Marriage Lookup: 1826

[Rosinish]

Of course, with Forfarian's thought, her DC might not help either?

It may be worth looking for it (I haven't done a search) as often wording can be the clincher?

Was there not a difference in their occ. titles too, may not seem much but a big difference, Lieutenant & Officer?



Annie

[Rosinish]

Forfarian, would it be possible for him to legally settle anything to an estranged wife without this being memorialised in probate documentation?

Anything settled prior to him writing his will wouldn't need to be added to his will?

I think Forfarian was only showing a possibility.

I would tend to think they were 2 different people but I can see the dilemma, not having an 'other' marriage although your chap does seem to have been single i.e. never married.

Annie

[Rosinish]

It's the difference in occ. title which had me wondering if they were 2 different people but...

The more I think on it, the surname Bayley isn't too common in Scotland against Bailey & the strange coincidence of both your David & the Mary being alone in 1841 with no wife/husband does lean towards them having been estranged husband & wife.

Another coincidence, the fact there had been no child(ren) with either in 1841 & no child(ren) mentioned in the will!

It's actually very difficult to narrow down as definite.

Annie

[Forfarian]

Forfarian, would it be possible for him to legally settle anything to an estranged wife without this being memorialised in probate documentation? I’m not so sure. I’m just not convinced it’s the same person.

I don't see why not.

If he made an arrangement with her there might have been some legal documentation to back it up and prevent her claiming on his estate after his death.

Probate deals only with the contents of a will, not with anything that went before it.

[Forfarian]

Was there not a difference in their occ. titles too, may not seem much but a big difference, Lieutenant & Officer?

A lieutenant is an officer.

[Jayson]

Having looked through some papers I had completely forgotten about it would appear that there are two individuals in the RN at roughly the same date so therefore the Edward Bayley marrying Mary Arnot is NOT my ancestor but a completely different person. I had my suspicions and this has been confirmed by information provided earlier in this thread by GR2.

My Edward Bayley appears in the 1811 Navy List, where officers of Royal Marines are listed and was appointed as 1st Lieutenant RM on 24 March 1807. He served in Company 26 and was on the Hamadryad in 1811. He was also included in other Navy Lists between 1811 and 1830 where he is listed as on Half Pay, so not serving aboard a vessel. He ended active service 1st September 1814 and put on Reserved Half Pay as evidenced by a document headed ‘First Lieutenants reduced on the Peace Establishment’ as a result of the Napoleonic wars ending in victory. Waterloo was a year ahead but was a final flourish when Napoleon escaped but this was a necessary reduction. A Navy of 140,000 men was no longer required and was reduced to about 14,000, and so the Royal Marines reduced proportionately.

Thanks once again for all your help.