Author Topic: Convicts to Australia 1835  (Read 2059 times)

Offline Marglos

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 53
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Convicts to Australia 1835
« on: Tuesday 18 May 10 13:58 BST (UK) »
If a man received a life sentence and was deported  as above,
would his wife be free to marry again, after divorce?

Thanks you,
Marglos

Offline Robert Coble

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,446
  • crazy !!!! Crazy !!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Convicts to Australia 1835
« Reply #1 on: Tuesday 18 May 10 14:05 BST (UK) »
divorce
All Census Look Ups Are Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
Coble or Covell, Coule Australia, Canada, USA  @ England.
Barker Australia @ England
Walker Australia, England @ South America.
Bristol Australia @ England.
Nash Australia @ England.

Offline Ruskie

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 26,276
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Convicts to Australia 1835
« Reply #2 on: Tuesday 18 May 10 14:09 BST (UK) »
I don't think they would divorce in those days. But I imagine both would often remarry.  ;)

Offline Marglos

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 53
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Convicts to Australia 1835
« Reply #3 on: Tuesday 18 May 10 14:39 BST (UK) »
Thanks Ruskie,
So their marriage was finished with this sentence and he never came back.
I've got him, John Overall, travelling on The Royal Sovereign on 25th July 1835.
He then  lived in many parts of Australia.
I'm glad to have your help.
Regards,
Marglos

   


Offline yorkshire liz

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Convicts to Australia 1835
« Reply #4 on: Tuesday 18 May 10 16:55 BST (UK) »
Before 1858 an Act of Parliament was required to obtain a divorce, so it was only for the very rich and powerful.  Even after this date only the rich could afford the lawyers necessary, and the grounds for divorce were so heavily weighted in favour of the husband that I doubt very much whether his being transported would count as grounds!  However, if a wife left behind in England had not heard from him for seven years she was legally entitled to assume he was dead and remarry as a widow.

In the Colonies I belive they were much more relaxed about remarriage.  It was in the authorities' interests to have people married and settled down so they tended to turn a blind eye to the spouse on the other side of the world.

Best wishes
Liz