Men in Carmarthen not marrying their partners in the 19th century puzzle

[roycymru]

Hi

Maybe of no relevance at all, but is there a possibility that, at least for one of them, there was a previous marriage I.e. they were already married to someone else, preventing a second bigamous marriage. I do have an instance in my tree of someone marrying but then not living with their wife but going on to have several illegitimate children with his mistress. For any children born after 1837/38 have you also checked the GRO for their birth entries to see if they are listed as illegitimate (mother’s maiden name will be “-“). I presume you have also searched under surname Hugh or similar for any relevant records as Hughes and Hugh are often interchangeable in records.

[Caliandris]

Hi there,
Thank you for your suggestion. I have been unable to find a marriage for any of the three brothers, and more than that, they all declare themselves to be single when they fill in the census. In the case of my direct ancestor Maria Elizabeth, she was registered as Jones in 1839, which is her mother's maiden name, although she was baptized as Hughes and named as Hughes on all of the censuses from 1841. I can only find her brother Charles Henry on the GRO index, who was also registered as Jones.

I cannot find the other children on the index, Henry because he was born in 1836 (I have his baptism, and he was baptized Henry Hughes) and I think they would all have been registered as Jones, as they definitely never married. I'm still waiting for someone to come up with an explanation for why a middle-class, respectable family would have behaved this way.

[mrs.family]

I'm afraid I have no insights - but this is a fascinating puzzle!