Marriage document 1794 Licence

[mogridge]

Hi

Can anyone help me with a marriage document that i have. The marriage is between Isaac Burn and Elizabeth Ruddock.

It reads :-

Know all Men by these presents, that we Isaac Burn of Stamford Bridge in the County of York Farmer and Thomas Ruddock of Falsgrave in the said county Horsedealer
are bound firmly obliged to the right worshipful ROBERT SINCLAIR, Master of Arts, Commissary or Official of the Peculiar and Spiritual ?jurisdiction of the Deanry, of the
Cathedral and Metropolitical Church of St Peter of York, lawfully Authorized in the sum of two hundred pounds of good and lawful money of Great-Britain, to be paid to
him the said Robert Sinclair, master of arts, or to his Executors, Administrators, successors and assigns, for the payment whereof well and truly to be made, we oblige
ourselves, and each of us by ourselves, for the Whole, and the full, our Heirs, Executors and administrators, firmly by these presents, sealed with our ??. Given the
Fifth Day of the Month of August in the year of our Lord God. One Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety Four.

The Condition of this Obligation is such; That if the above- bounden Isaac Burn and Elizabeth Ruddock spinster now Licenced to be married together, be neither of Consanguinity
or affinity the one to the other, within the Degrees prohibited for Marriage: If also there be no other Lett, Impediment, or lawful Cause whatsoever, but that they may be
lawfully married together, both by the laws of god and this land: (so on so)


Why would a sum of Two Hundred Pound be paid to Robert Sinclair?

Many thanks
Frances

[Ruskie]

Is it a dowry? Is Robert Sinclair some kind of legal eagle or middle man doing the deal? I take it Thomas Ruddock is Elizabeth's father?

I really have no clue, but I'm interested to know the true meaning. 

[stanmapstone]

It is a Marriage Bond which was was a promise by two people, that they would pay the Church a substantial sum of money if the marriage proved invalid in the eyes of God and the law, obviously if the marriage did not take place the bond was irrelevant. Such bonds became compulsory from 1579, although not all dioceses asked for them. They were no longer required after the Marriage Act of 1823. A visit to the clergyman issuing a Marriage licence resulted in three documents, an allegation or affidavit, a marriage bond and the licence.
See See http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,438148.msg3016813.html#msg3016813
Stan

[Ruskie]

I've never seen a marriage bond before.  I suppose this was a big incentive to 'make it work' - £200 was a lot of money. Was this always the amount for the bond or did it vary? I imagine many folks would not be able to afford this if compelled to pay it ...

[stanmapstone]

Bonds were a very common legal device. By entering into a bond a person would agree for instance that a statement was true, in this case that there was no "lawful let or impediment" to the proposed marriage. If this was not the case  a penalty was due to the church official concerned. By the late 18th Century the penalty was £200. I would expect that they would not have to prove they had the money.  According to various books some second Bondsman were usualy a legal fiction, "John Doe" having offered more collateral than anyone else.

Stan

[Ruskie]

So if it was discovered that there was an impediment to a marriage, how would they ever extract the sum of £200 from a poor ag lab for example?

[mogridge]

Thanks for your help Thomas Ruddock was Elizabeth's brother with both parents dead I suppose she was a financial burden to him anyway. God only knows how they would have paid the fine. Still they had Nine children and I am here today to tell the tale. Many thanks for your help.
Frances

[Treetotal]

How interesting...Thanks for sharing that Frances...I never seen the contents of a Mariage Bond before or even knew of their existence until reading this...Thanks yourself and to Stanmapstone I am a lot wiser
Carol

[stanmapstone]

So if it was discovered that there was an impediment to a marriage, how would they ever extract the sum of £200 from a poor ag lab for example?

The practice of the church regarding the issue of marriage licences was codified in canons 101 to 103 of 1604, which required that such licences should only be granted 'upon good caution and security taken' .
I assume a bond  was mainly to deter frivolous applications for a licence, and would rarely have to be paid.
Stan