falsifying age at marriage

[srtearle]

Just wondering if anyone knows how easy it would have been for a 14 year old girl to have entered her age as 22 on a 1915 registry office marriage certificate in Edmonton, Middlesex, UK?

 

[juliejtp]

Hi,

Could be possible that the wrong age had been entered while transfering the info from the register to the marriage certificate (she may have told them she was 18 or so). It may be easier for a 14yr old to look 18 but 22, or she was a very mature 14yr old or the registrar was as blind as a bat.

 

[pennywinks]

Or possibly all three!! Is it possible that, with the fashion of siblings naming their children with the same family names, these are two girls with the same name but different birth dates?

 

[srtearle]

Thanks folks! I guess my fundamental question is whether the bride and groom had to provide proof of identity/evidence of age when applying for the marriage licence back in 1915? Susan

 

[johnson-burton]

Hi
no proof of age was needed. I have a marriage certificate that states the groom was 25 when he was in fact 19 and the (blushing) bride was supposed to be 45 when in fact she was 68. Wonder if she wore a thick veil or another case of a blind vicar. This was in 1920.
Good luck

 

[srtearle]

Thanks for that. I couldn't be sure from your message if you were talking about the same marriage, ie, did an 18 year old boy marry a 68 year old woman? If so, yes, the vicar must have indeed been blind! Your information strengthens my theory that our grandmother nicked off from Epsom Surrey to Edmonton on the other side of the river to get married at the age of 14, putting her age up to 22. She was of recently settled gypsy stock and the gypsies I understand were quite creative with the BMD paperwork. Another question I have is what is the legal age at which one could have married back then without needing parental consent? If it was 21 my theory still fits, if it was 18, then I guess it wouldn't, cos she would have only needed to say she was 19?

 

[johnson-burton]

Hi Susan
pretty sure that parental consent then was 21 (from 1754 marriage act) prior to 1929 with parental consent Girls could marry from the age of 12 and Boys 14, since 1929 the age with parental consent is 16. Yes that marriage is correct got a photo of the bride and the vicar must have been blind or blind drunk (am l allowed to say that) to miss the difference in ages. Also found out that the Grooms sister married the Brides son the same year she was 20 he was 40.
Good Luck

 

[pennywinks]

How fascinating! It only goes to prove that anything can happen if there is enough money involved lol!

 

[juliejtp]

I'm still giggling over the 68yr old bride.

 

[johnson-burton]

If you saw her photo you would think it even funnier, although since starting on the family history nothing surprises me anymore

 

[juliejtp]

I've got the giggles again.

 

[srtearle]

Goodness me. Politeness has stopped me asking thus far if these unusual marriages are among people directly related to you, but curiosity has got the better of me! You are quite right about the age of consent being 12 for a girl in 1915. I am wondering now if our Amelia Willett b1902 in Epsom was actually 12 or 13 at the time of her marriage, that she did have parental consent to marry a 27 year old groom and her age was simply mistranscribed as 22. All her details otherwise fit perfectly!

 

[johnson-burton]

Could it be possible that the birth was not registered in the correct year as the family were traveling around. l suppose it could be possilble that she was not sure what year she was born, I think thats made things worse. Yes those marriages are of my Great Aunt and Uncle. Is it possible that he made history as the first toy boy (oh dear l can hear Julie giggling again). Would like to point out that this family trait seems to have died out l'm perfectly sane or so my counsellor says.

 

[srtearle]

I suppose you have double checked the age of the bride and that there was not a daughter or niece (or granddaughter even!) named after her 68 year old mother? Did some checking on your last suggestion, apparently there were some lost birth records in Surrey for the 1880s/1890s, so our Amelia Willett may well have been born c1893 in Epsom Surrey as stated on her 1915 marriage cert and aunt of Amelia b1902 in Epsom Surrey (both Amelias are connected with the same street address in Epsom). A more likely theory perhaps. Thanks again for your help!

 

[johnson-burton]

pleased you have been able to make some progress, suppose its best not to rule anything out looks like only way you will get to verify it all is to get some certificates. Yes all mine have been double checked even got marriage certificate with wrong ages on, the name of the brides deceased husband and father all details check out. Good luck