Non-Conformist Marriages

[Muggins in Sussex]

I'm not sure that this is a question, but it just seems odd and wondered whether anyone had any thoughts.

The person who may have been one of my grandfathers ( but I now think was probably my great uncle) was married in 1915 in a Unitarian Church. His wife died, and in 1918 he was married again in a Presbyterian Church. I don't think this could have been because his second wife was a Presbyterian, because she had previously ( 4 months earlier!!) been married to someone else in a C of E Church

[Little Nell]

Was his second wife widowed or divorced? C of E church wouldn't marry a divorcee.

Perhaps your man married in 1915 in his wife's preferred church, and was a Presbytarian all along, or he may have changed religion. Or the church may just have been the most convenient one. Was the marriage by licence?

[Muggins in Sussex]

Thanks Nell - his second wife declares herself to be a spinster on the cert (!), although she had married someone else four months earlier. The two non- conformist marriages were both by licence

[Little Nell]

So is the 2nd wife really still married? A marriage by licence drew less attention than one by banns which required public announcement and meant a wait of 3 weeks.

[Muggins in Sussex]

I simply don't know, Nell
I have never found any evidence that her first husband ever existed!

[Merry Monty Montgomery]

I simply don't know, Nell
I have never found any evidence that her first husband ever existed!

That's not him entering the country in the US Army in Feb 1918 is it? (no middle initial, just the right first name.).....Probably not! (I haven't been reading your other thread, so apologies if this has been covered)

[Muggins in Sussex]

Blinky flip!!! No idea - but where did you find that please, Merry?

[Merry Monty Montgomery]

Sorry....on Ancestry

UK Incoming Passenger Lists, 1878-1960

Clarence Platt arrival date 23 Feb 1918 from New York, New York, United States to Liverpool, England

He's listed as a Captain in the US army.

[Muggins in Sussex]

Thank you Merry

I will have a look on Monday when I can access Ancestry.com.

The strange thing is that when his bride re-married only 4 months later, she describes herself as a spinster.

And in 1930, her new husband, according to a newspaper report, wants to go to Canada to prove the validity of his marriage.

Sorry - my threads seem to be getting all intermingled again! :o

[Tom Tom]

Was his second wife widowed or divorced? C of E church wouldn't marry a divorcee.

I have a divorcee who married in a C of E church in 1896 and my Mum's cousin (who is divorced) is marrying in a C of E church next month

[Little Nell]

Muggins

Are you sure its the same woman? And how does going to Canada prove anything (or were the marriages in Canada)

[Wor canny Lass]

Was his second wife's first marriage annulled? If that was the case she would be a spinster. 4 months is a short time to get an annullment

The other possibility is that the marriage wasn't legal. Only C of E ministers are automatically licenced tp conduct marriages, otherwise a registrar has to be there. In our non-conformist Church we have a member who is licenced to register marriages, and he has to be present at every marriage, or it isn't legal

Anne

[Muggins in Sussex]

Hi Nell - I'm sure it's the same woman - Caroline Ruth Dowsett, father, John - I have the certs - all the marriages were in England - I don't really understand the Canada connection - except that Caroline's husband was probably not the most unscupulous of people and may have been involved in an insurance scam

[Muggins in Sussex]

Was his second wife's first marriage annulled? If that was the case she would be a spinster. 4 months is a short time to get an annullment

The other possibility is that the marriage wasn't legal. Only C of E ministers are automatically licenced tp conduct marriages, otherwise a registrar has to be there. In our non-conformist Church we have a member who is licenced to register marriages, and he has to be present at every marriage, or it isn't legal

Anne

Hi Anne

So far as I know, the first marriage wasn't annulled. The groom was by all accounts a thoroughly unscruplous, and rather nasty piece of work, and so there are lots of possibilities -least of which is that he was my grandfather

[Uncle John]

The other possibility is that the marriage wasn't legal. Only C of E ministers are automatically licenced tp conduct marriages, otherwise a registrar has to be there. In our non-conformist Church we have a member who is licenced to register marriages, and he has to be present at every marriage, or it isn't legal

Not strictly true, Anne. For a marriage to be conducted in a non-conformist church without the registrar, the church has to be "registered for the solemnisation of marriages" (and therefore hold its own marriage register) and the minister (or other person, such as the member you mention) has to be registered to conduct marriages at that church.

[Olde Crone Holden]

Tom

Extreeeeeemly unusual for a divorcee to be remarried in the C of E in 1896. There must have been truly exceptional circumstances.

I was not allowed to remarry in church, as a divorcee, in 1976!

Muggins

I cannot imagine any non-conformist church performing a marriage if they didn't have a licence to perform marriages, so the marriage would be legal from that point of view. The fact that it appears in the indexes is proof that the church was licenced to perform marriages.

OC

[Little Nell]

A friend of mine couldn't marry in her parish church in 1990 because she was divorced. They had a service and blessing though, following the register office bit.

[Muggins in Sussex]

Thank you for your replies - these are the two certificates which are causing the main problem





I thought I'd post them in case anyone can see anything I have missed.

(Hope I have cropped them sufficiently)

[Merry Monty Montgomery]

I presume you got the two certs from the local RO as they are in modern handwriting, but not at the same time as they are in different hands?

Would it be worth writing to the Brighton registrar (sending copies of the certs) and asking if they can compare all the handwriting of the original people? You could do it on the pretext of "wondering" if Miss Dowsett is the same person both times (I know she is! lol), but I was actually wondering if the two grooms, or any of the witnesses might have the same handwriting?

In any case, there's probably a reasonable chance there will be someone at the reg office who is interested in a good mystery and the more minds the better.......

Is the John Dowsett witness bound to be her father?

Do you know who Miss/Mrs Hope is?

[Muggins in Sussex]

Thanks Merry - you presume right!

I had been thinking of contacting the Register Office, but not known how to word it - You suggestion is brilliant Thank you - I will do it.

I'd assumed that John Dowsett, the witness in the Platt marriage, was Caroline's father, but it could of course have been her brother. The other witness was H W's sister

I got very interested in Eunice Hannah Elizabeth Hope! I had never heard of her or of William Lee until I got the marriage cert. I think she was using her maiden name when she witnessed the marriage, as she married William Lee on 9th March 1916. She was a dressmaker living in Brighton and William Lee was a provision salesman.

Thanks