Author Topic: Age of consent for marriage at St Marks Church, Portadown in 1891  (Read 2454 times)

Offline Jmama

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 108
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Age of consent for marriage at St Marks Church, Portadown in 1891
« on: Friday 28 June 13 18:55 BST (UK) »
I have a relative that is listed as  full age for marriage in 1891. Her birth year is 1875(16 years). Is this what is normal and what was considered as a minor's age for marriage at that time? I have another relative that is listed as a minor on her marriage certificate and her birth year would make her 13.
Can you tell me what the guidelines or rules for appropriate age for marriage  was at that time?
It's hard to tell if it was legal or if the parties in question have told a little white lie.

Offline Elwyn Soutter

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,525
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Age of consent for marriage at St Marks Church, Portadown in 1891
« Reply #1 on: Friday 28 June 13 20:39 BST (UK) »
You were a minor until age 21 at that time. I don’t think there was a statutory minimum age for marrying in Ireland (England was different as a result of Hardwicke’s Marriage Act) but in general marriages under 18 in Ireland were pretty rare.

The age discrepancies that you have identified tend to come from census and death certificate information where the ages are routinely out by anything up to 10 years. Few people celebrated birthdays in Ireland in the 1800s, many had no birth or baptismal certificates and so didn’t always know their own ages accurately. I dare say they did lie about their ages sometimes but in general most neither knew their age all that accurately nor cared.


Alexander Irvine was born in 1863 in Antrim town and became a Minister living in the US. This extract from his book “The Chimney Corner revisited” perhaps explains why people often had to guess their age:

“My mother kept a mental record of the twelve births. None of us ever knew, or cared to know, when we were born. When I heard of anybody in the more fortunate class celebrating a birthday I considered it a foolish imitation of the Queen’s birthday, which rankled in our little minds with 25th December or 12th July. In manhood there were times when I had to prove I was born somewhere, somewhen, and then it was that I discovered that I also had a birthday. The clerk of the parish informed me.”
Elwyn

Offline Jmama

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 108
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Age of consent for marriage at St Marks Church, Portadown in 1891
« Reply #2 on: Saturday 29 June 13 15:35 BST (UK) »
Dear Elwyn,
Thank you for your insight on this marriage subject. It does make sense and I know what you mean about discrepancies in the census records. My relative that married assumably age 13 has a death record that matches her age in her census years as well.
I do have another relative that enlisted in the Royal Irish Fusillers and was discharged 4 mos later for a false answer on his attestment papers. His birth date given 1874 yet I had a baptism of 1869. I take it he wouldn't have been discharged for an error in his reported age? I don't know what the reason for the discharge was and wondered if their would be a record of the reason kept in the archives. I have his attestment papers but there isn't any indication as to what the reason was. I have not found anything on this man since. His name is James Henry Lynas born JUN 14, 1869 to David Lynas and Elizabeth Black. Any thoughts on this one?

Offline Elwyn Soutter

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,525
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Age of consent for marriage at St Marks Church, Portadown in 1891
« Reply #3 on: Saturday 29 June 13 15:46 BST (UK) »
There are certainly plenty of cases over the years where people lied about their age in order to join up. Usually they claimed to be older than they really were, in order to meet the minimum age requirement. In your case James seems to have reduced his age by 5 years. Is that correct? I wonder why.

I am not quite sure what the army’s line was if they discovered an age discrepancy. I have a feeling that if they needed recruits and you were fitting in well, they often tended to turn a blind eye. Of course if you weren’t fitting in well, then a lie on the application form could be a good excuse to discharge someone. I don’t know enough about military records to say what may exist in this case and whether it will contain the reason for his discharge. Perhaps any military expert reading this can help?
Elwyn