• Do you love Genealogy? Why not write for us? we're looking for volunteers to write articles for Family history. Please contact us for further information.

Divorce or bigamy

gibbo

Loyal Member
Posts
23,229
Likes
1,027
Location
queensland
#1
Lots of convicts left partners behind in England. If the partners who were left behind or the convict remarried would they have had to have gotten divorced first? :confused:
Just never come across anything about divorce in any of the convict files so was just wondering how they worked it :confused:
 
Last edited:

g d cooper

Loyal Member
Posts
1,236
Likes
14
Location
new england
#2
Hi gibbo :I don't know but if you were sent out here for the term of your natural life, would that mean to all intent you would be classed as dead.

Glen. :biggrin:
 

gibbo

Loyal Member
Posts
23,229
Likes
1,027
Location
queensland
#3
Hi Glen, how you doing? :biggrin:

I didnt think of that one.

Maybe a lot of them lived together and she took his name without marrying and had a heap of kids etc etc. Or a awful lot of bigamy was committed to.
 

g d cooper

Loyal Member
Posts
1,236
Likes
14
Location
new england
#4
Hi Gibbo: if you take into account the numbers that did not worry the authorities with their living arrangements and the numbers that just moved to the next parish to remarry. I dont think they would worry to much, not a lot of help to us but.

Glen
 

oznannie

Loyal Member
Posts
2,082
Likes
5
Location
Rockingham
#5
Divorce cost an arm and a leg back then, only the toffs could afford it.
Common law wife seemed acceptable to the authorities.
First wife in UK probably did the same thing knowing her old man would never come back.
Interesting topic.

Ozn :)
 

gaelwyn

Valued Member
Posts
500
Likes
5
Location
Gold Coast
#6
I agree with the premise that to be sent out here for LIFE, especially in the first couple of decades, then to all intents and purposes, that person is dead to their first partners :(

I've had problems with some ancestors, unable to find marriages, or marital status has said widower, with no sign of previous marriage :confused:

A few of them must have had 'common law' marriages, especially when some women had several partners :eek::2fun:
 
Posts
7,407
Likes
11
Location
Leeds, born Hull
#7
Hi Gibbo

As Ozn posted, divorce cost so much only the rich could afford one, so those less well off just went their own ways. If they married again they just lied and said they were single or widowed, changed their name, or just lived together - and you wondered why you couldn't find that marriage!!

dave
 

leefer

Loyal Member
Posts
7,107
Likes
2
Location
swindon wilts
#9
Update,i have just been informed by a friend that there was a law that stated that if your Husband/Wife was out of the country for more than 7 years you could re marry regardless of being married.....but still not a defining answer i know.:rolleyes:
 

gibbo

Loyal Member
Posts
23,229
Likes
1,027
Location
queensland
#10
Thanks everyone.
Your friend was pretty much right Lee. I found this

Marriage & Divorce
Divorce was not available to the common person until the late 1800s and was expensive and scandalous. Previously married convicts were permitted to remarry after seven years' separation as long as their spouse was abroad, even if they were still living. The Government encouraged marriage between convicts as it was seen as a means of rehabilitation and more desirable than de facto relationships.


Applications to Marry can also provide information that is not recorded on marriage records and they are available on microfilm. Some of the applications were refused, especially when false names were given in an attempt to negate previous marriage information which had been recorded on original conviction records.

http://members.iinet.net.au/~perthdps/convicts/res-10.html
 

Similar threads

Top