View Single Post
  #4  
Old 15-01-11, 08:13
Merry's Avatar
Merry Merry is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 21,344
Default

lol Sarah! Your comment made me thinlk of other possible alternative wordings! I must look at the other ones I have to see if they read differently - I think I only have four in total though.

Julie, the version above was what was given to the married couple and this doc is not the legally binding version. The legal version held in the Quaker official records would have been similar (the general wording varied over the years) but significantly shorter and without all the witnesses (just the recognised two when that was what the law required) and , yes, Quaker marriages are legally binding, though I'm not 100% sure when the Government actually made that law - presumably some time after the Quakers started performing their ceremonies which was in the 1650s (The Society of Friends was formed 1653), but the earliest Quaker marriage in my tree is just before 1700. Quakers were given the right to conduct their own marriages alongside the C of E because they proved they kept accurate records of their membership and events.


Since civil registration began in 1837 in Eng/Wales if you buy I copy of a Quaker marriage cert from the reg office/GRO it will have the same format as any other marriage cert and that is the legally binding document, but even today the bride and groom will be given a non-legal document to keep with all the witnesses signed (the legal copy being the standard style) with similar wording to the above certificate.
__________________
Merry

"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
Reply With Quote