NSW Address but no name

[sparrett]

JM,
I never looked at the date
Of course you are right-4 years later.  I had been thinking the reason for HARRILL not marrying HARRIS was that it would have been bigamous.  However, perhaps you are correct and there was a divorce.

How interesting.

Sue

[majm]

Married 25 Sept 1894 by licence, at Fitzroy by Nathaniel KINSMAN, a Minister of Religion, by the rites of the Victorian Free Church

William James HARRILL gave his details as
Bachelor, Southampton, England
Steward, 28 Present and Usual residence Brunswick
(parents) Thomas HARRILL and Clara HARRILL (nee) WEBB.   Thomas, as an agent


Katerine SIMPSON gave her details as
Spinster, Hull, England
Assistant, 22, Present and Usual residence Beechworth,
(parents) Walter SIMPSON and Sarah SIMPSON (nee) unknown.  Walter as a carpenter.

Witnesses Lydia KINSMAN and F ROTHWELL.   
(likely witnesses were known to the Rev'd N Kinsman)   

Cheers,  JM

[judb]

Marriage Transcription:

 25 September 1894 at Moor St, Fitzroy
William James HARRILL, 28, bachelor, steward, birthplace Southampton, England;
present address Brunswick; usual address Brunswick;
parents Thomas HARRILL, agent, Clara HARRILL (WEBB)

Katerine SIMPSON, 22, spinster, assistant,
present address Beechworth; usual address Beechworth
birthplace Hull, England;
parents: Walter SIMPSON, carpenter, Sarah SIMPSON (maiden name 'unknown')

I, Nathaniel KINSMAN, a minister of religion, have this day at Moor St Fitzroy, duly celebrated  a marriage between William James HARRILL, steward. of Brunswick and Katerine SIMPSON of Beechworth, assistant;

The marriage by licence between us was solemnized according to the rites of the Victorian Free Church.
Signed:
William James HARRILL
Katerine SIMPSON
Witnesses: Lydia KINSMAN, F ROTHWELL

It should be noted that the certificate posted is a copy, issued 25 October, 1898, so the signatures are not the actual signatures on the original certificate.  Vectis, is this a certificate that you already had, or is it one recently purchased?  I don't think it will make any difference in this case but sometimes a comparison of handwriting is useful.  Interesting to know if someone had requested that copy back in 1898

Judith

Just an aside - as this certificate was issued in 1898 is it still in Copyright??

[judb]

Sorry - repeat info - my machine is soooooooooooooooooo slow today - and i didn't get the red message in time - you're quicker than I am this morning JM 

[majm]

    My laptop got given the full treatment by my OH yesterday, just in case it was my fault that I could not get Ancestry.....         I did TELL him that it was "DDOS" .   At least 'everything' is again backed up "properly"

It is my understanding that the document dated 1898 has no residual copyright issues hanging over it, at least from the various Australian copyright regulations.   I am happy to be corrected.   

http://www.copyright.org.au/find-an-answer/

ADD,  The document seems to have been a pre-printed form, and the details added to that form on 25th October 1898.   So under some of the copyright regulations, it could be argued there was no copyright issue involved even in 1898, as it was an official transcription from the original record.   

Cheers,  JM

[Vectis2]

Right the certificate was found in an old deed box of my mums. I too had missed that the issue date was a later date, I don't know why, but I have a theory Grandad may have wanted to start a divorce action, but because Katerine had disappeared was unable to serve papers, I don't know what back then was the period of desertion require to make serving those papers not necessary and as divorce was a highly scandalous and not common action at that time, he probably just walked away from it. I am sure if he could he would have married Hetty as they were apparently devoted to each other and share the same grave plot under the name of Harrill

[judb]

I agree with JM regarding the copyright of that particular certificate.

I doubt that buying the actual image from the original certificate would shed any more light on this, although you never know.  Vectis, is William HARRILL your grandfather?  I'm getting a bit confused now.

Here's the probable marriage of William's parents:

June qr 1857, registered at Bristol,  Vol  6a, p 86
Thomas Moxly HARRILL   
Clara Mary    WEBB   

Judith

[majm]

Divorce in Victoria dates from 1861, grounds for divorce extended to include desertion date from 1889. 


http://www.aifs.org.au/institute/seminars/finlay.html

http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/fm2001/fm60/jf.pdf

Cheers,  JM

[judb]

Hmm - maybe a brother of your man

Thomas Moxly HARRILL - Dec qr, 1893, registered Fulham, Vol 1a, p 582.

Unfortunately there are two men listed on the index for that page and only one woman - Jnae GILES - so where the record for the other woman is who knows!

One thing you've had in your favour, Vectis is the number of easy to find names that are not common 

Just another - Moxly must have been a family name as there is a marriage for a William Moxly HARRILL, registered Bristol, Sep qr 1853 - Anna Maria OGBORN is the only female listed on the same page.  Perhaps a brother/cousin of Thomas.

Vectis - do you already have this earlier information?

Judith