"Why consent with parents" TUCKER & VARCOE?

[KGarrad]

Curious, isn't it?

Thanks for your examples.  I'm sure that I do have the right baptisms for this couple now.

A very strange practice by the vicar though.

Not strange at all
Until Hardwick's Marriage Act of 1753, marriages were recorded in longhand with just the names of the bride & groom.

The 1753 Act, amongst other changes, introduced printed Marriage Registers.
Many of these registers included the (printed) words "with the consent of ", and there was confusion as to whether this should be crossed out, or completed by adding "parents", "friends" or some such wording.

[fisherj]

Thank you for explaining - there's always something new (for me) to learn.

[Maiden Stone]

Thank you for explaining - there's always something new (for me) to learn.

You're not the only one. I learn something on here most days.

[stanmapstone]

Not strange at all
Until Hardwick's Marriage Act of 1753, marriages were recorded in longhand with just the names of the bride & groom.

The 1753 Act, amongst other changes, introduced printed Marriage Registers.
Many of these registers included the (printed) words "with the consent of ", and there was confusion as to whether this should be crossed out, or completed by adding "parents", "friends" or some such wording.

I would have thought that there would be no confusion after 64 years, as my reply #4 shows 

Stan