• Welcome to this forum . We are a worldwide group with a common interest in Birmingham and its history. While here, please follow a few simple rules. We ask that you respect other members, thank those who have helped you and please keep your contributions on-topic with the thread.

    We do hope you enjoy your visit. BHF Admin Team

legal/illegal marriages

D

dipseydiva

knowlegable brummie
Hi, could I have your advice/comments on this puzzle I have come across in my research. I have an ancestor who married in 1782/1793/1800, his three wives all had the same surname and they all came from the same small village. The first two marriages were at that village and the resulting children were all baptized there. The third marriage took place some 50 miles away although they returned home to the village where they had four children, I can find no record of any of these children being baptized although they were all married in the village.

I thought that it wasn't allowed to marry your dead wifes sister so I wondered if the second marriage was frowned upon but allowed, but when he wanted to marry the third sister that was a step too far, hence the 50 mile journey. However the resulting children were refused baptism.

I realize I have a lot more research to do but I wonder what you think of this as a theory
 
No sure of the present law but you could not marry your wife's sister because she is your sister-in-law. I believe a former lord of the manor of Harborne married three sisters in succession but he had to go abroad to Europe to do so. The children would therefore have been regarded as illegitimate but I don't know if that would have been a bar to baptism.
 
My great, great grandfather married his sister-in-law after his wife died - marriages were 1874 and 1890. He seemed to have got away with it by marrying in a completely different part of London; at least he said that he was a widower!

The following link details the forbidden marriages from 16th century until 1960s, giving clear tables of what was not allowed and how this changed as the result of various Marriage Acts:
https://www.genetic-genealogy.co.uk/Toc115570145.html
 
Hi, thanks for those replies, as sistersue61 says that is a very interesting link. I wonder just how common it was to break those laws when remarrying ?
 
I guess that it was quite easy to flout the 'realationship' laws as long as you married in a parish where the vicar didn't know any history. I have found two cases in my reserach of men marrying their sister-in-law - and there are probably more obscure 'no-no' that I haven't identified.
I'm not sure when you started having to prove who you were etc. Certainly, for baptisms and births there was little or no checking and the vicar and regsitrar just seemed to accept they was told - as I discovered with some birth registrations where the 'father' that is named had died ten years earlier!
 
dipseydiva said:
Hi, could I have your advice/comments on this puzzle I have come across in my research. I have an ancestor who married in 1782/1793/1800, his three wives all had the same surname and they all came from the same small village. The first two marriages were at that village and the resulting children were all baptized there. The third marriage took place some 50 miles away although they returned home to the village where they had four children, I can find no record of any of these children being baptized although they were all married in the village.

I thought that it wasn't allowed to marry your dead wifes sister so I wondered if the second marriage was frowned upon but allowed, but when he wanted to marry the third sister that was a step too far, hence the 50 mile journey. However the resulting children were refused baptism.

I realize I have a lot more research to do but I wonder what you think of this as a theory
Click to expand...

In the UK it was illegal to marry your dead wife's sister until 1907 when the Deceased Wife's Sister's Marriage Act was passed.
Until this time canon law had prevailed.
However, if a wife died and she had a sister who was unmarried then the spinster would move in and look after the Children.
Obviously in the late 19th Century a man and a woman living out of wedlock gave rise to concern for many within the community, so the law was passed in 1907 to ensure that standards could be 'maintained'.
It was not until 1921 that the Deceased Brother's Widow's Act was passed.

New laws state that as his wife sister is not a blood relative he would be able to marry his sister in-law. ( see Wikipedia )
If a partner has died or a couple have divorced then the in-law becomes an ex-law.
Besides they are not blood related.

Although his wives shared the same name -Are they sisters or cousins ?
Do their christening records show the same parents ?
As for the 3rd Wife, Brides usually marry in their own parish rather than the groom parish.
Once married they usually return to live in the grooms parish.
It is not uncommon for children to be christened in the Brides parish.

Have you viewed the original Parish records rather online records . The latter children refused Baptism is that a fact or theory ?

I am intrigued by your quest. If I can be of any assistance please send me a personal message with details.

Bo-Ja-Lu
 
Last edited:
I am not sure myself of all the legalities, but it may not have been entirely illegal to marry your dead wife's sister, as Matthew Boulton did so. He married Mary Robinson of Whittington, nr Lichfield in 1749 but she died and he then married her sister, Anne. He did, however have to go to St Mary's Rotherhythe, to do it. If it has been technically illegal, surely he would have been prosecuted? Their children were baptised, too. Perhaps it was only illegal in Canon Law?
 
I didn't realise it was illegal until 1907. Very odd as its seems to have been quite common. I have two ancestors who married their their dead wives sisters, had oodles of children all of whom seem to have been baptized/christened. They were both non comformists, it seems in more ways than one.

Does anyone know any more about this state of affairs?
 
Henry VIII married his brother's widow, Catherine of Aragon, but had to get a special dispensation from the Pope. This is one of the reasons that a later Pope refused him a divorce or annulment as he could not claim the marriage was invalid if he had been given the dispensation to marry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top