How likely is an 1862 RC marriage with a pregnant bride aged under 12 ?

[kob3203]

...Another thing that's niggling me is that none of Johanna's sons are named Lawrence. I understand that it was traditional for the one of the sons to be named after his maternal grandfather.)

So what were the names, in order, or their children?

As far as we know:
- Thomas 1862
- Edmond 1864
- Mary 1867
- Ellen 1869
- John 1872
- William 1874

If Johanna was aged 4 months or older when she was baptized (and we will never be able to find this out) then she was old enough by Canon Law (if 12 was the indeed the minimum age) to be married. If there was no requirement for a parent/guardian to record consent in the entry in the parish register then the the 1862 marriage could be her.

However, if Johanna was less than 4 months old when baptized, or if the consent of a parent/guardian had to be recorded in the entry in the parish register for a 12 year old girl to marry then the 1862 marriage cannot be her.

I don't think we'll ever know.

[Wexflyer]

...Another thing that's niggling me is that none of Johanna's sons are named Lawrence. I understand that it was traditional for the one of the sons to be named after his maternal grandfather.)

So what were the names, in order, or their children?

As far as we know:
- Thomas 1862
- Edmond 1864
- Mary 1867
- Ellen 1869
- John 1872
- William 1874

So, I think you have your answer right there. You can see that the first son, and first daughter are named for the paternal grandparents, just as expected. But none of the children are named for the putative maternal grandparents from the 1850 Cahir baptism (Lawrence and Bridget). Also, if Johanna was only born in 1850, one might expect the children to continue long past 1874....

[kob3203]

I've got a pair of ancestors, John and Joanna, where when I listed all the children born to the couple and their dates I quickly smelled a rat. Turned out Joanna had died and John had rapidly remarried to another younger Joanna and carried on going. Are you sure the Johanna you have the date of birth for is the same one that originally married? (I can't see the death to see if her maiden name is mentioned on it).

We have the civil birth records from irishgenealogy.ie of all children except Thomas (born two years before civil registration started), and the mother is given as Johanna Purtill nee Sweeney in all of them. So I think the mother of all 6 children is the same Johanna Sweeney.

Of course, she could have died after the last child was born, and Edmond could have married another Johanna (whose maiden name could have been anything).

[Wexflyer]

If Johanna was aged 4 months or older when she was baptized (and we will never be able to find this out) then she was old enough by Canon Law (if 12 was the indeed the minimum age) to be married.

Sorry, but that is simply unrealistic. She would have been baptized within 1-2 days of birth.

[kob3203]

...Another thing that's niggling me is that none of Johanna's sons are named Lawrence. I understand that it was traditional for the one of the sons to be named after his maternal grandfather.)

So what were the names, in order, or their children?

As far as we know:
- Thomas 1862
- Edmond 1864
- Mary 1867
- Ellen 1869
- John 1872
- William 1874

So, I think you have your answer right there. You can see that the first son, and first daughter are named for the paternal grandparents, just as expected. But none of the children are named for the putative maternal grandparents from the 1850 Cahir baptism (Lawrence and Bridget). Also, if Johanna was only born in 1850, one might expect the children to continue long past 1874....

Paternal grandfather Thomas based on the 20 April 1841 Fethard baptism for Edmond, yes? (which is another checkmark for that baptism being the correct one). But I can't see where you got the paternal grandmother's name Mary from?

The lack of any children named Laurence or B. (again, where did you get Bridget from - I only see "B. Hanly" on the marriage record) was one of the two big question marks about that 1850 baptism.

[kob3203]

If Johanna was aged 4 months or older when she was baptized (and we will never be able to find this out) then she was old enough by Canon Law (if 12 was the indeed the minimum age) to be married.

Sorry, but that is simply unrealistic. She would have been baptized within 1-2 days of birth.

I totally agree with you. One other researcher strongly believes that the 1850 baptism is the correct one, but I and a third researcher strongly disagree. I started this thread to try and get independent, unbiased opinion, and I'm delighted with the responses so far !

[Wexflyer]

Paternal grandfather Thomas based on the 20 April 1841 Fethard baptism for Edmond, yes? (which is another checkmark for that baptism being the correct one). But I can't see where you got the paternal grandmother's name Mary from?

The lack of any children named Laurence or B. (again, where did you get Bridget from - I only see "B. Hanly" on the marriage record) was one of the two big question marks about that 1850 baptism.

Sorry, meant second daughter (Ellen).
B. in the baptismal (not marriage) register is clearly Bridget, just as M. would be Mary.

[Wexflyer]

Here is an alternative possibility for Johanna, where
- Her possible parents names are reflected in her children's names
- The location is near Cahir (Clonmel), and
- The date is more reasonable than 1850.
NAME:   Johannam Sweeny
EVENT TYPE:   Baptism
BIRTH DATE:   1843
BAPTISM DATE:   2 Oct 1843
BAPTISM PLACE:   St Mary's, Clonmel
DIOCESE:   Waterford and Lismore
HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS NAME   
Mother - Maria McGrath   
Father - Thoma Sweeny   
Child - Johannam Sweeny   

There may be additional possibilities also...

[kob3203]

That 1843 Clonmel baptism looks very interesting. As mentioned on the other thread I was steeling myself for a trawl through the NLI's online scans of the RC parish 1840-50 baptism registers for Ballylooby, Ardfinnan, Clonmel (St Marys), New Inn, and Bansha  (i.e. the parishes adjacent to Cahir) after having no success (except the highly questionable 1850 one) with the Cahir register for the same period.