Which marriage is correct?
 

Margaret Gould married Charles Baring on 6 Sep 1767 AND 5 May 1768, same parish, both by licence, both with her mother, also Margaret as one of the witnesses.

The first child was baptised 5 June 1768.

I can see no other likely earlier marriages for either party or any reason why they would need to re-marry.

Can anyone think of a reason why this would happen and which marriage would be the valid one?

Was the first one the marriage bond for the licence?

The first marriage is the valid one.

OC

I don't know what you mean by a marriage bond? They both look like normal parish register entries.

Both entries are on one double page of the register, one on the right page and the other on the left. No comments in the margins

The first marriage record says that they were married by John Weston, rector, and the second witness is J. Weston. Seems suspicious? Then the second record has them married by Geo Moore, rector, with the second witness being Caleb Blight.

Parish is St Leonard, Exeter, by the way. John Weston died on the 9th Oct 1767 (Gentleman's Magazine.)

It could be suspicious but I can't see why. Her father is dead and her mother is present, or at least someone of her name is there. It does appear they waited until her father died, but it may be coincidence. Neither were married before, as far as I can tell, so there is no bigamy, nor re-marrying properly after an unwanted spouse dies. They were both of age.

They definitely married as the couple are mentioned in wills of other family members.

Maybe John Weston was a bit senile, or ill, and they remarried with 2 proper witnesses to make sure it was all above board? Assuming J Weston is John Weston and not a relative.

Changing the topic slightly. Charles leaves everything to a daughter named Emily or Lady Young. The only child that might fit this name is Amelia, although she is baptised at a different parish to all the other children. Are Emily and Amelia similar enough to be the same person?

Fairly sure that licence allegations for the period are published.

I would suspect a perceived irregularity in the first marriage, which might be important if money were involved.

Oh, and yes, I have Millys who turn out to be Emily, Amelia or even Millicent. Misrecording might reflect a deaf parson.

I note that Margaret Gould signed 'Margaret Baring' at the first marriage and 'Margaret Gould' the second time round.

Sorry, Toni, I only meant that the witness's name seemed suspicious.