|
#1
16-01-13, 07:15
|
||||
|
||||
Divorce Records 1858-1914 - ancestry
http://search.ancestry.co.uk/search/db.aspx?dbid=2465
They are calling them "UK Civil Divorce Records" but I suspect it is just England and Wales - anyone know whether this is the case? There is a similar database on findmypast but you may find people listed on one and not on the other (Apparently ancestry's database is from J77 at TNA and findmypast's from J78). Edit - date range was 1858-1911 when this thread was originally posted, but now goes up to 1914. Last edited by kiterunner; 10-09-15 at 16:38. Reason: change title of thread and add info about date ranges 
|
|
#2
16-01-13, 07:41
|
||||
|
||||
|
FMP only has the index (I think)....Ancestry has the papers, so all the juicy stories
 Although 'mine' couldn't afford official divorces I have been having a look at some of the cases....They make interesting reading. Thanks for bringing this to our attention Kite Chris
__________________
Avatar..St Peters Church Thundersley Essex 'Take nothing on its looks, take everything on evidence. There is no better rule' Charles Dickens, Great Expectations. Last edited by Chris in Sussex; 16-01-13 at 07:44.
|
|
#3
16-01-13, 10:53
|
||||
|
||||
|
Oooh, I've just been reading the papers regarding "my" 1903 Horniman "divorce" (apparently there was never a decree absolute).
I thought I was reading about Mr H doing the gentlemanly thing, having allowed himself to be seen entering various hotels on specific dates to commit adultery with a woman named Wentworth about three months before the divorce petition......but when I got to the papers for him, he accuses his wife of adultery with three different men (one of whom she eventually married once Mr H had died) and two of those at their family home! I didn't think that was what a gentleman was supposed to do? lol Maybe he eventually thought twice about the divorce, as I'm sure all the details would have ended up in the newspaper had it gone through, as Mr H was an MP with a wife 40 years his junior! Thanks for the link, Kate - I wonder who else I can find?
__________________
"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
|
|
#4
16-01-13, 11:00
|
||||
|
||||
|
Ooh, thanks, Kate, off to have a look.
|
|
#5
16-01-13, 14:10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Oooh thank you
|
|
#6
16-01-13, 16:57
|
|||
|
|||
|
Found a few in there. One was pages long - mainly because they kept repeating the same pages again and again!
|
|
#8
17-01-13, 08:14
|
||||
|
||||
|
Just found one for OH's husband. I had thought it was reasonably amicable as she was the executor and beneficiary of hubby's will when he died but her application for separation and divorce state he neglected her and physically abused her. Made me sad really.
__________________
Toni 
|
|
#9
17-01-13, 14:29
|
||||
|
||||
|
I don't think you need take legalese as much of a faithful indicator of real life stories in all cases, Toni. Sometimes the lawyer has to write the language that matches the hurdles to be got over in order to satisfy the "letter of the law."
|
|
#10
17-01-13, 14:49
|
||||
|
||||
|
I don't really agree with that.
The grounds for divorce used to be adultery, desertion or cruelty (no-fault divorce wasn't introduced until fairly recently). I would say it was fairly unusual for somebody to invent stories of cruelty, because it would have to be proved. If both parties wanted a divorce, the usual thing was for the husband to arrange to be seen by a private detective entering a hotel with some woman and leaving the next day. If only one wanted the divorce, they would need to get the same kind of evidence of adultery, or apply on the ground of two years' desertion. I would guess that cruelty cases were a minority.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
