|
#1
07-01-16, 11:50
|
|||
|
|||
Two weddings
Does anyone know why a mixed religion couple would have married in 1876, in a Catholic Church, but with a registrar present as well, but then also get married 2 weeks later by certificate in a registry office in a different area where the soldier husband was living in barracks. Had the catholic marriage not been registered I could have understood it, but I'm baffled.
|
|
#2
07-01-16, 11:54
|
||||
|
||||
The Catholic marriage would have need a register present to make it legal. Maybe the soldier hadn't got permission to marry from his commanding officer when the Catholic marriage took place, so the second ceremony was to keep the army happy?!
__________________
"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
|
|
#3
07-01-16, 12:22
|
|||
|
|||
|
I wondered that, because there was certainly a registrar at the first ceremony. Had ithe second wedding been in an Anglican Church I would have said it was for the non Catholic. Probably one of those queries that I'll never have a definitive answer to. Thanks
|
|
#4
07-01-16, 17:18
|
|||
|
|||
|
Agree with Merry, the second "marriage" was to satisfy the army because permission hadn't been granted for the original marriage.
OC
|
|
#5
07-01-16, 18:04
|
||||
|
||||
|
Where did they marry, Jill?
I have a number of mixed marriages in the family tree (actually, come to think of it, so it my marriage!) as well as military marriages. A Catholic was permitted to marry a non-Catholic at the time, but would likely to have received dispensation from the bishop. Also, the Catholic in the marriage would have to agree to raise any children as Catholics. With regard to military marriages, married men were paid more, so the soldier would have to get written permission from his commanding officer. The CO would also have to be satisfied of the women's good character. If the soldier was below the rank of sgt, he would have to have completed seven years service, have a certain amount of savings and been awarded good conduct badges. I think there were other hurdles to jump if the couple intended to live in barracks in married quarters. Only a certain proportion of men were allowed to have their wives and families in barracks, so permission would not have been granted unless there was a 'vacancy', ie, available accommodation. His marriage should be recorded in his military records. One of my OH's great-grandfathers who was in the army at about the same time, married without permission (back in Ireland; he was stationed in England) and this is in his records. It states he 'married without leave' in Feb 1873. He then 'marries' again in August of the same year. He was then re-engaged as a married man.
|
|
#6
07-01-16, 19:10
|
|||
|
|||
|
The first marriage was at St Austins RC church in Stafford, the second was at Medway Registry Office, when he is shown as living in barracks and she is at an address nearby. i've only just found the second marriage because the grooms surname shows as double barrelled, when in fact the first part was a third Christian name ( although originally a family surname). Again whether that was intentional, or an error by the registrar ???
|
|
#7
07-01-16, 19:23
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#9
07-01-16, 21:59
|
||||
|
||||
|
If it has been copied out with a hyphen then it should mean that it was originally written that way by the groom (assuming it doesn't have an X and say "the mark of"). But of course mistakes can be made when certificates are copied out.
Some people did make their middle name and surname into a double-barrelled surname, maybe to make their names more distinctive? I certainly have some in my tree who did that.
|
|
#10
07-01-16, 22:41
|
|||
|
|||
|
There is also the unpleasant possibility that he wished to conceal the fact that his wife was Catholic from the army authorities......
OC
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
