Genealogy Chat

Have found on marr. cert details re the groom being divorced and name of his ex wife. (ex wife marr. 2 months earlier giving false name and stating a spinster). However I would like to know please if divorce was normal at this time in the working classes (groom was a blacksmith) as I understood it was expensive and grounds limited. Can anyone help? Have tried the internet but not getting anywhere. All part of a puzzle which has taken about 20 years to solve and coming to the end of it now - I think. Thank you Ann

hiya, from what has been said on previous threads, it was expensive to divorce, and rarely the poorer could afford to, perhaps he told a little lie, as much the same as his wife earlier, Julie bigamy was rife!!!!

If they did divorce, there MIGHT be a mention in The Times newspaper archive. I'll have a look if you can tell me the surname and the time span (were they still married in 1901, for instance?) Merry

Today, if you marry after a divorce you have to show the decree absolute. Don't know about then, but it might have been a risky lie! I have seen cases of ordinary people divorced even before this date, but it was uncommon. Merry

Samuel Henry Jolliffe marr. Elizabeth Sarah Kitching in Methodist church - in 1901Census - they are at separate addresses in Portsmouth. Feb 1904 she married in anglian church in Portsmouth stating single and giving false name - only item which born any resemblence to truth was her father's occupation. In April 1904 Mr. Jolliffe marries in Methodist church in IOW and states he is divocred from Elizabeth Sarah Jolliffe formerly Kitching and he is a blacksmith. I am puzzled - 30 years ago Methodist Church was reluctant to marry divorcees never mind in 1904. Also at one time I know husbands could divorce wives for adultery but not the other way! What grounds were available in 1904? I know if we apply for a copy of decree absolute (if indeed it exists) it is possible that the grounds will not be mentioned on it - they were not mentioned in a 1951 decree which I applied for.

As far as I can remember, a woman had to have pretty strong reasons for a divorce to be granted - I think seven years desertion was one reason. Unnatural sexual practices (LOL), insanity etc, but NOT adultery. The Decree Nisi usually gives the reasons but I dont know that you can get hold of this. But in 1904, divorce was still very rare and was almost always reported graphically in the lower type of newspaper! As for her giving a false name at remarriage and stating she was a spinster - there was a great deal of social stigma attached to a divorced woman and she may have 'forgotten' to tell her new husband that she was divorced. OC

She was a little madam - her g.dau has been trying for nearly 30 years to find out which sister her g.mother was! With this last piece of evidence we know. She changed her names - both christian and surnames many times over the years - her second husband and she split up in Canada/USA. She only told her family her real surname before she died but gave her sister's name and details! Why would the Methodist church have married him?

I was only talking this evening with a friend about my parents-in-law. After they died, I found out my father-in-law had been married before. They were married in 1949 in the methodist church - the marriage cert clearly states that he was previously married and gives former wife's details as well as the fact that they were divorced. M-i-l always told me they'd married in the methodist church because she didn't get on with the C of E vicar. nell

Nell the Methodist church must have been more liberal then - and even today the Anglican church will not remarry - or very rarely depending on the vicar. Probabaly saying did not get on with the vicar covered the real reason of not marrying in the anglican church.

I seem to remember that the Methodist Church would remarry you if you were the 'innocent' party. When I remarried in early 1970s, the local Anglican Vicar would not marry us, even though we were both 'innocent parties'. OC

OC - interessting info coming through - looks like ministers 'do their own thing'. In 1978 - we applied (both anglican and innocent parties) to Methodist Church who informed us that we would have to wait at least 6 months for a decision and even then it was not certain - United Reform church married us by special licence in my own home - so knickers to all of them!!!!!!!!!

Ann - LOL Actually, I should have listened to the Vicar...I finished up getting divorced from number two, as well. (Vicar went to prison for his peculiar behaviour in public loos..so much for religious principles) OC

OC - that is the best laugh I have had all day - sorry you had heartache but when I read it I laughed out loud. You should have paid extra for a special licence - it was worth it - mind you after nearly 30 yrs I am still waiting for him to pay me back and for the minister's fee!!!!!

Ah well, its all sounding as if she was the guilty party. Sadly, she would not have stood a cat in hell's chance of getting custody of her son in those days, nor even of seeing him. I believe it was customary in those days to tell the child his mother had died, rather than admit there had been a divorce. The good old days, eh? OC

Merry - I am flabbergasted - now how do I tell my husband's cousin her granny was a bit of a flyer to put it mildly!. It looks like the right one but will not know unless apply for it and if that is the name of the co-respondent - that is NOT the name of the man she married in Feb 1904 giving birth to a son in JUly 1904! She also gave birth to a son in USA - stating on various returns he was her nephew/lodger and on his birth cert - she has down she is married to her child's father - all lies. So that is 4 men we know of so far! She is as bad as my husband's maternal g./father - he just upped sticks, moved and married - 3 times - never bothered with divorce. Strange thing is that both these persons came from very good backgrounds and in the g.fathers case - his father disowned him completely after he abandoned his first wife and daddy looked after her!

So flabber was my gasted I forgot to say thank you to Merry!.. Wonder if it was reported in Portsmouth papers - must have been then she took up new identity. We have always accused her of committing bigamy - beginning to look as if she didn't.

Blimey! Yes, The Times is not good for gossip columns in those days, but gives you a date to go on for the more scandalous press! There was a thread on here about ''other'' national newsaper stuff online, but I can't find it. I thought I'd saved it to favourites. Drat! Still looking! Merry

News of the World always reported Divorces and gave all the juicy details, well into the 1970s. OC

Found the link, but it doesn't quite go up far enough! http://www.uk.olivesoftware(.)com/ (remove brackets) So, it's back to the News of the World (which Crone obviously reads!!) Merry

If you find it Merry I would be grateful - nothing in Hampshire Chronicle for those years and canot get into Portsmouth News. Ann