Genealogy Chat

Can any member give a reason for this duplicated entry?
Does the letter “a” in 1883 have any significance?

Marriages Sep 1882
CUTTRISS Robert Young Chorlton 8c 1131
Holdsworth Jennette Chorlton 8c 1131

Marriages Sep 1883
CUTTRISS Robert Young Chorlton 8c 1117a
HOLDSWORTH Jennette Chorlton 8c 1117a

Just seems strange.

On freebmd site, there is an envelope symbol by these entries.
If you click on this there is an e mail address for a one-name study contact.
Perhaps he has information.

I would think that the 2nd entry has ammended or extra information.
Was Robert in the Army or in a place of employment where he needed permission to marry?

Gwyn

sometimes this happened when the man was in the army, as Gwyn has said .................

permission was needed from the army to marry, and anyone who married without it had to get permission, then get married again.

Thanks Gwyn,

I am not related to him, so I didn't want to give my email address to a non member.
I just wondered if a more experienced member had come across anything similar.

Not in the army. 1881 he's a Clerk.

Thanks again.

EDIT And SylviaInCanada

could apply to his job as well ............ he was born around 1860, so was marrying at around the age of 22 ..................

he could have been in an apprenticeship.


If you do not want to give out your email address ............ take out a free one with, eg, Google (gmail) or Yahoo, and use that address for all contact when you want to keep your own private.


The sure way of finding out would be to buy the certificate .......... but you could search through all the images on the Parish Registers shown on this site ..............

https://familysearch.org/search/image/index#uri=https%3A%2F%2Ffamilysearch.org%2Frecords%2Fwaypoint%2FM9QK-GPX%3An2105642381%3Fcc%3D1788853

It is the Mormon site, but I have taken you to the listing of parish Registers they have on file.

These are NOT indexed, so you have search yourself ................

scroll down to Chorlton ........... as you see there are several parishes .........

Chorlton upon Medlock, All Saints
Chorlton upon Medlock, St Luke
Chorlton upon Medlock, St Paul
Chorlton upon Medlock, St Saviour
Chorlton upon Medlock, St Stephen




sylvia

The the letter “a” in the 1883 entry is because the entry fell between page numbers and is down to how the GRO system worked, it occurs when the churches returns were late arriving at the GRO

see, Why are suffixes on some of the pages

http://www.bristolbmd.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/how_to_use.htm

and

http://www.freebmd.org.uk/search-faq.html#pagenosuffix

Roy

neither of the marriages were in a CofE church so the Mormon site search would be wasting your time.

Lancashire Marriage indexes for the years: 1882
Surname Forename(s) Surname Forename(s) Church / Register Office Registers At Reference
HOLDSWORTH Jennette CUTTRISS Robert Y Chorlton-on-Medlock Register Office or Registar Attended Manchester CHO_RM/60/82

Lancashire Marriage indexes for the years: 1883
Surname Forename(s) Surname Forename(s) Church / Register Office Registers At Reference
HOLDSWORTH Jennette CUTTRISS Robert Y Chorlton-on-Medlock Register Office or Registar Attended Manchester CHO_RM/63/189

ah, I didn't check the Lancs bmd ........... I did look at Lancs opc, and didn't find them.

they're also not showing on any of the ancestry records.

Joseph


try googling his name. There are a couple of references that pop up


this is on a history of the Cuttriss family ...................


"............ Further research has shown Robert Young Cuttriss married Jennette Holdsworth at Chorlton Register Office in 1882."


note that this says they were married at Chorlton Register Office

The Marriage locator web site has the wedding at Chorlton Register Office

http://www.marriage-locator.co.uk/cgi-bin/ML_search.cgi?year=1882&qtr=3&vol=8c&page=+1131&search=search

Roy

Roy - the Marriage locator web site errs in saying it was at Chorlton Register Office. Really all they can tell is the marr is recorded in the Chorlton registrar's own register. It's true most entries there are rego office marrs, but the registrar would have to attend all non-conformist marrs pre-1898, as non-conformists (jews and quakers excepted) weren't authorized to keep official marr registers, so the registrar would need to attend so they could sign his official register. Post-1898, most non-conformists were authorized, but not RCs (until the 1980s).

Thanks to all,

Gwyn in Kent, SylviaInCanada, Porkie Pie, lancashireAnn, and mgnv.

Joseph