I have come across two weddings ceremonies which took place between the same couple in two Anglican Churches within 11 miles and 4 months of each other. Can anyone offer any reason as to why this happened?
For some reason I get the feeling they were probably forced to undergo the second ceremony but I cannot find any reason why. Nor can I find any logical reason why they should want to do so.
William Reed and Sophia Seaman were first married in Withyham Parish Church, Sussex, on 18 February 1833 (Register No. 258). William Reed signed, but looks childish as if practised specially for the occasion, Sophia Seaman X. Witnesses Thos. Elphick (Signed) and Harriet Cridall X.
On 25th June 1833 they married again in Buxted Parish Church, Sussex (Register No. 217). This time the bride is recorded as Sophia Seymour, both bride and groom signed with an X. Witnesses were the same Thos. Elphick (Signed) and an Esther Daws X.
By Horse and Cart there's less than 11 Miles between the Churches.
I have been studying the Seaman/Seymour name in East Sussex and have ample proof they are completely interchangeable, together with a multitude of other variants, even within the same family group. Both marriages were by Banns. Both bride and groom came from very poor agricultural labouring families. I have not found any evidence to suggest they were separate couples with identical or very similar names; I’ve only ever found the one valid Sophia Seaman or Seymour, etc.
To add to the puzzle, Ellen Seymour, daughter of Sophia Seymour a single woman, was baptised in Buxted on 2 Jun 1833. I don’t know when she was born, it might have been before the first marriage in February that year. She appears in the 1841 Census under the name of Reed but that’s not an uncommon thing. She is definitely the daughter of the Sophia who married William Reed.
From research I’ve learnt that a marriage can be treated as “voidable” and thus cancelled if contested by one party in court, and one justifiable ground is the woman being pregnant by another man at the time of the marriage. But I’m struggling with this being the case here; first I doubt there was enough money for a court case, second I doubt there was enough time, and third why go through all that process only to get married again?
So I’m back to wondering whether the local Rector at Buxted had some influence in requiring a second marriage ceremony. Why was the first child baptised Seymour and not Reed ? I’ve no evidence that Ellen was the child of William Reed. Is there something in the church laws at that time that might have had some impact on this state of affairs?
I’m baffled – and intrigued. Any solutions anyone?
