; Taylor, Park in Westmorland; Hayhurst in Yorkshire, Westmorland, Lancashire; Hughes, Roberts in Wales.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Under age is not a reason, unless either of them were under the legal age for marriage, which is not the same as the legal age of consent.

                      In my experience, the church sometimes performed marriages even where parental consent was withheld, usually when the bride was pregnant.

                      Normally the vicar would write something to the effect that parental permission was withheld if that was the reason.

                      Many years ago I worked with a woman whose marriage was annulled. She said they both realised it was a mistake the night before the marriage but as so many guests had travelled such a long way, they went ahead with the ceremony but left the reception separately and both returned home with their astonished parents!

                      OC

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I remember Diana got worried about marrying Charles, and was told its too late

                        Lady Diana later told her own biographer Andrew Morton that she confided in her sisters, telling them: “I can’t marry him, I can’t do this, this is absolutely unbelievable.”

                        They told her it was too late to pull out because “your face is [already] on the tea towels”.

                        But, says Mayer: “She had no idea her bridegroom also had to be coaxed


                        shame she listened

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          In Manchester Library there were original church records and i noticed one full page had been carefully cut out.. 4 marriage details missing... to the point another record already completed had a note that the father had been and objected and his daughter was under 21, marriage did not take place... no ideaif they ever married later.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            My Father changed his mind ,after giving my Sister permission to marry at 18 , but although he told her, he did not inform anybody else, so she married in secret , with me and my Mum present, he never ever knew we were there and my Mum was a witness.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              four children later and they finally get around to marrying? In that day & age? Sounds like an impediment to me. Do you have the 1926 marriage record? What is the marital status of the parties?

                              Makes me think of Mr. Rochester.

                              Previous marriage is what stopped my g'g'g'grandparents - but that was in the mid-1800s ;) and they had more than four children when they married!
                              Last edited by PhotoFamily; 17-03-18, 02:10.

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                I had a great aunt who had her first child in 1896. She eventually married in 1927. After I found the marriage, I looked for an impediment, but found nothing.That is not to say that there wasn't one!
                                F

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  Amazing how our present day Family History finds out just what our Victorian ancestors really got up to. I could not find marriage Certificate for my grandparents. They had 4 children between 1901 and 1910 and I looked for a marriage from 1895 until 1912, no luck. One day I was looking for events in Metropolitan Archives Ancestry and came across a marriage that looked suspiciously like my grandmother in 1898, but not marrying my grandfather. Checking witnesses I realised they were her sister and brother in law!

                                  Back to Free BMD and found a marriage 1923. Sent for Certificate which stated that she was a spinster and he a batchelor, no sign of a previous marriage. Bigamy on her part?? All children's certs had my grandfather as father and she was down on all birth certs with my grandfather'sname and her maiden name. On both 1901 and 1911 Census she is down as married to my grandfather and I began to wonder if I had been correct with the marriage I found in London.

                                  A newspaper article in 1929 had them both named with address as a highly unusual case as my grandmother was suing for divorce on grounds of cruelty but her case was being thrown out because it had just come to light that there had been an earlier marriage with the person being named in the newspaper, the same marriage I had found in London. The report stated they had to come back to court at a future date to untangle the situation as there was now some doubt about the marriage of my grandparents in 1923. Tantalisingly I have yet to come across a further newspaper report. There are some things you could not make up if you trie!

                                  Janet
                                  Last edited by Janet; 17-03-18, 18:12.

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    they certainly did make life complicated for us :(

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      When 2G grandma married she married as Smith - her MMN. Her father was named as Ransom which had me puzzling but it wasn't until later I realised this was not her father but her step father. (I hadn't found her baptism at the time)
                                      It was the 1869 death cert of my 2G grandmother with the informant being her mother in the name of Lee that enabled me to untangle my 3g grandparents marriages.
                                      I found my 2G Grandma had been baptised in 1833 as Lee -Father was named as a Lee but mother by just a Christian name. They were not married and they each married separate partners the following year hence Ransom on 1841 census and Marriage cert.
                                      When 3G grandparents both became widowed in early 1850's they decided to marry - 20 years after the birth of their daughter. One wonders why they didn't marry back in 1833 as they were both single???
                                      Sometimes death certs contain surprising information
                                      Last edited by Katarzyna; 17-03-18, 21:44.
                                      Kat

                                      My avatar is my mother 1921 - 2012

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        I've often told people I've been helping when they started sputtering that their grandparents/ gt grandparents would "never" have "lived in sin" or married bigamously, that there were just as many breakdowns in marriage back then as there are now ........... but divorce was impossible for all but the wealthy. So couples just separated, and if one or both met someone new, there was not much else they could do but live together.

                                        I've also learnt to be wary of wives who declare themselves Widow on a census if I cannot find husband's death ............. look for death after that date, or look for him living elsewhere!

                                        Mind you, I still have a little giggle to myself when I remember one woman's response to the fact that I found her grandmother had an illegitimate child ............. she said she couldn't wait to tell her own mother because she had always held up the grandmother as a pillar of rectitude in all aspects of life :D . Her way of making her daughter aware that she had not come up to standard!
                                        My grandmother, on the beach, South Bay, Scarborough, undated photo (poss. 1929 or 1930)

                                        Researching Cadd, Schofield, Cottrell in Lancashire, Buckinghamshire; Taylor, Park in Westmorland; Hayhurst in Yorkshire, Westmorland, Lancashire; Hughes, Roberts in Wales.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X