Hi John, I would put the date they first posted the banns, in your case 13 May 1791. One thing to think about is: Why would anyone want one of these intentions dates in addition to the marriage date? The only reason I can think of is in the case of a second marriage: Then you would know that the first spouse was dead before that first intention. I can think of no reason for wanting the certificate date. One thing seems strange to me. It seems in your example, that the two people were living in two different towns. So, they posted banns in each. So far, so good. But then I'd expect a certificate from the town where they did not marry, to the town where they did marry. Instead the certificate is issued by the town where they later married. Wonder if they had a change of plan. Regards, Howard [email protected] ----- Original Message ----- From: "MAVitalRecords Project Slaughter" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 12:49 PM Subject: Re: [Barnstable Co MA] What is the official date of marriageintention? > Hi, Bobbie. :-) > Yes, it is a problem. We're not going to transcribe the entire record > verbatim. The page images will be online and linked from each of the > transcribed lines. > In the case of this one >>>May 13 1791 then Recd the Names of Lemuel Patts junr of Townsend and >>>Milly Woods of Pepperel With their Intentions of Marriage - >>>Certificate given June 6 1791 > > It would be something like: > Patts, Lemuel and Milly Woods, of Pepperell, int. June 6, 1791. > Woods, Milly, of Pepperell, and Lemuel Patts, int. June 6, 1791. > > This gets them indexed under both names and carries the pertinent > information. Then, there'd be the link to the page at the end of the line. > But, should we put May 13 rather than June 6? > > BTW, this was required by law. Later in the intentions we have some entered > like this: > June 10th 1776 Abner Brooks and Ana Hobart both of Townshend Stand Published > as the Law Directs in order for Mariage. > > Take a look at Weston and Concord in Middlesex county to see how those are > done. Go to http://www.rootsweb.com/~maessex/VitalRecords > > John & Jodi

Good afternoon, Howard. :-) The filing of intentions was required by law. Here is that law (sent to me by Bobbie Hall): Massachusetts Province Laws, Chapter 2:"An act to prevent incestuous marriages." This 1695 law specifies degrees of kin forbidden marriage. Any incestuous marriage is null and void and the children lose their inheritance. Violators receive 40 stripes and must wear a capital I on their clothes. If the I is not worn, then another 15 stripes. "And for the better preventing of clandestine marriages, the couple must bring a "certificate produced under the hand of the several towns where the parties respectively dwell, that the names and intention of the said parties have been entered with him fifteen days beforehand." Further, "all marriages shall be registered by the town clerk of the same town where they are consummated." Okay, now we have that established. I know that there were a lot of first cousin marriages back then. I sure have some in my own lines. I was thinking the other day that it would be interesting to check how soon the first child arrived after the marriage of cousins. Might be interesting. I think that we will be using the first date posted as far as the transcriptions go. After all, the researcher should always copy the images from the book for documentation and to get the full text of the entry. The couple in the example were from Townsend and Pepperell. I have not seen one instance where the town clerk recorded a certificate from a different town. He was probably only concerned with his town, Townsend in this case. John >From: "Howard Swain" <[email protected]> >To: <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: [Barnstable Co MA] What is the official date >ofmarriageintention? >Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:08:24 -0700 > >Hi John, > >I would put the date they first posted the banns, in your case 13 May 1791. >One thing to think about is: Why would anyone want one of these >intentions dates in addition to the marriage date? >The only reason I can think of is in the case of a second marriage: >Then you would know that the first spouse was dead before that >first intention. I can think of no reason for wanting the certificate >date. > >One thing seems strange to me. >It seems in your example, that the two people were living in two >different towns. So, they posted banns in each. So far, so good. >But then I'd expect a certificate from the town where they did not marry, >to the town where they did marry. >Instead the certificate is issued by the town where they later married. >Wonder if they had a change of plan. _________________________________________________________________ Rates near 39yr lows! $430K Loan for $1,399/mo - Paying Too Much? Calculate new payment http://www.lowermybills.com/lre/index.jsp?sourceid=lmb-9632-18226&moid=7581