Hi Folks can anyone tell me if there is a similiar site to this for people born in Dumfries? I have a 3x grt grandmother and her marriage is there but I can't find her birth. Fran

"Maggie Richie" <[email protected]> wrote: >I was not aware that it was a criminal offence to lie about your age >on a certificate, or anything else for that matter. Currently the penalty for lying to a Registrar is up to 2 years imprisonment or a fine. Before 1948 it was up to 7 years. Brian -- Brian Pears (Joint List Admin - NORTHUMBRIA Mailing List)

"Maggie Richie" <[email protected]> wrote: >I too thought this strange but asked many years ago on this forum >about the age of consent - I too do not understand why they stated >Full Age on the first certificate but the marriage was by Licence. I >have always followed your advice to be certain of anything to have a >minimum of three pieces of evidence, so I am absolutely certain both >certificates are correct (her father on both is GEORGE TINDLE >Labourer) and ELEANOR ROBSON nee TINDLE who then marries JOSEPH >PEARSON in 1873 is one and the same person. Maggie As you say, your evidence still doesn't explain why she would claim to be "of full age" when she had nothing to gain. Nor does it explain why, if your scenario is correct, she would claim to be single in 1871 thus labelling herself as an unmarried mother. So she has committed two criminal offences - providing incorect information to a Registrar and to a Census Enumerator - and labelled herself as a fallen woman, without gaining any sort of advantage. Although your evidence sounds convincing, there's something very strange here. Brian -- Brian Pears (Joint List Admin - NORTHUMBRIA Mailing List)

Dear Brian I have definitely the right person as I have her birth certificate, her two marriage certificates and the entries on the 1871/1881/ and 1891 Census returns. The lady in question is ELEANOR TINDLE born South Shields 1853 who married THOMAS ROBSON in 1867 in Newcastle. While the 1871 census says she is unmarried she is listed in her married name aged 17 with her son GEORGE WILKINSON ROBSON aged 3 living with her brother WILLIAM TINDLE (who is my great grandfather) Doing simple arithmetic on the other census they both give the same details taking her son's age away from hers = 14 years difference. The son was also named after her first husband's father. I too thought this strange but asked many years ago on this forum about the age of consent - I too do not understand why they stated Full Age on the first certificate but the marriage was by Licence. I have always followed your advice to be certain of anything to have a minimum of three pieces of evidence, so I am absolutely certain both certificates are correct (her father on both is GEORGE TINDLE Labourer) and ELEANOR ROBSON nee TINDLE who then marries JOSEPH PEARSON in 1873 is one and the same person. I have her son's birth certificate stating father Thomas ROBSON and mother ELEANOR TINDLE born 1867 and the census returns until he gets married. Marion -----Original Message----- What I do challenge is the specific claim in Maggie's post. It simply does not stand up to scrutiny. Let's look at it closely. Maggie wrote "I have one in my family where it says 'full age' when the bride was 14years old and her father and brother were the witnesses!" If the father was a witness, he obviously consented to the marriage, so the girl would have had no need to lie about being 14 if that was in fact the case. Why would she have risked the serious charge of perjury when she gained nothing. If this was in fact a 14 year-old marrying with her father present, then the marriage would have been quite legal without any need to lie. The conclusion - this girl is not the person Maggie thinks she is. Brian -- Brian Pears (Joint List Admin - NORTHUMBRIA Mailing List) .. Please remember to snip most of the earlier message before you post any reply...... Thank you! The NORTHUMBRIA FAQ page is located at <http://www.bpears.org.uk/NorthumbriaFAQ/> http://www.bpears.org.uk/NorthumbriaFAQ/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Dear Geoff The certificates are not from the RC church. Both certificates are GRO copies and the churches in question were St John's in Newcastle and the parish Church in Wallsend. I was not aware that it was a criminal offence to lie about your age on a certificate, or anything else for that matter. Most interesting to learn this how would they be found out especially when family members were witnesses? Marion

Dear Brian I have definitely the right person as I have her birth certificate, her two marriage certificates and the entries on the 1871/1881/ and 1891 Census returns. The lady in question is ELEANOR TINDLE born South Shields 1853 who married THOMAS ROBSON in 1867 in Newcastle. While the 1871 census says she is unmarried she is listed in her married name aged 17 with her son GEORGE WILKINSON ROBSON aged 3 living with her brother WILLIAM TINDLE (who is my great grandfather) Doing simple arithmetic on the other census they both give the same details taking her son's age away from hers = 14 years difference. The son was also named after her first husband's father. I too thought this strange but asked many years ago on this forum about the age of consent - I too do not understand why they stated Full Age on the first certificate but the marriage was by Licence. I have always followed your advice to be certain of anything to have a minimum of three pieces of evidence, so I am absolutely certain both certificates are correct (her father on both is GEORGE TINDLE Labourer) and ELEANOR ROBSON nee TINDLE who then marries JOSEPH PEARSON in 1873 is one and the same person. I have her son's birth certificate stating father Thomas ROBSON and mother ELEANOR TINDLE born 1867 and the census returns until he gets married. Marion -----Original Message----- What I do challenge is the specific claim in Maggie's post. It simply does not stand up to scrutiny. Let's look at it closely. Maggie wrote "I have one in my family where it says 'full age' when the bride was 14years old and her father and brother were the witnesses!" If the father was a witness, he obviously consented to the marriage, so the girl would have had no need to lie about being 14 if that was in fact the case. Why would she have risked the serious charge of perjury when she gained nothing. If this was in fact a 14 year-old marrying with her father present, then the marriage would have been quite legal without any need to lie. The conclusion - this girl is not the person Maggie thinks she is. Brian -- Brian Pears (Joint List Admin - NORTHUMBRIA Mailing List) .. Please remember to snip most of the earlier message before you post any reply...... Thank you! The NORTHUMBRIA FAQ page is located at <http://www.bpears.org.uk/NorthumbriaFAQ/> http://www.bpears.org.uk/NorthumbriaFAQ/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Acorn Cottage <[email protected]> wrote: >Surely the legality of an "under-age" marriage does not depend on >parental consent but on the minimum legal age to marry. That will >depend on the date that the marriage took place. > >I am aware of a marriage in the 1930s where the bride was only 15 but >her father was a witness. This is still an unlawful marriage. Ruth Indeed, but we are dealing with the term "Of full age" which was rare after the 1870s, let alone the 1930s. The statements I'm challenging relate to the use of that term, so they certainly relate to the pre-1929 period when marriage was legal for under 16s. Brian -- Brian Pears (Joint List Admin - NORTHUMBRIA Mailing List)

"Margaret Garthwaite" <[email protected]> wrote: >Sorry > >Just intended as a comment on the dangers of relying unquestioningly >on the information even in official documents Well that is warning worth listening to. Brian -- Brian Pears (Joint List Admin - NORTHUMBRIA Mailing List)

Brian Surely the legality of an "under-age" marriage does not depend on parental consent but on the minimum legal age to marry. That will depend on the date that the marriage took place. I am aware of a marriage in the 1930s where the bride was only 15 but her father was a witness. This is still an unlawful marriage. Ruth > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brian Pears > Sent: 18 April 2013 11:31 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [NMB] 1859 marriaged cert - What is full age? > Also inquestaccess query Maggie wrote > > "I have one in my family where it says 'full age' when the > bride was 14years old and her father and brother were the > witnesses!" > > If the father was a witness, he obviously consented to the > marriage, so the girl would have had no need to lie about > being 14 if that was in fact the case. Why would she have > risked the serious charge of perjury when she gained nothing. > If this was in fact a 14 year-old marrying with her father > present, then the marriage would have been quite legal > without any need to lie.

Sorry Just intended as a comment on the dangers of relying unquestioningly on the information even in official documents -----Original Message----- From: Brian Pears Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 11:30 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [NMB] 1859 marriaged cert - What is full age? Also inquestaccess query > >I have a marriage certificate where the bride's information has been >copied from her baptismal certificate - it's RC - and the only correct >information on it is her name and age > >The rest is what her mother told the priest who baptised her and not a >word of it is true But what on earth has this to do with the post you are agreeing with?

"Margaret Garthwaite" <[email protected]> wrote: >Absolutely true > >I have a marriage certificate where the bride's information has been >copied from her baptismal certificate - it's RC - and the only correct >information on it is her name and age > >The rest is what her mother told the priest who baptised her and not a >word of it is true But what on earth has this to do with the post you are agreeing with? Yes, we know that people lied when giving information to Registrars or clergymen, and these lies can and do appear on certificates. This is not in doubt. What I do challenge is the specific claim in Maggie's post. It simply does not stand up to scrutiny. Let's look at it closely. Maggie wrote "I have one in my family where it says 'full age' when the bride was 14years old and her father and brother were the witnesses!" If the father was a witness, he obviously consented to the marriage, so the girl would have had no need to lie about being 14 if that was in fact the case. Why would she have risked the serious charge of perjury when she gained nothing. If this was in fact a 14 year-old marrying with her father present, then the marriage would have been quite legal without any need to lie. The conclusion - this girl is not the person Maggie thinks she is. Brian -- Brian Pears (Joint List Admin - NORTHUMBRIA Mailing List)

Absolutely true I have a marriage certificate where the bride's information has been copied from her baptismal certificate - it's RC - and the only correct information on it is her name and age The rest is what her mother told the priest who baptised her and not a word of it is true -----Original Message----- From: Maggie Richie Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 4:58 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [NMB] 1859 marriaged cert - What is full age? Also inquestaccess query Don't believe everything on the marriage with regard to 'full age'. I have one in my family where it says 'full age' when the bride was 14years old and her father and brother were the witnesses!

Maggie and Brian: While not wanting to further fudge the issue, I think I should address two points which have not really been mentioned so far. First, the "RC marriage certificate". Are you sure, Maggie, that this really is a GRO-type marriage certificate or is it just a copy of what was entered into the register of a RC church? RC marriage registers usually include only basic details of the parties, much as C of E ones did before 1837 but with the possibility of the Priest having entered his own comments on the parties, the whole thing being usually in Latin. They must have kept (and perhaps still do) two sets of books, one of their own for "church records" and two of the standard type, for (a) the couple concerned and (b) the registrar. My other comment is the more fundamental one, as far as the initial query is concerned. The question was about "full age" but the discussion has mainly been about "legal age". The two are different things. "Full age" means that the person is in law an adult. For the period we are considering that was 21 years. Anyone aged less than 21 would be a "minor", and as such would need permission from their parent (father) or guardian, even if it was legal for them to marry. I agree with Brian, however, that teenagers rarely married. Even the word "minor" tends to mean "aged 20" in almost every case. Geoff Nicholson -----Original Message----- From: Brian Pears <[email protected]> To: northumbria <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 12:02 Subject: Re: [NMB] 1859 marriaged cert - What is full age? Also inquestaccess query "Margaret Garthwaite" <[email protected]> wrote: >Sorry > >Just intended as a comment on the dangers of relying unquestioningly >on the information even in official documents Well that is warning worth listening to. Brian -- Brian Pears (Joint List Admin - NORTHUMBRIA Mailing List) .. Please remember to snip most of the earlier message before you post any reply...... Thank you! The NORTHUMBRIA FAQ page is located at http://www.bpears.org.uk/NorthumbriaFAQ/ ------------------------------- 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

"Maggie Richie" <[email protected]> wrote: >Don't believe everything on the marriage with regard to 'full age'. I >have one in my family where it says 'full age' when the bride was >14years old and her father and brother were the witnesses! > >When she remarries she states the correct age but she is a spinster >when in fact she is a widow with a young son! Maggie The marriage of a 14 year-old would be an extremely rare event - and I find it almost impossible to believe that a 19th century (I'm assuming from the terminology that we are talking about the 19th century) 14 year-old could have passed herself off as 21+. Some modern 14 year-olds could possibly get away with such a deception, but I've never seen a picture of a pre-WW1 14 year old looking like anything other than a child. I would suggest that the earlier marriage was of a different, older female of the same name, and the supposed second marriage was in fact the lady in question's first - as she claimed. Brian -- Brian Pears (Joint List Admin - NORTHUMBRIA Mailing List)

Susan C <[email protected]> wrote: >In Northumbria and elsewhere I have seen marriage records recording >the younger age as "full age" when they were in fact 13, 14 or 15 yrs. >old.  Perhaps in the 16th and 17th century parents made arrangements >for their children to marry at that age because of war, disease, to >keep the family name or it was because there was no one else to leave >(in a will) an estate to keep in the family.  In some cases the groom >or bride died very young, before they had the chance to have >children.  Susan This is simply not true. Yes, there were the occasional 20, 19 or 18 year-olds passing themselves off as 21+ by declaring themselves "of full age", but definitely not kids of 15 or under.If you think you have an example of a 13 year old claiming to be "of full age", it is certain to be a misidentification. Indeed if you think you have any example outside the aristocracy of a 13 year-old marrying in this country, it will almost certainly be a misidentification. There are very few, comfirmed examples of such marriages. In fact marriages of under 16s, though legal until 1929 in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, have always been very rare. If anyone thinks they have one in their tree, I would advise them to be very cautious over the identification of that child. Chances are it will be an older person of the same name who married. You are also confusing the issue by talking about the 16th and 17th centuries in relation to the phrase "Of full age". I don't think this phrase was used prior to 1837 because ages were not recorded in marriage registers until then so there would be no point. Yes, some people were said to be "minors" on pre-1837 marriage records, or the phrase "with the consent of parents" would be there - and the absence of these would imply that the parties were 21 or over, but, as far as I'm aware, this wasn't implicitly stated. Brian -- Brian Pears (Joint List Admin - NORTHUMBRIA Mailing List)

Hi Yvonne Don't believe everything on the marriage with regard to 'full age'. I have one in my family where it says 'full age' when the bride was 14years old and her father and brother were the witnesses! When she remarries she states the correct age but she is a spinster when in fact she is a widow with a young son! Marion -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Yvonne Sent: 17 April 2013 13:37 To: [email protected] Subject: [NMB] 1859 marriaged cert - What is full age? Also inquest access query Hello I hope someone can shed a bit of light on my queries. I have just received a copy of a marriage certificate of my gggrandparents. I was hoping it would have given their ages but it only states that they were "of full age". What age did they have to be for a marriage to take place in 1859 Newcastle? Also, on another certificate it states that an inquest had been held on 20th August 1880 in Newcastle after the person drowned in the Tyne. Is there anyway to gain access to Coroner's reports from that time? Any information would be gratefully received. Thank you in advance. Yvonne .. Please remember to snip most of the earlier message before you post any reply...... Thank you! The NORTHUMBRIA FAQ page is located at <http://www.bpears.org.uk/NorthumbriaFAQ/> http://www.bpears.org.uk/NorthumbriaFAQ/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Nothing found in the British Newspapers online But the OCR is appalling so its worth checking further perhaps as it may be garbled Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 17/04/2013 14:06, Yvonne wrote: > Hello Ruth, > > His name was John Gardiner a fisherman aged 22 died 17th August 1880 and the inquest was held on 20th August 1880 in Newcastle. It states that he drowned in the Tyne. > > Any help would be fantastic. > > Thank you > Yvonne

I checked in the newspapers on Find My Past but unfortunately there is no reference to the inquest. Could be that it just wasn't in one of the papers on FMP - Newcastle Central Library might be able to help. Sorry Ruth > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Yvonne > Sent: 17 April 2013 14:07 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [NMB] 1859 marriaged cert - What is full age? > Also inquestaccessquery > > Hello Ruth, >   > His name was John Gardiner a fisherman aged 22 died 17th > August 1880 and the inquest was held on 20th August 1880 in > Newcastle.  It states that he drowned in the Tyne. >   > Any help would be fantastic. >   > Thank you > Yvonne > > > ________________________________ > From: Acorn Cottage <[email protected]> > To: 'Yvonne' <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, 17 April 2013, 13:49 > Subject: RE: [NMB] 1859 marriaged cert - What is full age? > Also inquest accessquery > > > Hi Yvonne > > "Of full age" means that they were 21 years of age or older.  > That was the > age at which an individual could marry without parental consent. > > You are unlikely to find a copy of the Coroner's report; if > it still exists > would probably be in the Newcastle or Northumberland > Archives.  However, > there is likely to be a newspaper report, so a search in the > newspapers for > Newcastle on or around 20th August 1880 should help.  Can you > provide the > name of the person who died? > > Ruth > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Yvonne > > Sent: 17 April 2013 13:37 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [NMB] 1859 marriaged cert - What is full age? Also > > inquest accessquery > > > > Hello > >   > > I hope someone can shed a bit of light on my queries. > >   > > I have just received a copy of a marriage certificate of my > > gggrandparents.  I was hoping it would have given their ages > > but it only states that they were "of full age".  What age > > did they have to be for a marriage to take place in 1859 Newcastle? > >   > > Also, on another certificate it states that an inquest had > > been held on 20th August 1880 in Newcastle after the person > > drowned in the Tyne.  Is there anyway to gain access to > > Coroner's reports from that time? > >   > > Any information would be gratefully received. > >   > > Thank you in advance. > > Yvonne > > .. > > Please remember to snip most of the earlier message before > > you post any reply...... Thank you! > > > > The NORTHUMBRIA FAQ page is located at > > http://www.bpears.org.uk/NorthumbriaFAQ/ > > ------------------------------- > > 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 > > > .. > Please remember to snip most of the earlier message before > you post any reply...... Thank you! > > The NORTHUMBRIA FAQ page is located at > http://www.bpears.org.uk/NorthumbriaFAQ/ > ------------------------------- > 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 >

Hello Ruth,   His name was John Gardiner a fisherman aged 22 died 17th August 1880 and the inquest was held on 20th August 1880 in Newcastle.  It states that he drowned in the Tyne.   Any help would be fantastic.   Thank you Yvonne ________________________________ From: Acorn Cottage <[email protected]> To: 'Yvonne' <[email protected]>; [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, 17 April 2013, 13:49 Subject: RE: [NMB] 1859 marriaged cert - What is full age? Also inquest accessquery Hi Yvonne "Of full age" means that they were 21 years of age or older.  That was the age at which an individual could marry without parental consent. You are unlikely to find a copy of the Coroner's report; if it still exists would probably be in the Newcastle or Northumberland Archives.  However, there is likely to be a newspaper report, so a search in the newspapers for Newcastle on or around 20th August 1880 should help.  Can you provide the name of the person who died? Ruth > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Yvonne > Sent: 17 April 2013 13:37 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [NMB] 1859 marriaged cert - What is full age? Also > inquest accessquery > > Hello >   > I hope someone can shed a bit of light on my queries. >   > I have just received a copy of a marriage certificate of my > gggrandparents.  I was hoping it would have given their ages > but it only states that they were "of full age".  What age > did they have to be for a marriage to take place in 1859 Newcastle? >   > Also, on another certificate it states that an inquest had > been held on 20th August 1880 in Newcastle after the person > drowned in the Tyne.  Is there anyway to gain access to > Coroner's reports from that time? >   > Any information would be gratefully received. >   > Thank you in advance. > Yvonne > .. > Please remember to snip most of the earlier message before > you post any reply...... Thank you! > > The NORTHUMBRIA FAQ page is located at > http://www.bpears.org.uk/NorthumbriaFAQ/ > ------------------------------- > 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 Yvonne "Of full age" means that they were 21 years of age or older. That was the age at which an individual could marry without parental consent. You are unlikely to find a copy of the Coroner's report; if it still exists would probably be in the Newcastle or Northumberland Archives. However, there is likely to be a newspaper report, so a search in the newspapers for Newcastle on or around 20th August 1880 should help. Can you provide the name of the person who died? Ruth > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Yvonne > Sent: 17 April 2013 13:37 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [NMB] 1859 marriaged cert - What is full age? Also > inquest accessquery > > Hello >   > I hope someone can shed a bit of light on my queries. >   > I have just received a copy of a marriage certificate of my > gggrandparents.  I was hoping it would have given their ages > but it only states that they were "of full age".  What age > did they have to be for a marriage to take place in 1859 Newcastle? >   > Also, on another certificate it states that an inquest had > been held on 20th August 1880 in Newcastle after the person > drowned in the Tyne.  Is there anyway to gain access to > Coroner's reports from that time? >   > Any information would be gratefully received. >   > Thank you in advance. > Yvonne > .. > Please remember to snip most of the earlier message before > you post any reply...... Thank you! > > The NORTHUMBRIA FAQ page is located at > http://www.bpears.org.uk/NorthumbriaFAQ/ > ------------------------------- > 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 >