Some years ago, I was most surprised to find the 1810 Irregular Border Marriage of my 4x great grandparents recorded in the Coldstream Kirk Register. That sparse record lay between two regular marriages recorded on 16/11/1810 and 25/11/1810 but merely gave their names, showed they were both 'of this parish' and 'were married irregularly upon the 21st day of Jany 1810', with no venue shown.
Their first son was born on 5/11/1810 and it was clearly their wish to arrange his baptism
that had triggered this belated 'marriage record' at the Kirk.
It was well known then that if a couple wished to register their irregular marriage, that could only be done via the courts, either on a degree of declarator of any competent court, or on conviction before a Justice of the Peace of having contracted such a marriage, with the latter course more favoured as it cost less. It could not be registered merely by a register entry made by the Kirk Minister.
Possibly, the Minister implied that a baptism as their lawful son would not be possible without a record of their marriage even though he would have known well that irregular marriages were perfectly legal and it would follow that children of such marriages were lawful children of their parents.
I am very glad to have come across the entry but remain intrigued about the purpose of it in the Kirk register as it does not seem to fulfil any legal or Kirk requirement, and would welcome suggestions.
I do not know whether money crossed palms at Coldstream in 1810 over this, but the fact is their son was baptised as their lawful son at the Kirk on 25/11/1810.
Their irregular marriage most probably took place at another well known Scottish venue for Irregular Border Marriages, that of the Toll House for the Bridge across the Tweed at Coldstream.
merleyone
|