Genealogy Chat

Just received a marriage cert. I sent for which confirms that in 1919 an uncle married his neice. Is this legal? Also on the cert. one of the witnesses I believe to be the grooms sister is Mrs Ann................... the Mrs has a line through it and the number 5 has been written, on the side of the cert. the Deputy Registrar has written five and initialled it to confirm the alteration any ideas on that please?

Thanks Heather for your reply but the witness was married and the alteration has been initalled by the original deputy registrar. Also where does five come into the marital status?

Dont know about the legality - there were some threads on marrying relatives here - so someone will come up Im sure. Re the alteration, sounds like the Mrs was incorrect and crossed through. The cert we see isnt the original its a copy sent to the GRO so the clerks can make mistakes when they copy details.

These marriage are Illegal by law... Men cannot marry... Mother Daughter Father's mother Mother's mother Son's daughter Daughters daughter Sister Father's sister Mother's sister Brother's daughter Sister's daughter Women cannot marry... Father Son Father's father Mother's father Son's son Daughter's son Brother Father's brother Mother's brother Brothers son Sister's son Georgina.

Hi Georgina, Thanks for your reply, it seems this marriage was illegal then so any ideas how they managed to get round that, surely they had to produce certain proofs of who they were, not sure if bans were read as they married at a register office. Lin

My G/Parents on my Mothers side were first cousins and it would appear this was legal strange to say. Lyn

Would it be illegal if she was his first wife's niece. How do you know she was his niece? Susan xx

It may have been illegal, but plenty did it! You didnt have to produce proof of anything to the Registrar. OC

Sue, He was a batchelor when he got married hence no previous wife to consider. Father's names on marriage cert. plus witnesses are from the family!!!

I believe the illegality thing was based on the blood line. Your wife's brother's daughter is not blood related (and does not appear in the list of who you an not marry).Back in the 1870s we have two examples of this sort of thing inour tree. Clive

Also, the Church rules about who you could and could not marry, differed from the rules for a Civil marriage - maybe why they opted for a Registry Office wedding? Roughly speaking, you cannot marry anyone with whom you share more than a quarter of your blood, either in church or a registry office. But the church added a few more relationships, ones which would have been damaging to the family unit, but not necessarily to the bloodline! Can you tell us which relatives they share - make up some names to illustrate the relationship. OC

I just wondered if the new bride shared the same name as his niece. In one of my families we had four Ann Clarks. It caused a little confusion until I knew who was who. The first Ann had a daughter Ann and two grand-daughters called Ann - all Clarks!! Susan

Could the Mrs have been crossed out not because she wasn't married but because normally signatures don't include Mr/Mrs/Miss but just first names or initials and surname so by putting Mrs she was making it look like Mrs was her first name? I have a case in my family where an uncle married his wife's niece, the girl was also the daughter of one of his cousins but it wasn't one of the prohibited relationships, though it probably caused family disapproval - especially as he was 36 years older than his niece!

The number 5 just relates to the 5th error which had been made that quarter - no clue there Im afraid.

Niece - was this a child of one of the groom's siblings?a niece by marriage i.e of a previous wife?step-child of a sibling? Jay

Sorry folks, had to close down for a while. Here is the actual thing - names changed to protect the innocent. Ben married his sister Amelia's daughter also named Amelia. 10 years difference in age, he was a batchelor, she a spinster. Definately, the neice, all dates correspond, names of fathers etc. They went on to have two children a son and a daughter themselves. The 5 is definately not an S as it's written in full as FIVE on the side of the cert. and initialled by deputy registrar as acceptance of an error.

It is a 5, that is the mistake is the fifth in that Register. The witness would have signed the Register without the Mrs but when the Registrar came to issue the certifcate and wrote the witnesses name they made a mistake and put Mrs first. They are called numbered errors.

Lin It would seem then, on the face of it, to be technically an illegal union, but as I said before, they certainly weren't the only ones! OC

Thanks Nottingham Lass - I'm really pleased to clear that one up. OC thanks for your words of reassurance but it doesn't make the pill any easier to swallow, just pleased it's in the past.