Marriage declared void - where could I find details?

[Elaine ..Spain]

Looking for information on how to find out whether a marriage had been declared void. Would the certificate held by the GRO be annotated to this effect?

It relates to a marriage in 1872 when the bride would have been between 16 years and 16 years 4 months of age (calculated from date of marriage and the quarter in which the birth was registered)
Parish register marriage entry gives bride's age as 18.
Groom was of full age which was correct.
Witnesses were not family members.

Bride remarries in 1875, shows as spinster at time of marriage.
Groom remarries 1878, shows as bachelor at time of marriage. (Uses a dffierent surname!)

I am wondering if the bride married without parental consent and the marriage was subsequently declared void.

The reason I ask is that I can see the entry in the parish register (on FMP) and it just looks like a normal entry - no crossing out, no annotation.
However, a contact who is researching the same family, has said that he has seen the certificate on Ancestry (although he cannot remember where) and it was "all crossed out ".
I've searched Ancestry and cannot see anything, which makes me wonder whether a copy held at GRO would have included "crossings out" and what he has seen is a copy of the GRO marriage certificate uploaded by another researcher.

Thanks.

[GallowayLass]

Have you searched this dataset on its own? Birth, Marriage & Death, including Parish

Also have you entered them as spouses in the main search box and unticked all but the "family trees" option? If you are lucky there might not be a lot of trees to look at and somebody will have uploaded the image to their gallery.

[Elaine ..Spain]

Have you searched this dataset on its own? Birth, Marriage & Death, including Parish

Also have you entered them as spouses in the main search box and unticked all but the "family trees" option? If you are lucky there might not be a lot of trees to look at and somebody will have uploaded the image to their gallery.

There's a transcription of the marriage on Ancestry, but no image.
The marriage took place in Hampshire and I am pretty sure that Ancestry have never had images from Hampshire PRs.
I have an image of the parish register entry which is available on Findmypast.
Nothing comes up on public family trees.

My contact says he found a marriage on Ancestry but it was all crossed out! I cannot think what he was referring to and unfortunately he doesn't have a link or screenshot of it!

[kylejustin]

Familysearch has hampshire records. But pretty sure you have to view them at an lds centre only? Could he have seen a bishop transcript?

[Elaine ..Spain]

Familysearch has hampshire records. But pretty sure you have to view them at an lds centre only? Could he have seen a bishop transcript?

Yes, that's a possibility. I'll take a look on FamilySearch.

[PhotoFamily]

If you find it, can you provide a link to the FS transcription? I'm headed to the library today.

[Elaine ..Spain]

If you find it, can you provide a link to the FS transcription? I'm headed to the library today.

That is very kind of you.

I have found an entry for the marriage but I have a feeling that this will be the same as the image I can see on Findmypast.

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QP8Z-15HT

According to the catalogue, BTs for Portsea are only available up to mid 1830s.

[PhotoFamily]

The BT is limited, but the PR is also in the catalogue, and probably the source of the transcription.

Parish registers for St. Mary's Church, Portsea, 1653-1926

Marriages, 1869-1873

Family History Library

British B1 High Density

919759

8065790

But yes, is the record on FMP the PR or the BT? And, you do have that image? FS gave/exchanged many of the transcriptions that it has for privileges from FMP and Ancestry. So, often the transcription you see on one of those sites is what FS has.

[Elaine ..Spain]

But yes, is the record on FMP the PR or the BT? And, you do have that image? FS gave/exchanged many of the transcriptions that it has for privileges from FMP and Ancestry. So, often the transcription you see on one of those sites is what FS has.

Yes, I already have the image of the parish register from Findmypast.

[PhotoFamily]

The reason I ask is that I can see the entry in the parish register (on FMP) and it just looks like a normal entry - no crossing out, no annotation.
However, a contact who is researching the same family, has said that he has seen the certificate on Ancestry (although he cannot remember where) and it was "all crossed out ".
I've searched Ancestry and cannot see anything, which makes me wonder whether a copy held at GRO would have included "crossings out" and what he has seen is a copy of the GRO marriage certificate uploaded by another researcher.

AntonyM This is a good question for AntonyM!

[AntonyM]

The fact that a marriage may later have been regarded as void or invalid doesn't change the fact that the ceremony took place - this is the view the Registrar General took in the 1930s in a similar case when asked to delete or amend a record ( of a marriage that had been found to be bigamous) ...he refused and replied that:

"A marriage register entry is not a guarantee that a valid marriage subsists between the parties specified …. it is a record of the fact that a marriage was celebrated between certain persons after fulfilment of all the requirements of the law."

I have seen one or two parish registers where entries have been annotated or even crossed through in such circumstances, but I wouldn't expect the same to happen on the GRO copy.

Lack of parental consent wouldn't automatically make the marriage void or invalid anyway - read Rebecca Probert's book "Marriage Law for Genealogists" for a full and clear explanation of the subject.

[Elaine ..Spain]

Thanks Antony.
I think I will just have to put this to one side for now!
I suppose it's possible they married, drifted apart and then both married again (bigamously) claiming they were single at the time. The groom even changed his surname for the second marriage so I presume he was "running away" from someone or something!

[Gwyn in Kent]

It is interesting that the bride remarried years before her 1st husband.

Reminds me of a couple I helped to investigate for a friend.

This was in Portsmouth in late 1800s and the bride 'took up' with another man, while her husband was away at sea.
He came back to find that she had married another man declaring herself to be a widow.

We found a newspaper report about the case and subsequent divorce proceedings.