Couple marrying twice

maisiedaisy

Hi all,

Just wondering if anyone has come across this. I’ve found a couple who appeared to have married each other twice, 5 years apart in two different locations (Cork and Bantry). They are James Manders and Mary Dukelow.

1853 in Bantry : https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/marriage_returns/marriages_1853/09444/5421521.pdf

1849 in Cork city : https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/marriage_returns/marriages_1849/09367/5392292.pdf

The earlier marriage appears to be non religious, I wasn’t aware that that was an option in those times. If anyone has any insight I’d really appreciate it!

PS: am off to look for any children born between the two marriages!

Yakov P. Golyadkin

https://kyngeston.wordpress.com/2015/10/01/church-of-ireland-baptismal-register-durrus-kilcrohane-1797-1903/

A child, Thomas, born in 1851.

55Gem

The 1849 is a registry office marriage, the 1853 is a church marriage, perhaps they or their families didn’t consider them properly married, although they got another license which shouldn’t have happened as legally they were already married.

is a divorce in between possible? Too expensive for a shoemaker surly.

maisiedaisy

Thank you for the links and info! It’s an unusual one.

The first marriage not being considered ‘proper’ seems plausible. Will have to keep digging!

spurious

He was police. It may have been within the 7 years, so they might have wanted to keep it on the downlow.

One party to the marriage will have been Church of Ireland for a civil record to exist from that time.

I checked the RIC service records, Neither marriage gets a mention in his record. he joined on 15 September 1846. James Manders was Protestant, a native of Galway, aged 21 in 1846 and served most of his career in Dunmanway.

Not sure the 1849 chap is the same man, as that stage police James had already been promoted to Constable, the equivalent of Sergeant once the ranks were reorganised. He was discharged on gratuity 1 February 1858.

maisiedaisy

@spurious if he was R.I.C. would that not have been his occupation on either marriage cert? Thank you for checking the R.I.C. records, would it be common for marriages to be mentioned there?

Mary would have been COI.

spurious

It would be the norm for marriages to be in the man's record, as they could serve in neither their native county nor that of their wife. Of course there were cases where this was overlooked, but not many.

It says he was an Acting Constable on the 1853 record.

maisiedaisy

It’s Mary my family would be connected to, and she would have been from Durrus, as per the later marriage.

Him serving in Dunmanway which is only 30 odd KM away from her home town wouldn’t fit with that ruling?

pinkypinky

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121581174#Comment_121581174

@spurious my understanding is that the 1844 act did make provision for entirely secular marriage so one of them being CoI wouldn't be a requirement. However, everyone would have been of some denomination in that period, i.e. I'm not even sure atheism was a concept!

My great-grandparents married twice and it did involve church reasons. I wrote about it here. https://cbgenealogy.ie/something-special-unexpected/

spurious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121581342#Comment_121581342

Especially in the early days, there were exceptions. It often counted for lots in what sort of standing a man was held.

Remember in his case though, there was no official mention of a marriage on his record, so there was no wife officially to check the native county of.

maisiedaisy

Thanks everyone for your input! Fascinating about the RIC element, also interesting to read about PinkyPinky’s great grandparents!