A Question on Bigamy

[jibba]

Afternoon

I have query regarding bigamy and what would happen if a couple where found to be in such a relationship?

This query regards my ancestor Sarah Marshall of Benenden, who married her first husband Alexander Butler in 1811 also at Benenden.

In 1832 Alexander was charged with larceny and as a result became alienated from the family. The 1841 census shows Sarah is living with a Robert Morris in Goudhurst, whom she later married in 1847, probably using the seven year rule that Alexander was deceased and therefore free to marry again.

Fast forward to the 1861 census and Sarah is still with Robert, living in Cranbrook. Also living in Cranbrook was Alexander, although he was in the workhouse where he died in 1862.

Now at some point between 1861 and Sarah's death in 1865, her marriage to Robert must have become invalid as both her death certificate and burial record list her as Sarah Butler. In fact her death certificate lists her as 'Widow of Alexander Butler, Farm Labourer'

So if someone became aware of this illegal marriage, who would they have reported it to and what steps would have been taken to declare the marriage invalid? Would it have been announced to the public at any time?

[stanmapstone]

The details on the death certificate and burial record would be given by the informant, who was it?

Stan

[jibba]

Hi Stan

From Sarah's death certificate:

Caroline Harris, present at death, Union Workhouse, Cranbrook

I don't know who this lady is. Its not Sarah daughter who died in 1845, nor can I find her in the 1861 or 1871 census' or a death registered in the Cranbrook district around that time

[Craclyn]

The informant may have been one of the workhouse staff who knew nothing personal about Sarah. They may have found some, but not all, paperwork and jumped to the wrong conlusions which could then have been documented on the death cert.

[jibba]

I think we can agree Caroline is either a member of staff or another inmate.

The problem as I see it is that Robert Morris was still alive when Sarah was placed in the workhouse (he died in 1881). Now the admission register to Cranbrook workhouse doesn't appear to have survived, so I cannot tell if she was admitted as a Morris or a Butler. I personally think its the latter, which in turn would mean her marriage to Robert was dissolved prior to her entry to the workhouse.

If this is the case, who would have dissolved the marriage? The local vicar? Maybe Robert himself, although that idea conflicts with the 1871 census where Robert is listed as a widow

[stanmapstone]

If it was a bigamous marriage then it was invalid, did not legally exist and therefore could not be dissolved. A second marriage, while the husband or wife of the first marriage is living is void, and in the event of the return of the absent spouse the ceremony is a mere nullity.
"The Marriage Law of England" James T. Hammick
Stan

[Jolee]

Just as a point of interest Robert married three times
Mary Ann Brady 27/05/1824 possible death for her 1840
Sarah Butler 19/10/1847
Elizabeth Maynard 10/09/1873

1st one a bachelor 2nd 3rd widower
Source Goudhurst CD

Did you know Alexander was acquitted maybe he joined the army?

[jibba]

Hi Jolee

Yes I knew he was acquitted. A couple of years ago I saw the transcript of the trial. The only sentence recorded of him speaking was the stereotypical 'I'm innocents of the charges against me'

Why Alexander did not rejoin his family after the trial is unclear. I've asked for help in finding him in the 1841 census via this topic http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=690385.0, as I have struggled to locate him so far. As he was listed as a travelling tramp in the 1851 census, I'm assuming he was in the same position in the 1841 census and therefore may not be listed at all

Unfortunately this vanishing act is typical amongst the Butler family. Alex's father, and the majority of his siblings and children disappear without a trace as time went on. I'm assuming most of them emigrated.

If Sarah's marriage to Robert Morris was declared invalid, then that's why she could have ended up in the workhouse. Would they have been mentioned in the local papers for what had happened? Then again how common was bigamy back in those days?

[IgorStrav]

I think bigamy would have been relatively common as it was beyond the resources of working people to obtain divorces.

My greatx2 grandmother was married in 1864 near Sevenoaks in West Kent, and then reappears in the 1871 census near Otford as the "wife" of someone else.

Her husband, my greatx2 grandfather, is in Northfleet in East Kent in the 1871, also shown as the husband of someone else, and then marries bigamously using his mother's maiden name in 1874, even though there were two children born before the marriage, under his correct name.  After 1874, the whole family becomes known as the new name.

My greatx2 grandmother didn't marry her second partner (or I can't find that they did), despite having many children.  I suppose as time went by they forgot they weren't actually married.  Nobody asked to see the marriage certificate.

So I suppose this sort of thing went on all the time but the people concerned did move away from the area so other people wouldn't know.