|
Pages: [1] 2 3
|
 |
|
Author
|
Topic: 1868 June 5th Kilmarnock, a missing marriage registration (Read 791 times)
|
Bobbius
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 15
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
On the above date a marriage took place? in Kilmarnock between a Robert Mann b1848 Auchinleck and Janet Barbour b 1850 Kilmuires. I have been unable to find any record of the marriage on www.scotlandpeople.gov.uk and am wondering why!!
I am confident the details are correct because they are extracted from the birth certificate of son Robert Mann (1868 GRO Birth 597/00 0724), recorded the following August - 2 months later. All details also tie in with the 1871 census records.
Can anyone offer any advice, guidance or locate this missing marriage registration.
Many thanks
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobbius
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 15
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Hi Ev,
Many, many thanks for such a quick response.
You are quite correct Janet Mann (nee Barbour) died in 1877, only 9 years after she got married? of a long standing heart problem, leaving the son Robert 12 with his g'parents - no sign of the father Robert Mann b1848 and mysteriously no sign of him in the 1881 census or beyond.
Thanks for confirming IGI also has no trace of a marriage. I am perplexed, was this couple telling porkies about their marriage at the recording of their son's birth only two months later??. The marriage details are so clear on the son's birth registration I find it hard to believe they presented false information and yet, not to find a trace of the marriage registration! 
Regards
Bobm
.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: Saturday 04 July 09 23:20 UTC (UK) by Bobbius »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
hume
RootsChat Aristocrat
Posts: 1725
|
Hi Bob and ev,
I have searched through the June marriage records for that year in Kilmarnock, and there's nothing matching your couple. I wonder if the marriage was just common law ... it wouldn't require registering (as far as I know). I have seen other similar cases where the parents give an exact date and place for their marriage, yet no record can be found of it.  I think precise porkies is the term.
It's a pity they didn't have any other children to confirm marriage date. Not sure how else you could find anything more. 
Do you have parents for Robert b. 1848? I'll have a look for any census results or death records.
hume
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobbius
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 15
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Many thanks for help. Is the preciseness of the marriage information on one hand and the fact the marriage was not quite a shotgun affair (10 weeks before the birth)
Unfortunately it was a short lived family as the wife Janet died aged 31 on 21 Feb 1877 Kilmarnock of a 10 year old heart problem see 1877 Barbour, Janet (Stat Deaths 597/00 0083)
Robert Mann (23) , wife Janet (25) and son Robert (3) appear in the 1871 Kilmarnock census Mann, Robert 1871 597/00 009/00021
By the 1881 census the son (12) is with her parents in Kilmarnock, Hugh (71) wife Janet Barbour (60). recorded over two pages in the 1881 Mann Robert Census 1881 597/00 023/00 021. Have not been able to track the father, Robert Mann down in the 1881 census.
Its taken me a long time to answer your question ref the father Robert Mann's parents , however you needed to know the above. I believe Robert was born 22 Aug 1846 Mosside, Auchinleck to Robert Mann (another one!! born Mauchline 31 May 1812) and Agnes Campbell Mann nee Frazer (Mauchline 31 April 1808).
Their son Robert can be traced through the 1851 census at Mosside, the 1861 census as a stable lad at Greenock Mains, Muirkirk -- then he disappears for 20 years to re-appear in the 1881 Census of Carnwath in Lanarkshire, and from there traced through to his death in 1920. Is this the Robert who in those blank intervening years married Janet Balfour and had a son.
That is the big question and I was hoping the darned missing marriage certficate would pull it all together.
Regards
Robert ( darn, yet another Robert or at least you can see where my forename came from)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
hume
RootsChat Aristocrat
Posts: 1725
|
Hi Robert,
I did see the Robert Mann (or Main?) of Carnwath with his family. His birth date and place matches pretty well with the details known of your man. However, I was put off by him having a son Robert although this may be named for himself this time or his wife's father. Have you been able to trace this Robert in the earlier censuses, or does his death certificate mention the Robert/Agnes couple you have found?
hume
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobbius
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 15
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Hi Hume,
I'am amazed you have stayed with the story and put most of the pieces together.
The Carnwath Robert (Mann/Main) appears on the 1881 census Carnwath. In September of that year,1881, he marries a Jane Jackson from Lesmahagow (not far from Carnwath).
His parents on the marriage certificate match the ones way back at his birth in 1846 - There cannot be too many sets of parents named Agnes Campbell Fraser and Robert (Main/Mann) from Auchinleck.
Unfortunately that marriage certificate fails to say widower or batchelor - would have been most helpful.
He also appears on the 1891 and 1901 census and in 1920 he dies, all at the same place Wilsontown near Carnwath. The 1891, 1901 census data (DoB and place of birth) and his marriage certificate (parents), all match his birth data and also that from the middle years.
So the Robert Mann born in Auchinleck in 1848 must?, most likely, is the same person who ends up living his latter years in Wilsontown, although now called Main. Is he the same one who was married to Janet Barbour in 1868 for 9 years? That would account for his "missing" early years, his late marriage to Jane Jackson in 1881 and suggest a name change from Mann to Main after the first wife? Janet Barbour died in 1877, but before he married Jane Jackson in 1881. Why the name change, I don't know and probably never will - possibly he may have wanted to simply disappear after the death of his first wife
This could be a good tale, the missing marriage certificate in 1868 would have gone a long way to proving the connection, if the later marriage certificate in 1881 had said widower,that would have helped - instead it said nothing - unusually.
Somewhat of a long story, however you can see why I am so keen to prove out the marriage in 1868, this could link it all together.
I have a full paper trail for the above and now not sure how to proceed.
Many thanks for listening, apologies if you now have digestive problems. I did try to keep the problem simple, at least initially.
For information, alrhough you have probably guessed the connection, the Wilsontown Robert is my great grandfather 
Regards
Bob (Robert) (Main or Mann, I'm confused)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
kirkmichael
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 79
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Hi Bob
The correct expression in Scotland is not 'common law' but 'irregular marriage'.
See http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,348725.0.html for lots of info.
It was LDS who extracted details for the IGI of Scottish BMDs between 1855 and 1875, and, generally, the extraction and indexing was very high quality. In other words if the record isn't in IGI, then it's near certain that the marriage was irregular, but was never formalised via the Sheriff Court or Court of Session route, followed by an entry by the registrar in his Register Book of Marriages.
As commented earlier, it's unfortunate that there weren't other children of the marriage to give a cross check on the place of date of the marriage of the parents as declared at the time of the birth registration.
So did they go through an irregular marriage by declaration, or did they just conclude that it would look better on the birth register entry if they appeared to be married? That happened!, and it's a debatable legal point as to whether it actually equates to a marriage by declaration  , or even the 'habit and repute' variant.
In Scots registration law, the registrar had no authority to ask to see a marriage certificate when registering a birth. He could only record what he was told.
Wullie
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobbius
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 15
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Hi Kirkmichael,
Many thanks for input.
It is all highly irregular
Regards
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
kirkmichael
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 79
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Hi Kirkmichael, Many thanks for input. It is all highly irregular Regards Bob
There were many such marriages ! 
Somewhere I've got a note of the actual numbers from certain years, - the figure appeared as a statistic in the annual report of the Registrar General; but, for the life of me I can't locate the reference for the moment ...... just found it, - in 1914 12% (twelve %) of all marriages registered in Scotland were 'irregular'.
How many irregular marriages there were that were never recorded by the registrars as the couple never went through the Sheriff or other court process to 'regularlise' their marriage is an open question. Some surely, but just how many ?
Wullie
Later PS
See http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/scottishwayofbirthanddeath/marriage/
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bobbius
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 15
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
That is one heck of a %!
In effect the marriage database could be missing 1 in 8 entries.
Possibly only discovered when tracking through census returns and like me, finding no corresponding marriage registration.
Had not given it a though - now will bear it in mind
regards
bobm
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
MonicaLesl
RootsChat Marquessate
Posts: 9059
|
Hi Bob
Just circumstantial really...likely Robert's brother James also ended up in Kilmarnock. He shows with wife Janet there in 1871. This is the family entry for 1881 - all the children show as born in Kilmarnock:
James Mann 39, gen. lab., Auchinleck, Ayrshire
Janet Mann 44, b. Galston, Ayrshire
Robert Mann 16
Isabella Mann 12
Agnes Mann 10
Alexander Mann 6
William Mann 4
Address: Dykes, Kilmarnock
Re the change of name from MANN to MAIN, I wouldn't put too much mystery behind it. In those times, both first names and surnames were more fluid and spellings could vary enormously.
Like Hume, the thing that bugs with this is the potential second use of the name Robert for his son with second wife Jane...specially when it seems that first son may still have been alive:
There is Robert Mann, b. 1868 showing in the 1891 census boarding with the Craig family at 7 Scotstoun Pl, Renfrew. He shows as born in Kilmarnock, occupation furnaceman.
Monica
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
MacIsaac, MacDonald, MacPherson, MacVarish, MacMaster: Moidart - Inverness-shire. Gillies: pre-1850 Knoydart, Inverness-shire /post 1850s Fort William area - Argyll. Tully, Tulley, Moran, Murphy: Lanarkshire. Durnan, Durnin, Kelly, Tully, McPhillips: Co Monaghan. McIntyre, McMahon, Tully: Co Cavan (?) Ireland. Moran: Co Mayo (?) Ireland. ..........and lots of Spanish name interests........ Census information Crown Copyright, www.nationalarchives.gov.uk |
|
|
MonicaLesl
RootsChat Marquessate
Posts: 9059
|
A health warning on that 1891 census entry for a young Robert Mann lodging in Renfrew I can only see one Robert born in Kilmarnock c. 1868 in 1891, the one lodging in Renfrew. Not sure if this is the son of Robert and Jane B or the son of James and Janet (Ramage). In 1901, there is also only one Robert b. 1865 in Kilmarnock who would certainly look to be the son of James and Janet R.
I was hoping (if that is the right word) to find a possible death in Kilmarnock for a young Robert Mann son of Robert and Jane between 1881-84, which could then explain the second use of that name by Robert Snr and his new wife, but no joy so far.
Monica
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
MacIsaac, MacDonald, MacPherson, MacVarish, MacMaster: Moidart - Inverness-shire. Gillies: pre-1850 Knoydart, Inverness-shire /post 1850s Fort William area - Argyll. Tully, Tulley, Moran, Murphy: Lanarkshire. Durnan, Durnin, Kelly, Tully, McPhillips: Co Monaghan. McIntyre, McMahon, Tully: Co Cavan (?) Ireland. Moran: Co Mayo (?) Ireland. ..........and lots of Spanish name interests........ Census information Crown Copyright, www.nationalarchives.gov.uk |
|
|
Bobbius
RootsChat Extra
Posts: 15
Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
|
Hi MonicaLesl and Hume and Kirkmichael
Input greatly appreciated. I womder if I am Mann enough to keep up with the Main storyline (appalling pun!).
You are correct in saying James moved to Kilmarnock he apears in the 1861 census staying with his sister Janet (age 27) and husband Thomas Carmichael b Lanark aged 26, son Peter (. James next appears in the 1871 Kilmarnock census with wife Janet(34) and children Robert(6) and les'enfant 8 months. You have him spotted in the 1881 census.
leaving all that aside, the major issue I have is, is Robert Mann b 1846, Auchinleck the same person as Robert Main who marries Jane Jackson 1881, The marriage registration with details of his parents names and place of birth are clinchers, I think. Tell me , if I am barking up the wrong tree.
The secondary issue is where did he disappear in the intervening years. The short marriage? to Janet Barbour is a very convenient answer and ticks all the boxes. Without the marriage registration I have not been able to prove this was the case , however I have not been able to prove it was not -how annoying. Your help, to place the argument on one side or the other is very much appreciated.
Your point re the first son Robert b1868 is valid and I must admit not having given it enough thought or research. Which I will now remedy. It does appear the family line is fixated on the name Robert - oh for some originality.
I also take the point re the name change from Mann to Main, you can see the effects of confusion in the documentation Mann to Munn to Main to Mann and back again. However, On the basis no one does something without a reason, what was his reason - was he running away from his obligation to his first son Robert - we'll never know, but I could start a family rumour.
Regards
Bobm
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3
|
|
|
|
|
