Liverpool & South West Lancashire FHS - Forum

Hello Forum
Is it possible to have a register office wedding, and then some time later get "married" in a R. C. Church without the Registrar present but listed in a church register? The year is 1918.
Regards
seeker 8041

Its called a Blessing,

A few years ago I had the honour of giving away a lady at her and her Husbands Blessing, only I wasn't really giving her away, because they had married 35 years previous in a registry office, cut a long story short. He promised her that one day they would have a church Wedding/Blessing, no registrar present and it can't be performed exactly like a Wedding, something has to be different.

Good answer there Bert and a lovely story.

Confirms that yes the "church service" could take place at any time, even the same day, the official ceremony could have taken place and then they may have nipped around to the church where the registrar wouldn't have been needed.

Hi
Thank you both for the replies. You have both confirmed what I knew. Just to expand a bit this is one of my "brickwalls" the lady in question is an orphan as a child,was adopted (pre 1927). There is also confusion about her name.
Regards
seeker 8041

Don't forget that if you want any opinions, just post some details and we would try to help if we can.

MaryA wrote:Don't forget that if you want any opinions, just post some details and we would try to help if we can.

If you do decide to post details as suggested by MaryA, make sure you include the bride's age from the marriage cert and the names of witnesses. If there is a name for her 'father' on the cert, include that as well as his occupation, even though he may be her foster-father.

Hello Forum,
In answer, on a register office m. cert. the groom is Hugh Joseph keenan date 4th Mar. 1918.(41 Dryson St. Bootle) In St. Anthony's Scotland Rd his name appears again for a wedding dated1st Nov.1918(44 Epsom St) Both addresses seem to be Scotland Rd. area. In both cases F's names and occupations are the same, and that also applies to the bride.The differences are the bride's first names. (in both cases the surname Glover is the same)Am thinking the way forward maybe Electoral Rolls. Am I right in thinking women were only given the vote after 1918?
seeker 8041

Re:

The differences are the bride's first names. (in both cases the surname Glover is the same)

Is it possible the church marriage/blessing has the bride's forename in Latin?

Re:

seeker wrote:Am I right in thinking women were only given the vote after 1918?
seeker 8041

All women did not get the full franchise to vote until 1928. In 1918 the Representation of the People Act 1918 was passed, enfranchising women over the age of 30 who met minimum property ownership qualifications. The Representation of the People Act 1928 extended the voting franchise to all women over the age of 21.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_ ... ed_Kingdom

Hi DS
Thanks for that quick and informative reply. The reg.cert. has her first name as Jennie. The church entry is in latin, Maria Joanna (Mary Jane) and witnesses are Rosa Doherty & Agnete Collins. As they were just starting their lives after the war, there were no money. In any case he finished as a draughtsman and she a midwife.
Regards

Jennie can be a short/ pet name for Jane.

My Granny was Eleanor Jane but her nephews and nieces who I have met in more recent times, called her variously Auntie Janey, Auntie Jenny or Auntie Ginny.

seeker wrote:Hi DS
Thanks for that quick and informative reply. The reg.cert. has her first name as Jennie. The church entry is in latin, Maria Joanna (Mary Jane) and witnesses are Rosa Doherty & Agnete Collins. As they were just starting their lives after the war, there were no money. In any case he finished as a draughtsman and she a midwife.
Regards

Hi Seeker,
I'd say Jennie was the 'familiar' preferred [by her] version of Mary Jane. In the RC church blessing she would have probably been 'known' by her baptismal names.

dickiesam wrote:In the church blessing she would have probably gone by her baptismal names.

You mentioned it was in St Anthony's which was indeed RC, so I would suspect DS is correct in this assumption.

Hi Everyone
Thank you for taking the trouble to reply.
Kevin