A Question About Bigamy

[antonymark]

I wondered if there might be some sort of limitation period for the crime of bigamy, but an AI has told me this:

Under English law, there is no statutory limitation period for prosecuting the crime of bigamy. Bigamy is governed by Section 57 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, which classifies it as a felony punishable by up to seven years’ imprisonment. Unlike summary offences (minor crimes tried in magistrates’ courts, which have a six-month limitation period), bigamy is an indictable offence subject to no time restrictions.
This aligns with the broader principle in UK criminal law that there is no statute of limitations for serious offences triable in the Crown Court. Prosecution can occur regardless of how much time has passed since the bigamous marriage took place, provided sufficient evidence exists. However, exceptions to liability exist if the accused reasonably believed their original spouse had been continuously absent for seven years or if the prior marriage was legally dissolved.

Thanks AlanBoyd,

He must have spent years expecting a knock on the door from someone in authority.

I've found nothing so far to say that the Navy or the Police ever caught up with him. He seems to die under the new name in the 1960s aged 96.

Which is what I find so odd about the 1938 marriage index where he appears to expose his true name. I'll hopefully get a clearer picture when the certificate arrives.

I had until last night thought that wife 2 can't have known about wife 1 (he is a "Bachelor" on the 1897 marriage) and that she went along with the name change because they were on the run from the Navy. But if she goes through another wedding with him forty years later she has to have known at some point..... Perhaps his step sister 'helpfully' wrote to her too?

And round and round it all goes in my head!

Tony.

[KGarrad]

What does the marriage certificate say about his "condition"?
Single? Divorced? Previously married? Widower?

[antonymark]

What does the marriage certificate say about his "condition"?
Single? Divorced? Previously married? Widower?

On the 1897 marriage his condition is "Bachelor".

He is also "Bachelor" on the 1890 marriage to wife 1.

I have ordered the 1938 one.

[antonymark]

There is an article by David Annal in this month's FamilyTree magazine about illegitimacy that touches on bigamy. It says:

"...., bigamy was the easiest, and cheapest option. Figures suggest that for every divorce granted in the second half of the 19th century there were two cases of bigamy, only one in five of which ever went to trial."

Has anyone here had sight of the certificate for a bigamous marriage that they know was discovered and annulled? I am interested to know if a copy of this certificate from the GRO would carry an annotation from a registrar noting this - like the "adopted" that I've seen on the original birth certificate for a person who was later adopted.

The 1897 certificate I have for the marriage to wife 2 carries no additions. The 1938 certificate is now showing as despatched.

Tony.

[AntonyMMM]

I've seen an example of a parish marriage record where the vicar had later made a note in the register that a marriage was bigamous, but whether he then forwarded that as an amendment to GRO I don't know but I doubt it.

However I do have copies of Registrar General correspondence from the 1930s where the father of a bride who had been duped into a bigamous marriage wanted the record removed from the  register, or noted  as bigamous ( and got his MP involved) and the RG flatly refused to do so.

[antonymark]

https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=661236.msg5098706#msg5098706


This old post (replies #182 #183 and #184) sort of address my question about later notations on the GRO certificate.

Just had a happy hour reading all 22 pages. I've added a newspaper snip that probably wasn't available 12 years ago.

Tony.

[antonymark]

I've seen an example of a parish marriage record where the vicar had later made a note in the register that a marriage was bigamous, but whether he then forwarded that as an amendment to GRO I don't know.

However I do have copies of Registrar General correspondence from the 1930s where the father of a bride who had been duped into a bigamous marriage wanted the record removed from the  register, or noted  as bigamous ( and got his MP involved) and the RG flatly refused to do so.

Thank you AntonyMMM - I'd hoped you would have a look 

The absence then of any note on the 1897 certificate is probably not significant as to whether this ever came to the attention of the authorities.

Tony.

[AntonyMMM]

If the marriage was officially annulled through the courts because it was bigamous then I'd expect to see a record of it.

Annullments are in the same series as divorces at TNA  (J77) ....and available  on Ancestry to 1918.

[Jon_ni]

AnthonyMark

Just for your interest Marriage #1.
Marriage 27 Sep 1885 of Thomas Mansell, aged 22, Bachelor (Labourer) of 34 McClure Street, Belfast & Ellen Jane Collins, aged 22, Spinster (Stitcher) of 43 Lake Street, Belfast. Fathers Matthew Mansell (Builder) + John Collins (Cloth-passer).
https://irishgenealogy.ie/files/civil/marriage_returns/marriages_1885/10872/5970674.pdf

Thomas Maunsell obtained Ellen Jane Collins affections by sending a faked letter stating that her former lover had been killed in the wars. After marrying Mansell he had left her, whereabouts unknown [maybe Birkenhead area where was born, but parents had moved to Belfast when only 4]; was allegedly presumed dead until his return 1891. [ref newspapers on her prosecution]

Bigimous marriage #2 to her former sweetheart, under assumed names. 25 Mar 1887 of Thomas Douglas, aged 26, Bachelor (Labourer) of 8 Malt Street, Belfast & Mary FLOOD, aged 23, Spinster (Machinist) of 29 Excise Street, Belfast. Fathers = Thomas Douglas (Labourer) & Thomas Flood (Carpenter).
Husband also used pseudonym, was correctly Thomas Douglas Harvey.
https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/marriage_returns/marriages_1887/10789/5934783.pdf

4 Feb 1891 CHARGE OF BIGAMY. Ellen Jane Harvey, alias Mansell, arrested at 41 Osborne Street by Sgt. Cunningham of Antrim Rd. Magistrates asked for a remand to get the certificates of the two Belfast marriages contracted by the prisoner, maiden name Ellen J Collins.
13 Feb 1891 Recorder's Court, Belfast.
Ellen Jane Maunsell indicted with having committed bigamy by marrying Thomas Douglas Harvey in Drew Memorial Church, Belfast, on 24 Mar 1887, her former husband, Thomas Maunsell, to whom she was united on 27 Sep 1885, in St Anne's, being still alive.

https://search.findmypast.co.uk/bna/viewarticle?id=bl/0000434/18910204/249&stringtohighlight=ellen
https://search.findmypast.co.uk/bna/viewarticle?id=bl/0000434/18910206/169
https://search.findmypast.co.uk/bna/viewarticle?id=bl/0000098/18910206/013&stringtohighlight=bigamy
https://search.findmypast.co.uk/bna/viewarticle?id=BL/0001631/18910214/074/0003
https://search.findmypast.co.uk/bna/viewarticle?id=bl/0000038/18910214/032&stringtohighlight=harvey

Belfast Evening Telegraph, Saturday, February 14, 1891. "BELFAST RECORDER’S COURT. His Honour Henry Fitzgibbon, Q.C., Recorder of Belfast, and the County Judge for Antrim, resumed the business of the Recorder’s Court, in the Municipal Buildings, at eleven o’clock this forenoon. Mr. William Carson, J.P., Clerk of the Peace for the City, was in attendance. BIGAMY. Ellen J. Maunsell was indicated that on the 27th Sept., 1885, at the parish of St. Ann’s, Belfast, did marry one Thomas Maunsell, and that the said Ellen J. Maunsell, alias Harvey, afterwards, and whilst she was so married, on 24th March, 1887, at the Drew Memorial Church, Belfast, feloniously and unlawfully did marry one Thomas Douglas Harvey, her former husband being then still alive. Mr. M'Erlean, on behalf of the prisoner, pleaded guilty. His Honour allowed the prisoner to stand out on her own recognisances to come up for judgement at ten days’ notice."
I did not find a report of what she was fined or how long a custodial sentence was 10 days later.

1901 census with her husband from the bigimous marriage and two sons.
https://www.census.nationalarchives.ie/pages/1901/Antrim/St__George_s_Ward_Belfast/Colchester_Street/955022/
1911 boarding with another family saying they had been married for 24 years (1887).
https://www.census.nationalarchives.ie/pages/1911/Down/Victoria__part_of_/Cuba_Street/224823/
Younger son William John Harvey's birth registered as legitimate child of Thomas Douglas Harvey & Ellen nee Collins.
https://irishgenealogy.ie/files/civil/birth_returns/births_1895/02208/1834025.pdf

No additional annotation on EITHER of the quarterly return marriages sent to Dublin per the above pdf's and both indexed under those names on GRONI (equivalent to Local GRO copy in England, each marriage indexed from one of the pair of original bound church marriage ledger copies, one sent & retained in the Registration District when filled & stored with the original local birth & death ledgers) as that was all the North had after Irish Partition 1922.

Ellen Jane Harvey is buried with her bigimous husband Thomas Douglas Harvey in Dundonald Cemetery, they appeared to have lived happily together once the case was over. One son died WW1, the other in the Belfast Blitz WW2 serving with the Naval Reserves.

----------------------------------------------------
1st husband Thomas Mansell 1901 census said was married to a Minnie, but they NEVER actually married and had no children, from their GRO deaths you would think they had been. Would have been bigimous I guess as his 1885 marriage was still valid.
https://www.census.nationalarchives.ie/pages/1901/Antrim/St__George_s_Ward_Belfast/Matilda_Street/956484/
Death 13 May 1901 at 247 Matilda Street of Marian Mansell, aged 38, Married (Wife of Thomas Mansell, Plumber) of Cerebral Haemorrhage. Registered 13 May 1901 by Thos Mansell, Widower of deceased, present at death.
Death 12 Nov 1901 at 101 Argyle Street of Thomas Mansell, aged 38, Widower (Labourer) suddenly, from Heart Disease.
Marian was interred in Public ground of the City Cemetery, Thomas in same cemetery but with relatives in plot adjacent to his parent's headstone.