Scottish Marriage Procedure 1900

[Lanticbay]

Hi,

I have been studying the SP pdf extract from “Jock Tamson’s bairns: a history of the records
of the General Register Office for Scotland” by Cecil Sinclair (Edinburgh, 2000)

It states that the registration of marriages post 1855 involved the couple obtaining a schedule from the registrar which was completed by the clergyman officiating at the marriage, the various parties then signing the document. No further details of the procedure are given.

I am aware that the modern marriage registration process requires the couple to provide birth certificates before the schedule is issued by the registrar. Could anyone advise if this was also the case around the period 1900? If so, would an illegitimate child have to be married under their birth name and not the one that they may have adopted in later life?

[djct59]

In 1900 around a third of Scots marriages were "irregular" - the subject of Scottish irregular marriage has been covered here many times. While registration was technically compulsory in Scotland from 1855, there are parts of the country where this was taken less seriously, so there are gaps in the early records.

Unlike England, in Scotland your name is the one by which you choose to be known; that need not be the one entered on your birth certificate.

[Elwyn Soutter]

Hi,

I am aware that the modern marriage registration process requires the couple to provide birth certificates before the schedule is issued by the registrar. Could anyone advise if this was also the case around the period 1900? If so, would an illegitimate child have to be married under their birth name and not the one that they may have adopted in later life?

I am pretty certain that no documentation was required at that time. The information was taken on trust. The check on it's truthfulness was that banns were usually posted notifying the public of the impending ceremony, plus there is the opportunity at the service for anyone to object if they know of a good reason. Not foolproof but what society then was content with.

[Lanticbay]

Thanks for your replies. Guess that explains why my ancestor was able to marry under her  "adopted" name rather than the one on her birth record.

Catherine

[Guy Etchells]

In Scotland both regular and irregular marriages were recognised by the law.

There was a type of irregular marriage called "marriage by cohabitation with habit and repute" which could apply to couples who had lived together and were thought to be married

Two other types of irregular marriage also existed
A couple were legally married if they declared themselves to be so in front of witnesses.
A promise of marriage, followed by a sexual relationship, was also regarded as a legal marriage, but proof had to be provided such as a written promise of marriage, or an oath sworn before witnesses.
The above were abolished by the 2006 Act.

A regular church marriage, requiring marriage banns to be read in the church advance, was the usual practice, from 1834 priests and ministers not of the established church could also conduct legal marriage ceremonies. These did not have to take place within a church building and were commonly carried out in the home.

Civil marriages in a register office came in after the Act of Parliament in 1939.

Cheers
Guy

PS In England a persons legal name is the name they are known by the same as in Scotland. The ONLY way to change one’s name in England is by using a new name everything else including deed poll is only proof that a change of name has occurred.

[RJ_Paton]

A couple of minor corrections ...

The Marriage Notice (Scotland) Act 1878 meant that Banns no longer had to be called at church but could be posted at the Registrars Office.

The Marriage (Scotland ) Act 1916 basically "decriminalised" irregular marriages ....  although the system allowed a period of grace to have such marriages registered the burden of proof was on the persons involved and one way (the cheapest) was to be convicted at one of the lesser courts of taking part in a clandestine marriage - the 1916 Act did away with this and streamlined the Registration Process.

The Marriage (Scotland) Act 1939 as well as introducing Civil Marriage also abolished  the form of irregular marriage "by declaration in the presence of witnesses"

Various minor pieces of legislation followed over the years until the form of irregular Marriage known as  Marriage by cohabitation and repute was strangely the only form that survived until the 2000's when it and other forms were finally consigned to history.

[Lanticbay]

Thanks for the additional information. Very interesting, as I am fairly new to all this.

[terianne]

legal adoption didn't come in to affect until the 1920's - up until then adoptions where arranged privately or children where fostered out and raised by others

i have an aunt which was raised by another family, known by her adopted/fostered family's name, but all her certificates where her birth surname and my grandmother appears as her mother on all the certificates too.

it case when the case of a children being raised by the fathers family a court order could get the name changed in favour of the father - I also have such a case where the father of the mother brought a paternity case against the father and the court gave the child to the father & Mother of the father and the child's birth surname was changed to that of the father.

the Scottish system of all official records to be under their birth surname is a good thing, as too is the fact that women don't legally given up the name upon marriage and have the right to choose to take her husband's name. - makes researching the female line easier.

[dowdstree]

To follow on from the last post.

My mother was born in 1918 she was "fostered" and never legally adopted when it became possible in Scotland in 1926, I believe. She used her "foster" surname when growing up.

When she married my father in 1945 her surname on the marriage certificate is given as "foster" surname  formerly "birth" surname.

In 2010 when we registered her death the registrar would only accept her "birth" surname. We had the marriage certificate with us but it made no difference we could not persuade them to record it as on the marriage certificate. Mum would not have liked that !!!

A lot to be said for Legal Adoption from a person's point of view but obviously not for researchers of the future.

Dorrie