Giovanni Battista - St Mary's RC marriage

[battista]

The priest who baptised their baby thought they were married. They might have let him assume it.
Were either of godparents or marriage witnesses relatives?
Marriages traditionally happened in the bride's parish, but that could have been wherever she was living or said she was living at the time.

I can't read the last two lines of that baptism. "a me [illegible] Patrinus fuit [illegible] Matrina fuit [illegible]" So I'm unsure who the godparents were, it doesn't look like the last name Gray, Simmons or Lawson though, all of which were members of the mothers family. I might recognise the names if they are members of the fathers family.

Elizabeth Lawson's birth record is here: https://i.imgur.com/DjZU7oD.png

She's born in Sunderland and is still living there in the 1861 and 1871 censuses. 1861 census the address is 23 Northumberland Place, East Sunderland, which doesn't appear to exist now. The only record I could find is someone else who also had a relative living on that street (http://www.northeastforum.co.uk/durham-news-and-discussions-3/northumberland-place-sunderland/).

In 1871 she's living in 28 Robinsons Lane as a general servant, in a lodging house. Doesn't appear that either of those places exists anymore, so I'm not entirely sure how far away they are from St Mary's.

[alpinecottage]

]

I can't read the last two lines of that baptism. "a me [illegible] Patrinus fuit [illegible] Matrina fuit [illegible]" So I'm unsure who the godparents were, it doesn't look like the last name Gray, Simmons or Lawson though, all of which were members of the mothers family. I might recognise the names if they are members of the fathers family.

[/quote]


The godparents' names are Dominic Rossi and Jane Hurley, I think. 
The previous line reads Thos Wilem (or similar) but it's the priest or curate who did the baptism.

[heywood]

I am hoping I have followed this properly.

It looks, to me, that Giovanni was already married so Elizabeth assumed Giovanni’s surname.

When the civil marriage took place either he knew he was widowed or assumed he was or just lied. Maybe that was why they didn’t marry in church.

[River Tyne Lass]

https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=793871.270

I was able to look up the baptism of first child on this thread.  Mother's maiden name given as Simmons.

See Post 272.

[battista]

https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=793871.270

I was able to look up the baptism of first child on this thread.  Mother's maiden name given as Simmons.

See Post 272.

Hey RTL,

The actual baptismal record is in my original post

If they were married in an RC church, I believe it would be St Mary's Church (Bridge Street), as their first child Pasqualino was baptised there in 1878 (https://i.imgur.com/jRN3oyv.png).

[battista]

I am hoping I have followed this properly.

It looks, to me, that Giovanni was already married so Elizabeth assumed Giovanni’s surname.

When the civil marriage took place either he knew he was widowed or assumed he was or just lied. Maybe that was why they didn’t marry in church.

Yes, that's certainly possible and is my default assumption. However, I do want to rule out (or in) that there's an earlier RC marriage record for the couple. What I'll likely do (if possible) is use the TW archive research service, ask them to search 1874 - 1878 for a marriage in St Mary's. In the meantime, look for Giovanni's previous wife.

[River Tyne Lass]

https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=793871.378

Oh dear, I did not know that.  I presume it will be on a link.  I can't open links on my Kindle.

I presume you managed to obtain this from the archives, as mentioned on other thread?

[battista]

https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=793871.378

Oh dear, I did not know that.  I presume it will be on a link.  I can't open links on my Kindle.

I presume you managed to obtain this from the archives, as mentioned on other thread?

Yes, I obtained it from the archives. I have a few other images I obtained as well, which I plan to post about tomorrow (I've got to get to bed).

[heywood]

I wonder why they chose to marry in a civil ceremony in 1885?
There is something about ‘presumption of death’ after 7 years which would fit here and avoid bigamy.
I suppose after children, they might not want a religious service.

My grandparents had their first child in 1903 but did not marry until 1940s - until the first spouse died. As they lived close to each other, their circumstances would be known.