I am hoping some very knowledgeable person will be able to better interpret some information I have discovered in an online newspaper. It reads as follows: "An apology was made for the absence of Mr H ...on account of Mr H having gone on a matrimonial tour, he having himself become united, as well as the towns". (Mr H had been unable to make an annual dinner of an association that employed him which had joined with other similar associations in other towns - becoming "united" so to speak.) I immediately thought that Mr H had got married and gone on a honeymoon, but the problem is that this paragraph was in a newspaper of Nov 1851 and the first instancce that I know of with Mr H marrying is in March of 1852 in Marylebone. When I googled matrimonial tours modern day references seem to relate to organised tours where you travel to find a "mail-order" bride! Googling e-books brings up some references of matrimonial tours, including one where a man took his mother on a matrimonial tour. So I started to think that a matrimonial tour was travelling around to find a wife; however, this does not explain the rest of the sentence in which Mr H had become united. Was it typical that young men become engaged and then embarked on travel before actually marrying - a twist on the the modern day OE (overseas experience)? Some instances of matrimonial tours that I have come across do refer to couples, so I have thoroughly confused myself online ... I have also considered that Mr H was either not telling his employers the truth, or that there was another marriage before the one in March 1852. Mr H was well educated and had good job prospects in England. However, he was unhappily married and deserted his wife in 1857, and left English shores. His first wife eventually found him and divorced him - Mr H having already remarried! Mr H has described himself as a bachelor on all marriage certificates that I have found. Collective wisdom would be much appreciated!!! Beth

Beth wrote <<this paragraph was in a newspaper of Nov 1851 and the first instancce that I know of with Mr H marrying is in March of 1852 in Marylebone>> Those dates could be quite consistent with one-another. It all depends on your source for the March 1852 marriage: was that the GRO indexes? If so, then "March 1852" doesn't mean March 1852: it means the quarter ending with March 1852, that is Jan, Feb or Mar 1852. Also, that doesn't mean that the marriage took place during that quarter, but that it was registered centrally in that quarter. Various administrative delays in passing paperwork on could mean that a marriage (or birth or death) could take place in one quarter but be registered centrally in the next. So it is possible that the marriage took place in mid November but appears in the March quarter. Of course, if your source wasn't the GRO indexes then that isn't the explanation. HTH Roger Lovegrove Please do visit the LOVEGROVE Information Centre on http://www.lovegrove.f9.co.uk/ons/