Author Topic: 1826 Marriage: Evidence of age: COMPLETE  (Read 2807 times)

Offline brynsmum

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 93
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
1826 Marriage: Evidence of age: COMPLETE
« on: Sunday 06 February 11 20:42 GMT (UK) »
Hello
My 3xggp's married  in 1826 at All Saints, West Ham....
What evidence of age would have been required at that time period - if any?

Would evidence have been required by law, or ecclesiastic law or would it have been 'negotiable' by whover conducted the service?

If they married by licence, would  what evidence was supplied be recorded on the licence? It's just that I am having real difficulty locating her baptism although I know where she was born.

Thanks for any help/advice offered
June
Ps I've also submitted this post in Essex but received no replies as yet

Offline stanmapstone

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 25,798
    • View Profile
Re: 1826 Marriage: Evidence of age
« Reply #1 on: Sunday 06 February 11 21:08 GMT (UK) »
To put it simply, no evidence of age was required. The legal age for marriage was 12 for a girl. Lord Hardwicke's 1753 Marriage Act, made it illegal for those in England under the age of 21 to get married without the consent of their parents or guardians. However marriages of minors without consent after banns were valid, unless the banns had been forbidden by parents or guardians openly and publicly in church at the time of publication.
In an application for the licence  it was sworn, usually by the groom, that there was no lawful impediment to the marriage, such as being under the age of 21.

A visit to the clergyman issuing the licence resulted in three documents, an allegation or affidavit, a marriage bond and the licence.
I have posted examples of a Bond, Affidavit, and Licence at http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,438148.msg3016813.html#msg3016813

Stan
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline brynsmum

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 93
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1826 Marriage: Evidence of age
« Reply #2 on: Sunday 06 February 11 21:37 GMT (UK) »

Thanks Stan for taking the trouble to reply.

Best wishes June

Offline stanmapstone

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 25,798
    • View Profile
Re: 1826 Marriage: Evidence of age
« Reply #3 on: Sunday 06 February 11 21:50 GMT (UK) »
Just to add that by Hardicke's 1753 Marriage Act, all marriages solemnized by licence, where either of the parties, not being a widow or widower, was under the age of 21 years, without the consent therein required, were rendered absolutely null and void.

Stan
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Offline Guy Etchells

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,632
    • View Profile
Re: 1826 Marriage: Evidence of age
« Reply #4 on: Sunday 06 February 11 22:41 GMT (UK) »
However the consent requirement was repealed in 1823.
Cheers
Guy
http://anguline.co.uk/Framland/index.htm   The site that gives you facts not promises!
http://burial-inscriptions.co.uk Tombstones & Monumental Inscriptions.

As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.

Offline brynsmum

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 93
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1826 Marriage: Evidence of age
« Reply #5 on: Sunday 06 February 11 23:25 GMT (UK) »
Thank you both for the extra details
June

Offline stanmapstone

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 25,798
    • View Profile
Re: 1826 Marriage: Evidence of age
« Reply #6 on: Monday 07 February 11 09:09 GMT (UK) »
However the consent requirement was repealed in 1823.
Cheers
Guy


The wording of the Act is; Section 14 (XIV)
and where either of the Parties, not being a Widower or Widow shall be under the Age of Twenty one Years, that the Consent of the Person or Persons whose Consent to such Marriage is required under the Provisions of this Act has been obtained thereto : Provided always, that if there shall he no such Person or Persons having Authority to give such Consent, then upon Oath made to that Effect by the Party requiring such Licence, it shall be lawful to grant such Licence notwithstanding the Want of any such Consent. http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~framland/acts/alm1823.htm

So  from the 1st November, 1823, under the  Act, the want of consent did not affect the validity of a marriage after celebration. The consent required was only directory, and the marriage was not rendered void if solemnised without consent, and it was not an impediment where there was no person having authority to consent. However as a general rule the consent of parents or guardians was required for the marriage of any person, not being a widow or widower, under 21 years of age.

Stan

Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline brynsmum

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 93
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1826 Marriage: Evidence of age
« Reply #7 on: Monday 07 February 11 10:42 GMT (UK) »

Thanks again Stan.

I'm fairly new to RootsChat, but so far I'm impressed....

June

Offline Guy Etchells

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,632
    • View Profile
Re: 1826 Marriage: Evidence of age
« Reply #8 on: Monday 07 February 11 19:36 GMT (UK) »


The wording of the Act is; Section 14 (XIV)
and where either of the Parties, not being a Widower or Widow shall be under the Age of Twenty one Years, that the Consent of the Person or Persons whose Consent to such Marriage is required under the Provisions of this Act has been obtained thereto : Provided always, that if there shall he no such Person or Persons having Authority to give such Consent, then upon Oath made to that Effect by the Party requiring such Licence, it shall be lawful to grant such Licence notwithstanding the Want of any such Consent. http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~framland/acts/alm1823.htm

So  from the 1st November, 1823, under the  Act, the want of consent did not affect the validity of a marriage after celebration. The consent required was only directory, and the marriage was not rendered void if solemnised without consent, and it was not an impediment where there was no person having authority to consent. However as a general rule the consent of parents or guardians was required for the marriage of any person, not being a widow or widower, under 21 years of age.

Stan



Thanks for plugging my website Stan.

If you take the Act as a whole and also remember it is in itself amending the earlier Act [26th March 1823.] you will see consent was not required.
Yes consent was advisable but the marriage without consent was valid.

See-
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~framland/acts/rcm1823.htm
section II-
"...Provided always, that no Marriage solemnized under any Licence granted in the Form and Manner prescribed by either of the said recited Acts, shall be deemed invalid on account of Want of Consent of any Parent or Guardian."

The above must be read in conjunction with the later Act of [18th July 1823]
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~framland/acts/alm1823.htm

"VIII. Provided always, and be it enacted by the Authority aforesaid, no Parson, Minister, Vicar or Curate, solemnizing Marriages after the First Day of November next, between Persons both or one of whom shall be under the Age of Twenty one Years, after Banns published, shall be punishable by Ecclesiastical Censures for solemnizing such Marriages without Consent of Parents or Guardians, unless such Parson, Minister, Vicar or Curate shall have Notice of the Dissent of such Parents or Guardians; and in case such Parents or Guardians, or one of them, shall openly and publicly declare or cause to be declared, in the Church or Chapel where the Banns shall be so published, at the Time of such Publication, his, her or their Dissent to such Marriage, such Publication of Banns shall be absolutely void."

This shows that it is only if the dissent is declared publically that the marriage be void. It does not mean consent has to be given but rather no dissent be declared.

Later in the same Act this view is reinforced by section XXII, which being a long section I will only paste sections here.
"XXIII. And be it further enacted, That if any valid Marriage solemnized by Licence shall...
...such Party knowing that such Person as aforesaid under the Age of Twenty one Years had a Parent or Guardian then living, and that such Marriage was had without the Consent of such Parent or Guardian, ...
...it shall be lawful for the said Court to settle and secure such Property, or any Part thereof, immediately for the Benefit of the Issue of the Marriage, subject to such Provisions for the offending Parties, by Way of Maintenance or otherwise as the said Court, under the particular Circum­stances of the Case, shall think reasonable..."

In other words the married couple remain married but any benefit of the marriage is passed to any issue of the marriage.

The marriage is still a lawful marriage and is neither void nor voidable for want of consent.
Cheers
Guy
http://anguline.co.uk/Framland/index.htm   The site that gives you facts not promises!
http://burial-inscriptions.co.uk Tombstones & Monumental Inscriptions.

As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.