Author Topic: Marriage annulment  (Read 278 times)

Offline Stewart R

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 485
    • View Profile
Re: Marriage annulment
« Reply #9 on: Thursday 08 January 26 17:12 GMT (UK) »
Thanks again Jon_ni

Sorry, i posted my last reply just after your second message.

Begining to make sense now thanks.
Reid, Wolfendale, Hawkin, Tapp
Plymouth, Macclesfield, Liverpool.

Offline AntonyMMM

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,457
  • Researcher (retired) and former Deputy Registrar
    • View Profile
Re: Marriage annulment
« Reply #10 on: Thursday 08 January 26 17:41 GMT (UK) »
This was something commonly done in the army, and wouldn't probably need to be hidden.

I have a copy of correspondence from the registrar general's office in the 1920s discussing it - the RG wasn't happy about the double marriages of servicemen but recognised them as being "widely practiced".

The birth registration of the first child will no doubt be in the form of that to a married couple.

Famous air ace (Sir) Douglas Bader married his wife  twice in the 1930s, I assume for the same reason.



Offline Stewart R

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 485
    • View Profile
Re: Marriage annulment
« Reply #11 on: Thursday 08 January 26 18:14 GMT (UK) »
Given what I've been advised by all the fine responces, a little further digging has revealed to me that the Child (my great Aunt) would not have been classed as "on strength" being born before CO permission to marry was given. She was, as far as the Army was concerned, illegitimate. It would now possibly explain a family mystery as to why she, by now a 12 year old, did not accompany the rest of the now expanded family, when my Great-Grandfather was posted overseas yet again.
Reid, Wolfendale, Hawkin, Tapp
Plymouth, Macclesfield, Liverpool.

Offline Andy J2022

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,419
    • View Profile
Re: Marriage annulment
« Reply #12 on: Thursday 08 January 26 18:45 GMT (UK) »
I believe that the version of Queens Regulations which was applicable at the time was the one published in 1859 (the next was not until 1895). QRs 1859 contains 3 pages of rules concerning marriages of soldiers. It's too long to reproduce it all here*, but suffice it to say that if the first marriage had occurred without the Commanding Officer's consent  - which was only sparingly given with no more than 4 soldiers per company of 60 men being permitted on the Regimental strength - then if later consent was given, a new ceremony might have been necessary to meet the stipulation in QRs that a valid certificate of marriage from the officiating priest had to be presented to the Adjutant before the marriage could be entered into the Regimental Marriage Book. Similarly the births of any children born before the marriage was recorded in the Marriage Book would not be recognised until after the marriage itself had been recognised.

* You can view the whole document on the Internet Archive - see pages 387-399


Offline Wexflyer

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,453
  • Not Crown Copyright
    • View Profile
Re: Marriage annulment
« Reply #13 on: Thursday 08 January 26 18:55 GMT (UK) »
OP has not told us a significant detail: Was this man a soldier or an officer at the time of his first marriage? Clearly he was an officer later
BRENNANx2 Davidstown&Taghmon,Ballybrennan; COOPER St.Helens;CREAN Raheennaskeagh&Ballywalter;COSGRAVE Castlebridge?;CULLEN Lady's Island;CULLETON Forth Commons;CURRAN Hillbrook, Wic;DOYLE Clonee&Tombrack;FOX Knockbrandon; FURLONG Moortown;HAYESx2 Walsheslough&Wex;McGILL Litter;MORRIS Forth Commons;PIERCE Ladys Island;POTTS Bennettstown;REDMOND Gerry; ROCHEx2 Wex; ROCHFORD Ballysampson&Ballyhit;SHERIDAN Moneydurtlow; SINNOTT Wex;SMYTH Gerry&Oulart;WALSH Kilrane&Wex; WHITE Tagoat area

Offline Jon_ni

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 831
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Marriage annulment
« Reply #14 on: Thursday 08 January 26 19:06 GMT (UK) »
On the 1st marriage he was a 2nd Corporal, many soldiers married unofficially but the wife had no rights to reside in camp/barracks or to accompany the regiment. She had to live in lodgings in Plymouth paid for out of their own pockets.
On the second he was now a Staff Sergeant, Royal Engineers, entitlement likely meant married quarter accomodation by 1897 in somewhere as large as Plymouth plus paid travel and rations for wife & children if the regiment moved or was posted abroad.

This article quotes "Grierson (1899): "Marriage is allowed to all the staff-sergeants, to 50% of the other sergeants, 4% of the corporals and privates in the cavalry, artillery and engineers, and 3% in the infantry."
https://dressuniformhire.co.uk/pages/a-military-wedding-history-tradition
https://dressuniformhire.co.uk/blogs/history/asking-permission-to-marry-in-the-military

A Soldier is not to marry without a written sanction, obtained from his Commanding Officer. Should he marry without this sanction, his Wife will not be allowed in Barracks, nor to follow the Regiment, nor will she participate in the indulgences granted to the Wives of other Soldiers.

"Whilst such a union was not something the army could disturb despite army regulations, it meant that such a married soldier would normally have to sleep in his barracks and his wife elsewhere. At some later date a soldier’s wife might be given permission to ‘go on the strength’ of her husband’s regiment."

https://wightonfamily.ca/genealogy/essays/armywives.html
https://blog.forceswarrecords.com/service-in-the-british-army

Quote
a valid certificate of marriage from the officiating priest had to be presented to the Adjutant before the marriage could be entered into the Regimental Marriage Book
The snip indicates a GRO cert was proof, and was to be transcribed into the Regimental Register. The officiating minister held the only copies of the marriage register ledgers on the day of marriage and immediately afterwards, so issued any required GRO certs. An additional copy became available once the priest had forwarded his quarterly return to London. Once books were full one duplicate ledger was deposited with the GRO District, the other retained by the church, hence the FindMyPast images. One sometimes sees annotation "cert seen" in service records next to details of wife & children / NOK, even the odd English GRO marriage or birth cert in Boer/WW1 era records.

Offline Stewart R

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 485
    • View Profile
Re: Marriage annulment
« Reply #15 on: Thursday 08 January 26 19:12 GMT (UK) »
He was only a corporal at the time of the 1st marriage and Staff Sergeant at the time of the 2ND in 1899. He got his commission in 1911 a few years after his final overseas posting. Spent WWI in liverpool and was effectively in charge of the defence of the river Mersey

(Just noticed you've beaten to the post me again Jon_ni :) )
Reid, Wolfendale, Hawkin, Tapp
Plymouth, Macclesfield, Liverpool.

Offline AntonyMMM

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,457
  • Researcher (retired) and former Deputy Registrar
    • View Profile
Re: Marriage annulment
« Reply #16 on: Yesterday at 08:26 »
Given what I've been advised by all the fine responces, a little further digging has revealed to me that the Child (my great Aunt) would not have been classed as "on strength" being born before CO permission to marry was given. She was, as far as the Army was concerned, illegitimate. It would now possibly explain a family mystery as to why she, by now a 12 year old, did not accompany the rest of the now expanded family, when my Great-Grandfather was posted overseas yet again.

She may have been unrecognised by the army  but she was not illegitimate.