Having looked at the 1871 census, it seems as though Frances Augusta was the niece of Nathan Hubbersty. She was living with the family in Eastwell in 1871. That does mean she was a first cousin of the groom though... John Kirkland Chester, England Joy Hungerford wrote: > With respect, the writer has added a dot to the i in 'relations' and > 'wedding,' but not in the last word. So this is unlikely to be 'niece.' I agree it's unlikely to be 'niece' but not because there's no dot over the 'i' (that would rule out 'mill' as well). The groom's father was a clergyman. He would have known an uncle/niece marriage was one of the forbidden degrees.