Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Registry Office in 1856?

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

  • Registry Office in 1856?

    I have been asked by a friend about a marriage certificate he has from 1856. the marriage was in a Registry Office and the groom was a widower, aged 36. The bride was a spinster aged 35.

    Does anyone think that a registry office wedding would indicate that one of them was not baptised? I didn't think so but maybe you folks have more experience of RO weddings?

    Just off to get tea - back later
    Anne

  • #2
    Earliest reg office wedding I have is for gt x 2 grandparents Honor Brewer Pope and James Broad in 1852. The fact that their eldest child was baptised just 3 weeks after the event tells me perhaps it was a hastily arranged, perhaps a shotgun, do!

    A register office wedding might be because bride and groom are from different faiths and can't agree on which faith to marry in, or because they want to get married quickly - and maybe the local vicar disapproved.
    ~ with love from Little Nell~
    Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

    Comment


    • #3
      Oh, and my gt grandfather's 2nd marriage in 1907 was in a register office, perhaps the reason for the one you've found is to do with being widowed and the marriage just being one of convenience.
      ~ with love from Little Nell~
      Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

      Comment


      • #4
        Many of my Holdens married in Register Offices from the moment they opened their doors in 1837.

        This is because they were strong nonconformists and in the early 1800s the nonconformist churches and chapels they attended were not licenced to perform marriages.

        As Civil Marriage was brought into being to cater for people who, for whatever reason, did not wish to be married in the established church, then this meant they did not have to go through the hypocrisy (to them) of an Anglican church wedding, when they had never stepped foot in the place before.

        It was also quite common to marry in a Register Office where one or other of the parties was widowed. As Anglican marriage was seen by the religious as for eternity, then one could not in all conscience go through another marriage in church.

        OC

        Comment


        • #5
          Well.....75% of the reg office marriages on my tree before 1872 were bigamous marriages!! lolol

          Comment


          • #6
            Register office is a good choice for a bigamist. No banns (and therefore no attention) called, you can be fairly anonymous, there won't be a regular congregation member to shout "but he's already married!" etc.
            ~ with love from Little Nell~
            Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks for the comments - not quite what I had expected but I will pass them on! I think he was hoping that it meant that the groom - for whom he can't find a relevant baptism - was not 'allowed' to marry in church.

              Anne

              Comment


              • #8
                What about the first marriage for the groom?

                Comment


                • #9
                  I only have two (1872 and 1880) so not quite the period you're after and in both cases the brides (both spinsters) had illegitimate children by a previous partner.
                  CAROLE : "A CHIP OFF THE OLD BLOCK"

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    That's a very good point Merry! When I check the details on his tree the first marriage is just down as an 'estimate' because, although there is census evidence, the marriage has not been found. It would have been before the start of civil registration - I wonder if it was non-con?

                    Thanks for the shove!

                    Anne

                    Sorry Taffy, I wasn't ignoring you - the site was playing up and your reply had not appeared.
                    Last edited by Anne in Carlisle; 03-03-08, 20:06.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Anne in Carlisle View Post
                      It would have been before the start of civil registration
                      Are you sure? If he was 36 in 1856, he would only have been 17 when civil reg started

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Anne in Carlisle View Post
                        It would have been before the start of civil registration
                        Are you sure? If he was 36 in 1856, he would only have been 17 when civil reg started


                        If it was before 1837 then the marriage would have to take place in the C of E, unless he was a Quaker or a Jew!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Erm....I've been married twice in a Register Office and both times Banns were published, as "Notice of Intent to Marry" or something.

                          Admittedly, you have to go and nose at the Notice Board in the Register Office - but that is what it's there for - public proclamation of intention to marry.

                          )C

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Are you sure? If he was 36 in 1856, he would only have been 17 when civil reg started

                            Merry - I think he was telling porkies - he would have been more like 40 when he was married! We do have a death for his first wife, so at least it wasn't bigamy!

                            Anne

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Anne

                              I was told on these boards a few weeks ago that the Parish Church in an area cannot refuse to marry anyone who lives in the parish. Baptism doesn't come into it apparently.

                              OC

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                OC - that was my feeling too. I was really just checking what other opinions were before giving my friend the information.

                                Thanks
                                Anne

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  No problem Ann

                                  Re: non-conformist marriages - didn't they have to be 'done' in the parish church anyway up to a certain year anyway? Can't remember the year? Can anyone refresh my memory?
                                  CAROLE : "A CHIP OFF THE OLD BLOCK"

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    OC

                                    1) not banns, but notice to marry is posted where you marry by certificate. If you marry by licence, just as in church weddings, you don't have to wait 3 weeks.

                                    2) I thought marriage was dependent on the vicar, though of course things might have changed now. I know several folk who couldn't marry in church because of divorce and a work colleague's ancestors had to marry in a register office because the vicar refused to marry them as the bride was pregnant!
                                    ~ with love from Little Nell~
                                    Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      Nell

                                      Until recently, I believed the same as you - the Vicar could pick and choose who he married in his church, but apparently not.

                                      My Vicar didn't know this rule though because he refused me permission to marry in the parish church because I was not a church goer. Fair enough, I thought at the time.

                                      OC

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        Mmm, just googled and apparently you have a right to be married in your parish church regardless of whether you attend or even have a belief. But vicars can choose not to marry you if you aren't of that parish, and you don't have a right to get married in church if you've been divorced.

                                        You live and learn!

                                        There are moves afoot to change the law so you can marry in any church:
                                        Your marriage in the Church of England | Church of England questions & answers.
                                        Last edited by Little Nell; 03-03-08, 22:00.
                                        ~ with love from Little Nell~
                                        Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X