RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: coltman on Saturday 15 January 22 17:12 GMT (UK)
-
Hello,
Big ask this one please. I downloaded a scan of the original Parish Register for the marriage of John Coltman and Elizabeth Abbot 17th Oct 1772. There was a 2nd seperate document available (findmypast) which I've posted below.
I can read a lot of and dont need a transcribe, but am unsure what it means. 1st paragraph appears to be some sort of contract (dowry?) between the groom John Coltman and his future mother-in-law Patience Abbot, dated 1 day before the marriage, (16 Oct 1772). It does say in the 2nd paragraph 'pre contract' and a 2nd date of 25 March 1774. I don't understand what it is with all the archaic legal jargon. Also, nowhere in the document does it quote the marriage date of 17 Oct 1772. Can anyone help with this please? Thanks.
Regards,
Andrew
I now think it is Patient (male)and not Patience.
Patient Abbot & Eliz. Green 2 May 1745
Phillimore's Marriages - Wigston Magna 1567 to 1837
-
That looks like a marriage bond. The marriage was by licence? So John Coltman together with his bondsman, in applying for the licence had to swear to knowing of no impediment to the marriage, on pain of paying a fine of £200.
The bondsman is almost always a man -usually a relative of the bride or groom -but in this case it is a woman, Patience Abbott.*sorry, just noticed your amendment
There is no date set for the marriage to take place when the licence is applied for, as it can be any day within a reasonable time from the licence being issued. I have found that it is usually within a day or two, but it can be later.
-
I'll agree with Galium - date of marriage appears to be 17 October 1772 (by Licence). A marriage by licence is a substitute for a marriage by Banns - for whatever reason the participants did not wish to wait 3 weeks (Banns) before the marriage took place.
-
Thank you very much for the information Galium. Yes it was by licence. That's a lot of money in 1772. I thought it was a transcribe error, Patient for Patience but have found 2 males with the forenames Patient and Patience and have downloaded PR for 'Elizabeth daughter of Patient Abbott bapt 27 May 1751'.
Regards, Andrew
-
Thank you BumbleB.
Regards, Andrew
-
Hi,
Re the marriage bond, not sure if you have seen this but there is a second page of info.
Dated 16th October 1772, giving ages both being 21 and that both have been resident in Great Wigston for 2 years.
Spendlove
-
Hello spendlove. No I wasn't aware there was a 2nd page so thank you for that information. I've been buying them separately from findmypast and it was a single page. I did wonder if there was some sort of header page as the document isn't dated at the top. Regards, Andrew
-
Patient Abbot is definitely a Male in this instance, marries Eliz. Green 2 May 1745. Death in Jan 1780 doesn't state sex and then to confuse further I have a will header dated 1780 for J Abbot Patient of Great Wigston. Hahaha.
-
As father of bride had first name Patient, might the Abbot family have been Non-conformist? That may have been a reason for marrying by licence instead of banns. If they didn't attend the Anglican church they may not have wanted banns, which were usually read out at Sunday services. One of my Catholic lines, yeoman farmers, innkeepers or business owners, generally married by licence around this time as they didn't attend the parish church on Sundays. Some of their Catholic friends & neighbours also married by licence. My Catholic lines in an adjacent parish, ag. labs., married by banns as they wouldn't have had a few shillings spare for a marriage licence.
That's a lot of money in 1772. I thought it was a transcribe error,
The sum of £200 was payable only if it turned out that what they'd sworn to was false. The bondsman was
the guarantor for the £200, like someone who stands bail for an accused person. The £200 may not even have existed. All being well, the only money which the bridegroom had to pay was the cost of the licence, a few shillings.
There are examples of marriage licences online with explanations. They may include typical fees for licences.
-
Another reason for choosing a licence was that it could work out cheaper than banns if groom and bride lived in different parishes. Doesn't apply in this case as John and Elizabeth were in the same parish.
See reply 12 by Jon_ni on this marriage topic:
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=857724.9
The Lost Cousins link in Jon's post shows a scale of charges in 1 parish in 18thC.
From another link I've learned that licences in Ireland in 19thC were much cheaper than in England. Consequence was a greater number of marriages by licence in Ireland proportionately than in England.
-
Hello Maiden Stone,
They were the Anglican registers. I did wonder that myself the name being Quaker-like. She was pregnant. By lic. 17 Oct 1772, John Coltman & Eliz. Abbot. Eliz Coltman baptised 9 April 1773, daughter of John.
The lost cousins lists a marriage bond at £1 9s 6d. I now have the 2nd sheet of the bond. I dont see why such a potentially hefty marriage bond was necessary. Thank you for the information and link.
-
The lost cousins lists a marriage bond at £1 9s 6d. I now have the 2nd sheet of the bond. I dont see why such a potentially hefty marriage bond was necessary. Thank you for the information and link.
I think you may be confusing the cost of obtaining the licence with the penalty.
The £200 penalty referenced in the bond would be payable only if it turned out later that there was a 'lawful impediment' to the marriage (if, for example, one of the spouses was not free to marry). It was essentially a deterrent to making a false declaration, and the payment would not normally be called in.
-
Hello Maiden Stone,
They were the Anglican registers. I did wonder that myself the name being Quaker-like. She was pregnant. By lic. 17 Oct 1772, John Coltman & Eliz. Abbot. Eliz Coltman baptised 9 April 1773, daughter of John.
The lost cousins lists a marriage bond at £1 9s 6d. I now have the 2nd sheet of the bond. I dont see why such a potentially hefty marriage bond was necessary. Thank you for the information and link.
All marriages except those of Quakers and Jews had to be conducted in an Anglican church 1754-1836.
Patient may have belonged to a Non-Conformist chapel. Several babies baptised in 1700s at a church near where I was born were named "Silent".
Pregnancy may have been a reason for hurry.
The clergyman's list of charges on Lost Cousins shows a range of fees. They were over almost a century. I wonder if £1 9s. 6d. was for the equivalent of a special licence. An ordinary licence cost £2-£3 in 19thC. according to another source.
-
Hello Bookbox,
It's the first time I've come across a marriage bond but I understand how it works. The £200 is only payable if the conditions of the bond are broken. Thanks. Andrew.
-
Hello Maiden Stone,
I didn't know that so thank you for the information. I've got the Will of Patient 1780 which mentions daughter Elizabeth wife of John Coltman and granddaughter Elizabeth. She married Thomas Siddans who is an executor and administrator of the will. Thanks. Andrew.