Two marriages -- why?

[queencorgi1]

On 23 November 1916 Trevor Southgate married Vera Coysh at St George's, Hanover Square. They were 20 and 19 respectively but gave their ages as 22 and 21. The marriage was by special licence and the witnesses appear to have been fellow trainee RFC pilots known to the groom.
On 18 January 1917 the same couple got married again, this time at St Andrew's, Westminster, with banns and witnessed by the groom's grandfather and the bride's father.
My question is, why bother? Presumably the first time they thought they wouldn't get consent from one family or the other, but once married, they were married -- or would the fact that they lied about their ages make a difference, because they should have had their father/older relative consent?
I have come across a number of other underage marriages before but never a remarriage of this kind. Thoughts would be much appreciated. Best wishes for a BETTER new year to all RootsChat users.

[markheal]

On 23 November 1916 Trevor Southgate married Vera Coysh at St George's, Hanover Square. They were 20 and 19 respectively but gave their ages as 22 and 21. The marriage was by special licence and the witnesses appear to have been fellow trainee RFC pilots known to the groom.
On 18 January 1917 the same couple got married again, this time at St Andrew's, Westminster, with banns and witnessed by the groom's grandfather and the bride's father.
My question is, why bother? Presumably the first time they thought they wouldn't get consent from one family or the other, but once married, they were married -- or would the fact that they lied about their ages make a difference, because they should have had their father/older relative consent?
I have come across a number of other underage marriages before but never a remarriage of this kind. Thoughts would be much appreciated. Best wishes for a BETTER new year to all RootsChat users.

I understand that soldiers needed the consent of their Commanding Officer BEFORE marriage, otherwise the wife would not be recognised.
I have this event of two marriages of the same couple, before and after returning to barracks.

 

[queencorgi1]

Hi Markheal, thanks for that -- I had forgotten about that and I think you're correct. Although it would be much appreciated if anyone can confirm that this definitely applied to officers?

[markheal]

Queens Regulation from stanmapstone.
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=619030.msg4676327#msg4676327

[queencorgi1]

Hi Mark, that was a great thread, thanks for linking me to it! Yes, the CO's reaction may well have been the problem.

On a different but related topic, I do notice that a very large number of couples from all over the country came to get married in St George's, Hanover Square -- any idea why, anyone?

[markheal]

St George's, Hanover Square,
It was clearly the place to be seen at marriages by so many of the wealthy of the Victorian era.  [I have go fed up with typing it in full onto my tree!]

1850-1900
158807 BIRTHS
139737 MARRIAGES
This may make it one of the largest the Registration Districts in E and W.

Much poverty behind the large houses of the wealthy.
https://www.stgeorgeshanoversquare.org/history/the-parish.html
 "for nine months of the year we have scarcely any residents of the upper classes"
https://www.stgeorgeshanoversquare.org/history.html

[BumbleB]

Could the reason for so many marriages of couples from other parts of the UK be due to the fact that the rich usually employed servants from other regions.  I was told some years ago, that the wealthy employed "outsiders" so that they couldn't "run home" if things got rough! 

[queencorgi1]

Hi Bumble, no, these were genuinely people who lived and worked elsewhere, but for some reason chose to make the journey to London for marriage. I couldn't help wondering if the vicar offered a cut-price deal? Also, yes, at the same time Mark is correct -- it was a prestigious location for marriage for the rich as well, I've found those cases too.

[BumbleB]

It was only a thought!