View Full Version : Aaaaagh! Condition at marriage question.
Not needed for BK6. The people in post #7 don't seem to be connected when traced back.
I am trying to untangle one of my very difficult families. For every knot I untie, I seem to tie another knot, or two!
Last night I looked at 372 pages of unindexed PRs for St George Bloomsbury on Ancestry and so my head is a bit fuddled!
Anyway, can someone tell me why, when I look at the marriage entries for St Andrew's Holborn in 1832 the pre-printed register pages don't have a space for the marital condition of the bride and groom?? :( Would this be on the banns register perhaps? (which isn't available!). I thought this was information that had to be provided, so I don't understand why it's not on the record?
In case someone has a crystal ball, John Lavender married one of his cousins, Sarah McCrery, 25th July 1832 and it is vital to my research to know if she was a widow or not!!!
Oakum Picker
20-09-09, 08:47
Hi Merry,
The condition is usually inserted on the blank line underneath each name unless that line is needed for details of a different parish, then the condition is usually added on the same line as the name.
Unfortunately you appear to have a lazy priest (or whoever) who only added the condition to one out of the twelve names on those pages.
lol! Thanks - that makes sense!
Something odd here anyway as, if Sarah was a widow, then things tie up as in 1841 she is with her Lavender husband and her daughter from her previous McCrery marriage is with them. The interesting bit is that mother and daughter (if that is what they are) are both registered for death on the same GRO page in 1845. I keep imagining they were murdered by Mr Lavender, but I expect they both had consumption or something.
*searches purse for £14*
John Lavender died the following year. Don't you hate it when people can't last until 1851? I need to know where Sarah and her daughter Mary were born! 'Not in Herts' isn't good enough!! lol
Real inconsiderate of them not to last till 1851..........
I've got a few as well......lol
I agree very inconsiderate.
Just like those born early 1837 or died 1840.
Since Ancestry put up the London marriages, I've found three in the first half of 1837. Couldn't they have waited?!
OH's ggg-grandfather was in his coffin on census night 1851. He died two days before and was buried the day after the census was taken. Pity he didn't get included as he was probably in his coffin in the house with the family :rolleyes:
dont know if this is relevant ?. but a Sarah McCreery married a Charles Christopher Lavender 8/2/1829 in the same church or did you know that ?
Stop it val!! I've been trying not to see that one!
I don't know who either of them are, but Charles Christopher Lavender might be from the generation of Lavenders before my treee linked up with them. As for Sarah McCrery - well at lease she says she was a spinster, so that's a start. All my McCrerys are men (at least, there are no daughters until generation four) and but two of them married ladies called Sarah, so it's very confusing. All the men died young, so there are several young widows called Sarah McCrery.
A lot of this family were probably not C of E (a least, I can't find baps for dozens of them!) and they liked to go to London to marry, which just makes matters worse! Also they lived right on the border of Herts, Cambs and Bedford, so there's always three ROs to consider when looking for records.
*weeps copiously*
:d:don the pallots marriage to John it is mistranscibed as Crery suppose you knew that too ??? lol think I'll buzz off before I really upset you lol
now about my Guttentags ??????????
*hastily replaces earplugs and eyeshades*
*hums loudly to self*
Merry
Who are the ones you are looking for baptisms of?
Merry
Who are the ones you are looking for baptisms of?
My Maynards from Kempston, Beds are the first generation of troublemakers - my 3xg-grandfather was b in 1746 and was the youngest of his family according to his memoirs, but no sign of the birth/bap of any of them. (one of his sisters married the original Mr McCrery) - not only were they not baptised, but when they died they were not buried either! Not just one of them, but several - even those who wrote wills(so have the date the will was signed and the dateit was proved with only a few weeks between the two and still they were not buried! lol)
The Maynard descendants moved all over the place - London, Herts, Isle of Wight, South Africa all busy not being baptised along the way!
Joan of Archives
20-09-09, 13:31
Merry surely McCrery has Irish roots & is most likely a Catholic name? If that's the case, don't the baptisms & burials on most sites only refer to people of the Church of England faith so you will be unlikely to see many McCrerys at all unless they married "out" of their faith? :rolleyes:
Oh the McCrerys were baptised in the C of E, but they are just a twig! My main line here are the Maynards, who were neither baptised nor buried and I have no idea what denomination they were! lol
Merry.
Send me a few more details. There are thousands of non-con Maynards.
I'll pm you, Libby - prepare to regret your offer! lol I've been looking for decades! lol
Merry.
Send me a few more details. There are thousands of non-con Maynards.
I've just realised you are probably refering to the various sites that hold non-con records? I have access to those already, but they refuse to reveal anything of my family as yet!
I've just realised you are probably refering to the various sites that hold non-con records? I have access to those already, but they refuse to reveal anything of my family as yet!
And they still don't...............lol
vBulletin® v3.8.7 PL3, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.