1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

  2. Only registered members can see all the forums - if you've received an invitation to join (it'll be on your My Summary page) please register NOW!

  3. If you're looking for the LostCousins site please click the logo in the top left corner - these forums are for existing LostCousins members only.
  4. This is the LostCousins Forum. If you were looking for the LostCousins website simply click the logo at the top left.
  5. It's easier than ever before to check your entries from the 1881 Census - more details here
Cookies Not a member of the forum? Are you at the right site? Is this the right site? New feature!

Missing Marriage Record (1921-30)?

Discussion in 'England & Wales BMD registers' started by Davean, Jan 17, 2022.

  1. Davean

    Davean LostCousins Member

    Are there any England & Wales BMD index pages (the typed ones for each quarter, listed by surname) that are known to be missing for the period 1921-30?

    Alternatively, does anyone know what is the chance that a valid marriage was omitted from the index at that time?

    For years I've been looking for a marriage that must have taken place during this period. I've searched FMP, Ancestry, ScotlandsPeople and the Irish Civil Records without success. The bride's first name is very unusual (and hence often mis-transcribed) and her surname is fairly uncommon, so I've tried every combination of wildcard that I can think of. The groom's names are quite common.

    (I've looked through the handwritten additions on the relevant BMD index pages.)

    I suppose it's possible that the marriage took place outside the UK and Ireland, but I think it's highly unlikely (and I've searched the World records on Ancestry, too). The couple do not appear to have had any children.

    Any suggestions would be welcome! (Short of concluding that the lady's use of a married name from 1930 onwards was ...er ... mistaken.)

    David
     
    Davean, Jan 17, 2022
    #1
  2. peter

    peter Administrator Staff Member

    No. There was some analysis carried out by the late Michael Whitfield-Foster which suggested that there were a significant number of marriages missing from the GRO indexes in the 19th century, but this wasn't because pages were missing from the index.

    What makes you think that the couple married? In most cases when a marriage cannot be found it's because there was none - as you yourself suggest. Does the evidence for their marriage come from a source other than the censuses? I don't think it would be realistic to expect a couple who were openly living together as man and wife to give their status as anything other than married in the census, and if they had no children there would have been little reason to marry.

    Also bear in mind that in England & Wales you can call yourself by any name you want.

    Note: although probably not relevant in this case, it's worth mentioning that when entering relatives at LostCousins it's irrelevant whether or not they were legally married (or, for that matter, legally adopted).
     
    peter, Jan 17, 2022
    #2
  3. Davean

    Davean LostCousins Member

    Peter - thanks for your comments on the indexes.

    To give a bit more detail: the lady in question appears as 'Single' in the 1921 census - mis-transcribed again, but clearly the correct person as she's with her sister and mother. She resurfaces (without husband) under her married surname in electoral registers from 1930, and as a Widow in the 1939 Register.

    I’ve been unable to find her in the electoral registers on FMP and Ancestry for 1921-29, but these don’t yet appear to have a complete geographical coverage, even for England. I have found no records of the couple together. Since the husband had a fairly common name, I haven't been able to identify him unambiguously in the records.

    My 'evidence' for the marriage is circumstantial. She ran a successful business under her married name from 1930 to about 1950, in the kind of place where 'everyone knew everyone else's business', so any hint of scandal would have got around! My immediate family and I knew her quite well in the 1950s-60s. She had mementos of her husband in her house, e.g. named photos and army insignia (I can't remember the details of the latter). She was from a very 'respectable' family, had occasional visits from several siblings, etc...

    So my working hypothesis is that she WAS married, and that her husband died, probably by 1930 and almost certainly by 1939. Before concluding that this hypothesis is false, I wanted to find out about (a) any known gaps in the records, or (b) any other records that might help.

    David
     
    Davean, Jan 17, 2022
    #3
  4. peter

    peter Administrator Staff Member

    It's possible they will never be complete - even the British Library doesn't have a complete collection. Also bear in mind that women under 30 didn't get the vote until the law changed in 1928, so depending on her age you might not find her until 1929 or later.

    Also it's a mistake to assume that someone who was 'respectable' was more likely to have married their partner - if anything it was the other way round. Didn't you read my article last month about Fanny Cradock? Bear in mind that when a couple didn't marry it was often because one of them was already married to someone else.

    If you know the full name of her 'husband' his will is likely to be a valuable source of information. If you don't my advice is to turn your attention to something else and hope that something turns up - after all, it's not a 'brick wall' that's preventing you from researching your ancestry.
     
    peter, Jan 17, 2022
    #4
  5. Davean

    Davean LostCousins Member

    Good point. Yes, I did read your article about Fanny Cradock!

    I've looked through all the wills in the National Probate Calendar for the surname during the period in question, without success. I only return occasionally to this long-term puzzle, and did so in the last few days because I found the lady in the 1921 Census.

    Talking about the 1921 Census: it's led immediately to an interesting new line on my maternal grandfather, and photographs...!
     
    Davean, Jan 17, 2022
    #5
  6. At home in NZ

    At home in NZ Guest

    If you could find his army records, there should be a page where the question about marriage is asked. If affirmative it will give the name of the bride, the date and the place they married
     
    At home in NZ, Jan 18, 2022
    #6
  7. peter

    peter Administrator Staff Member

    Unfortunately records for anyone who was in the army after 1918 are still held by the MoD, with delays of over a year for record requests. They are being transferred to the National Archives over a period of 7 years, and will eventually become available online.
     
    peter, Jan 18, 2022
    #7
  8. Davean

    Davean LostCousins Member

    That's useful info about post-1918 Army records, Peter - thanks.

    Until recently, I'd thought they might have been married during WW1, and searched the available Army records of several people with his name. But then I found that she was single until at least 19 June 1921...
     
    Davean, Jan 18, 2022
    #8
  9. PaulC

    PaulC LostCousins Member

    Regarding the army connection, was the groom born before 1901, and do you have the date of birth? You could check the service personnel data released by the Ministry of Defence in 2014, I think there are some gaps but it may at least tell you if a servce record exists. It's the excel spreadsheets named Attachment 1-8 at the link below.

    FOI responses released by MOD: week commencing 1 December 2014
     
    PaulC, Jan 18, 2022
    #9
  10. Davean

    Davean LostCousins Member

    Paul - many thanks! I don't have the DoB, but it must have been before 1901. I've downloaded the files, and will take a look. They may also help with other people I'm looking for...
     
    Davean, Jan 18, 2022
    #10

Share This Page