As I frequently point out to anyone prepared to listen to me drone on about Genealogy, and those caught unawares with no easy means of escape. Nobody has proof of their ancestry even back to 1837 and regardless of what certificates and parish register copies that have obtained. What they have proof of is what peole have told registrars over the ensuing tje period since no registrar was required to verify in any way the facts presented them. Simply to record what the "Informant" told them and who the "Informant" said they were. On 07/28/2012 02:33 PM, Nivard Ovington wrote: > Hi Jenny > > I have often seen mention of the leaving of clothes or a suitcase for > three weeks in a Parish to qualify for "of this Parish" > > My question would be, how do they know? > > As the Vicar or Registrar was not looking for an excuse *not* to marry a > couple, I would have thought the mere statement that they were of this > Parish would be enough, I do not see either a Vicar or registrar going > around knocking on doors to try and prove the couple were telling the > truth, neither would know everyone on their patch > > In the same way, no proof of age was asked for neither was proof of the > fathers name, occupation or if alive or dead > > As there is no record kept of the seemingly mythical suitcase I am more > inclined to believe they simply made the statement and it was accepted > > Another reason they may have married so far from home, could be that > they could not marry at a home Parish, either because they did not have > both parents blessing or some other reason > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > > On 28/07/2012 18:34, Jenny De Angelis wrote: >> My Grandparents married in Stratford East London, a short walk from where >> the Olympics are being held at the moment, but they both lived in >> Hartlepool County Durham in the North East of England. My grandfather was a >> merchant seaman and must have been in the London Docks and grandma went down >> to marry there. They gave an address in the Stratford area and said they >> were both of that parish but maybe my grandfather had arrived the required 3 >> weeks beforehand and took up lodgings there in order that they could marry >> in the parish. Either that or my grandma moved down to Stratford to lodge >> for that period of time until granddad returned from his voyage and they >> could marry. >> >> I have also been told that all that would be required in order for someone >> to say they were of the parish in which they wanted to marry, was to leave a >> suitcase of clothes in a house in that parish for the required 3 weeks or >> so, they didn't necessarily have to live there. >> >> Regards >> Jenny DeAngelis > ************************************** > Send your List messages using **PLAIN TEXT** and always **TRIM AWAY** superfluous old messages in replies. > > **MEANINGFUL Subject Lines - who, what, where, when, with SURNAMES in CAPITAL letters** > > List Admin can be contacted at: [email protected] > ------------------------------- > 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 > -- */Mick/*

I guess that will make things easier for genealogists in the future. I am a marriage celebrant in Australia (and Yes , people do still get married. just not always before they have their children and certainly not before living together for a while) and we have to verify everything, including seeing a copy of not only the birth certificate but also a photo id to make sure the person in front of us is who they say they are! cheers Sheila As I frequently point out to anyone prepared to listen to me drone on about Genealogy, and those caught unawares with no easy means of escape. Nobody has proof of their ancestry even back to 1837 and regardless of what certificates and parish register copies that have obtained. What they have proof of is what peole have told registrars over the ensuing tje period since no registrar was required to verify in any way the facts presented them. Simply to record what the "Informant" told them and who the "Informant" said they were.