Your Thoughts Please

[anne_p]

I hold at least one Scottish marriage certificate where a spouse's info is definitely incorrect.

Can I have your thoughts on another one which has bugged me for quite some time
Here is the 1920 marriage index

Marriage date 7 Sep 1920

BUCHANAN
JULIA
Spouse details
1920
644/3 989
989
Calton (Glasgow)
(All details for bride above are correct)

CRAIG
THOMAS
Spouse details
1920
644/3 989
989
Calton (Glasgow)

Both bride and groom lived at the same address at time of marriage

Firstly, the marriage cert simply says: T. Craig age 21yrs ( where did "Thomas" on the index come from?)
Father's name  Thomas Craig ( Stableman)
Mother's name Elizabeth Craig Ms Black ( Deceased)

I could find no trace of T Craig or his parents nor could I locate any Craig children born to the 1920 marriage.

I then located the death certificate for the bride who died in 1977
One husband only is listed
Her last name was Carey. Husband's first name was Peter.

Using this new info, on my next GRO visit, I looked for births in the name of Carey.
I found 2. The first birth was 1925

Both show father's name as Peter Carey and  BOTH are annotated with the parents marriage date of 7 Sep 1920 Glasgow.

I found the death of Peter Carey.
His father's name given as Peter Carey ( Stableman, Deceased)
His mother's name was Elizabeth Carey Ms Black (Deceased)

How does T Craig, son of Thomas Craig ( stableman) become Peter Carey, son of Peter Carey ( stableman)?
Is there an error on the MC?

No place of birth is found for this Peter Carey BC 1899.
I have looked at ALL Scottish births in the correct time period and none had a mother named Elizabeth Black.

[ev]

Hi ,

Wonder if this will help ?

From the 1911 Census index -
East Kilbride Lanark 643/ 4/ 2
Peter Carey 40
Elizabeth Carey 42
Richard Carey 18
Peter Carey 14
James Carey 10

There is a death for a James Carey age 74 in 1974 Barrhead Renfrew(shire) , mother's maiden surname Black.



ev

[Forfarian]

Hmmmm.

I know that the couple had to fill out a Marriage Schedule with all relevant information, and I have been told that when the certificate has only an initial the full name can still be indexed because the full name is on the Schedule.

Also that the Registrar had to make a duplicate copy of the Register. One copy was sent on to Edinburgh and the other was retained by the Registrar.

This looks to me like an error by the Registrar. Not sure how to verify it however.

[Gadget]

I was intrigued so had a look at the cert.

I see it was by Declaration and Sheriff Substitute's Warrent issued.  I've only once had one of these for a distant relative so don't know much about them and wonder  if the process might be subject to more errors than other forms of marriage.

Gadget

[anne_p]

Thank you to all who replied.
Due to the mother's name being the same on both the 1920 MC and on Peter's DC, I came to the conclusion that there was an error on the 1920 MC

EV,
Re the 1911 census in EK
I found that same family  in Barrhead at 1901 but, I was still unsure if this was the correct Carey family

I obtained the birth cert for the youngest son named as James Carey born 1900

Parents were: Peter Carey and Elizabeth Black who married in Shotts, Lanarkshire in 1891.
Unsurprisingly, I cant find the stated marriage or births of Richard and Peter!

--------------------

My other anomaly MC relates to my ggg grandfather who remarried in 1860.
Correct details are entered for my ancestral grandfather. ( widower, address and parents)
All subsequent children born to his 2nd marriage  show the same marriage date ( in  Glasgow) and name the same mother.

The MC doesn't make sense.
The spouse named on the cert ( first and last names) is completely different to his known wife, mother of his children.

The only thing that sort of matches is mother's maiden name for the bride listed on the cert
THIS is the exact name of my ancestor's 2nd wife and corresponds  to the mother listed on the subsequent birth certs?

The biggest issue:
The MC states they married under the form of The Free Church Of Scotland ?

I do not believe  that they had a Free Church Marriage
This family was Irish Catholic!

1st marriage and all children born from both were RC and all had RC marriages.
They are all buried in RC cemeteries?

Parent info on death cert of this 2nd wife bears no resemblance to those listed on the 1860 MC.
(Yes, her mother's maiden details differ from the 1860 MC)


I am 100% convinced that the registrar was having a very bad day when he filled out this 1860 MC

[RJ_Paton]

I was intrigued so had a look at the cert.

I see it was by Declaration and Sheriff Substitute's Warrent issued.  I've only once had one of these for a distant relative so don't know much about them and wonder  if the process might be subject to more errors than other forms of marriage.

Gadget

Basically a declaration before witnesses that from that time forward they were considered man and wife - the couple then had 90 days to provide "proof" to a Sheriff that this event had in fact taken place and he would provide a warrant "In Declarator" in respect of the "crime" committed (irregular marriages were technically a crime). The Declaration by the Sheriff was then taken to the Registrar and the irregular marriage was formalised. Later on this process was in itself formalised and the declarations were often made in the presence of a Solicitor (in their offices) to make the provision of proof much easier.

Plenty of scope for errors to creep in.

I wonder if Peter was already married and adopted the persona of "Thomas" and later as circumstances changed - possibly the death of first wife - he returned to his real name.

[Gadget]

Thanks for the description of the process, Falkyrn.

I was wondering if Craig was a poor interpretation of Carey  - a similar form if the handwriting was 'iffy'. 

Gadget

[anne_p]

When I first saw the 1920 Marriage cert, I too thought that T Craig was a poor interpretation of
P Carey.

However, it does not explain why the father's name would be entered as Thomas Craig.

I doubt if I could ever prove that this document contains errors but, I do believe that errors occurred far more frequently than we think