Author Topic: Could a man marry his sister in law in 1757?  (Read 11146 times)

Offline jillruss

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,824
  • Poppy
    • View Profile
Could a man marry his sister in law in 1757?
« on: Monday 04 August 08 12:02 BST (UK) »
Was it legal for a man to marry his dead wife's sister?

The incidence I'm thinking of would have been in 1757 in Great Marlow - a middle sized town in Bucks at the time.

Jill
HELP!!!

 BATHSHEBA BOOTHROYD bn c. 1802 W. Yorks.

Baptism nowhere to be found. Possibly in a nonconformist church near ALMONDBURY or HUDDERSFIELD.

Offline avm228

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 24,827
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Could a man marry his sister in law in 1757?
« Reply #1 on: Monday 04 August 08 12:11 BST (UK) »
Such a marriage in 1757 would have been lawful and valid for all purposes unless and until it was successfully challenged in the Ecclesiastical Court (i.e. it was voidable, not void). 

The position changed in 1835 with the enactment of Lord Lyndhurst's Marriage Act, after which such a marriage (taking place after the Act came into force) would have been null and void from the outset.

Anna
Ayr: Barnes, Wylie
Caithness: MacGregor
Essex: Eldred (Pebmarsh)
Gloucs: Timbrell (Winchcomb)
Hants: Stares (Wickham)
Lincs: Maw, Jackson (Epworth, Belton)
London: Pierce
Suffolk: Markham (Framlingham)
Surrey: Gosling (Richmond)
Wilts: Matthews, Tarrant (Calne, Preshute)
Worcs: Milward (Redditch)
Yorks: Beaumont, Crook, Moore, Styring (Huddersfield); Middleton (Church Fenton); Exley, Gelder (High Hoyland); Barnes, Birchinall (Sheffield); Kenyon, Wood (Cumberworth/Denby Dale)

Offline willow154

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,202
  • Mum - Such love
    • View Profile
Re: Could a man marry his sister in law in 1757?
« Reply #2 on: Monday 04 August 08 12:37 BST (UK) »
Hi Jill,
By the Marriage Act 1835 all marriages of this kind not disputed before the passing of the act were declared absolutely valid, while all subsequent to it were declared null. This rendered null in England, and not merely voidable, a marriage with a deceased wife's sister or niece.
See also:
http://www.helium.com/items/825064-when-it-became-legal-for-a-man-to-marry-his-deceased-wifes-sister
So, Anna's answer was completely correct.
Paulene :)

Offline toni*

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 13,549
    • View Profile
Re: Could a man marry his sister in law in 1757?
« Reply #3 on: Monday 04 August 08 13:01 BST (UK) »
it was illegal at this time in the UK to marry your dead wife's sister right up until 1907 when the Deceased Wife’s Sisters Marriage Act was passed. Until this time canon law prevailed. Canon law is basically Church Law and this had taken the point of view that if a man and a woman marry then the husband is related to the wife’s family and therefore any marriage would be improper. However, in reality of many people’s lives was such that if a wife died and she had a younger sister who was unmarried (or even an older sister) the spinster would move in and look after the children. Obviously in the late 19th Century a man and a woman living out of wedlock gave rise to concern for many within the Community so the law was passed in 1907 to ensure that standards could be ‘maintained’ but it was not until 1921 the Deceased Brother’s Widow’s Act was passed!
Holman & Vinton- Cornwall, Wojciechowskyj & Hussak- Bukowiec & Zahutyn, Bentley & Richards- Leicester, Taylor-Kent/Sussex  Punnett-Sussex,  Bear/e- Monkleigh Gazey-Warwicks

UK Census information is Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchive


Offline stanmapstone

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 25,798
    • View Profile
Re: Could a man marry his sister in law in 1757?
« Reply #4 on: Monday 04 August 08 14:05 BST (UK) »
As previously posted, before 1835 it was a violation of Canon Law, and after the 1835 Act a violation of Civil Law. In a Parliamentary Commissioners Report (1847-8) it was found that public opinion was not offended by such marriages and unions with the deceased wife's
sister were far and away the most common within the prohibited degrees. In five districts in England, there were 1,364 unions within the prohibited degrees between 1835 and 1848. Of these, 90% were with the deceased wife's sister. However as late as 1949 a Marriage Act was passed that, among other provisions, prohibited marriage between a man and his divorced wife's sister.

Stan
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline toni*

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 13,549
    • View Profile
Re: Could a man marry his sister in law in 1757?
« Reply #5 on: Monday 04 August 08 14:13 BST (UK) »
As previously posted, before 1835 it was a violation of Canon Law, and after the 1835 Act a violation of Civil Law.
thats what i said it was illegal in the UK right up til 1907

although cases did occur, i don't suspect many of them were brought to court - justice whatever term you want to use.


but this is where the term brother in law , sister in law came from

that if a man and a woman marry then the husband is related to the wife’s family and therefore any marriage would be improper. 


 
Holman & Vinton- Cornwall, Wojciechowskyj & Hussak- Bukowiec & Zahutyn, Bentley & Richards- Leicester, Taylor-Kent/Sussex  Punnett-Sussex,  Bear/e- Monkleigh Gazey-Warwicks

UK Census information is Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchive

Offline jillruss

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,824
  • Poppy
    • View Profile
Re: Could a man marry his sister in law in 1757?
« Reply #6 on: Monday 04 August 08 14:29 BST (UK) »
Good lord! What a mass of info - basically saying - if I've got it right, that it might have been 'improper' before 1835 but it wasn't illegal.

I have a chap who married an Ann Phillips in 1752 and then, seemingly the same chap, married a Mary Phillips 5 years later. So, they could very well be sisters, which is really what I wanted to know.

Thanks for all the advice. Am I to take it that it's still illegal now? Interesting point about the origins of the terms 'in law' - didn't know that. Personally, I can't see the problem as they're not blood related.  :-\

Jill
HELP!!!

 BATHSHEBA BOOTHROYD bn c. 1802 W. Yorks.

Baptism nowhere to be found. Possibly in a nonconformist church near ALMONDBURY or HUDDERSFIELD.

Offline perth tiger

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,103
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Could a man marry his sister in law in 1757?
« Reply #7 on: Monday 04 August 08 14:32 BST (UK) »
my gggrandad married ann nelson in 1853, she died in 1865 and he then married sarah nelson in 1866. sarah was the half sister {same father) of ann.
would the fact that sarah and ann were half siblings make a difference?

perth :) :)
davey hodgson holliday nelson oxberry ruddock sunman Sidebottom
yorkshire
Census information is Crown copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk included on your posts.

Offline toni*

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 13,549
    • View Profile
Re: Could a man marry his sister in law in 1757?
« Reply #8 on: Monday 04 August 08 14:36 BST (UK) »
i am sure it was illegal until 1907
the dead wifes sisters act was passed in 1907 this meant that you could marry your dead wifes sister ,legally, but the dead husbands brother  act wasnt passed until 1921  ::)

not sure if half siblings would make a difference as once you got married you were then deemed to be related to that family. their sister in law
i think it was the female was then deemed to belong to the males family, i am not entirely sure if it worked both ways as we know males were seemed to be special
like the married womans property act which was passed in 1882 :~

the 1882 Married Women's Property Act. Under the terms of the act married women had the same rights over their property as unmarried women. This act therefore allowed a married woman to retain ownership of property which she might have received as a gift from a parent. Before the 1882 Married Women's Property Act was passed this property would have automatically have become the property of the husband. The passing of the 1893 Married Women's Property Act completed this process. Married women now had full legal control of all the property of every kind which they owned at marriage or which they acquired after marriage either by inheritance or by their own earnings
Holman & Vinton- Cornwall, Wojciechowskyj & Hussak- Bukowiec & Zahutyn, Bentley & Richards- Leicester, Taylor-Kent/Sussex  Punnett-Sussex,  Bear/e- Monkleigh Gazey-Warwicks

UK Census information is Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchive