Hi All, This is a general question regarding a problem with 2 church marriages that I have not come across before. It's not Glam related but I know someone will be able to come up with an answer. In 1863 I have a marriage of a couple (C of E ) full names..... occupations with fathers names and occupations of same. In 1881 I have the same couple showing in a RC marriage register 18 years later. The witness is exactly the same too....a brother to the groom. The exact same occupations too. The only difference I have seen between the two marriages is that the groom in marriage 1 declares himself as a bachelor....I know he had 3 children before 1863 marriage. Marriage 2 he describes himself as a widower....which I would expect....the bride is recorded as spinster. The bride in marriage 1 would have been far too young to be the mother of his 3 children. Would converting at that time mean anything regarding re/ marriage? I've never heard of that before. Also there is a civil registration of both marriages which confuses me further. I am truly baffled.

If the groom had 3 children before the first marriage you describe, was he already married? If he was then the marriage where he described himself as bachelor would have been bigamous, and therefore invalid. He may have married in the Cof E becaise the catholic priest may have known that he (or his wife) were already married. His first, real, wife may have died about 1881, and he therefore had a valid marriage to the lady he had first married bigamously. Dai On 05/10/2013 18:31, K Mc wrote: > Hi All, > This is a general question regarding a problem with 2 church marriages that I have not come across before. It's not Glam related but I know someone will be able to come up with an answer. > In 1863 I have a marriage of a couple (C of E ) full names..... occupations with fathers names and occupations of same. In 1881 I have the same couple showing in a RC marriage register 18 years later. The witness is exactly the same too....a brother to the groom. The exact same occupations too. > The only difference I have seen between the two marriages is that the groom in marriage 1 declares himself as a bachelor....I know he had 3 children before 1863 marriage. Marriage 2 he describes himself as a widower....which I would expect....the bride is recorded as spinster. > The bride in marriage 1 would have been far too young to be the mother of his 3 children. > Would converting at that time mean anything regarding re/ marriage? I've never heard of that before. Also there is a civil registration of both marriages which confuses me further. > > I am truly baffled. > > > > > > > >

If you have the marriage certificates are the signatures the same. Are you definite that this is the same couple - just thinking that, 18 years on it could be a member of the same family - unfortunately and fortunately alot of the families have the same names and it's carried down the line. Would love to know the outcome of this though. Happy hunting! Jane > Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2013 19:30:50 +0100 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [GLA] Church Marriage > > If the groom had 3 children before the first marriage you describe, was > he already married? If he was then the marriage where he described > himself as bachelor would have been bigamous, and therefore invalid. He > may have married in the Cof E becaise the catholic priest may have known > that he (or his wife) were already married. His first, real, wife may > have died about 1881, and he therefore had a valid marriage to the lady > he had first married bigamously. > > Dai > > On 05/10/2013 18:31, K Mc wrote: > > Hi All, > > This is a general question regarding a problem with 2 church marriages that I have not come across before. It's not Glam related but I know someone will be able to come up with an answer. > > In 1863 I have a marriage of a couple (C of E ) full names..... occupations with fathers names and occupations of same. In 1881 I have the same couple showing in a RC marriage register 18 years later. The witness is exactly the same too....a brother to the groom. The exact same occupations too. > > The only difference I have seen between the two marriages is that the groom in marriage 1 declares himself as a bachelor....I know he had 3 children before 1863 marriage. Marriage 2 he describes himself as a widower....which I would expect....the bride is recorded as spinster. > > The bride in marriage 1 would have been far too young to be the mother of his 3 children. > > Would converting at that time mean anything regarding re/ marriage? I've never heard of that before. Also there is a civil registration of both marriages which confuses me further. > > > > I am truly baffled. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > To send to the list send to [email protected] > GLAMORGAN Family History Mailing List archives etc. are at > http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/intl/WLS/GLAMORGAN.html > - > This site has been prepared to help you use the Glamorgan List > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~glamorgan/ > - > A large amount of information, and a wide variety of useful links, may be found at http://www.genuki.org.uk/big/wal/GLA/ > > - > The South/West Wales Lookup Exchange and Gareth's Help Pages > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~walesle/wal/AW.html and > http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~ukwales2/hicks.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi, It always amazes me at the odd ball findings in our research. Some years back I was baffled because things didn't look right in a marriage. In 1868 John WILSON married Susan WARD. But in the 1881 census she was suddenly the wrong age and there was what appeared to be an illegitimate WARD son that was younger than the marriage. I took me some time to discover that Susan WARD had died after a couple of years and John had remarried to another Susan WARD. In another case a Gt Grand Aunt married her mothers, first husbands, eldest brothers, youngest son. She lived in London, he lived in Brighton and they married in Bolton. These things are sent to try us and I think sometimes you have to think outside the box. Michael On 05-Oct-13 6:31 PM, K Mc wrote: > Hi All, > This is a general question regarding a problem with 2 church marriages that I have not come across before. It's not Glam related but I know someone will be able to come up with an answer. > In 1863 I have a marriage of a couple (C of E ) full names..... occupations with fathers names and occupations of same. In 1881 I have the same couple showing in a RC marriage register 18 years later. The witness is exactly the same too....a brother to the groom. The exact same occupations too. > The only difference I have seen between the two marriages is that the groom in marriage 1 declares himself as a bachelor....I know he had 3 children before 1863 marriage. Marriage 2 he describes himself as a widower....which I would expect....the bride is recorded as spinster. > The bride in marriage 1 would have been far too young to be the mother of his 3 children. > Would converting at that time mean anything regarding re/ marriage? I've never heard of that before. Also there is a civil registration of both marriages which confuses me further. > > I am truly baffled. > > > > > > > > >