What proof of marital status did my bigamist ancestor need?
QThe 1841 census shows James Sheldon, a shoemaker from Bollington, Cheshire, at home with his wife Hannah and their three daughters named Mary, Anne and Sarah.
In 1851, James, listed as married, is in Manchester. His wife isn’t present, but he has lodgers – the married Ellen Jervis, and three Jervis children. Meanwhile, Hannah Sheldon is head of household in Matley, living with Mary. Sarah and Anne are living in Ashton-under-Lyne.
Then, in 1855, James Sheldon, bachelor, marries Ellen Jervis, spinster. In 1861, James and Ellen are in Manchester with three Sheldon children – but I think Hannah is still alive in Ashtonunder-Lyne with Sarah.
When he married Ellen in 1855, would James have been required to provide proof of a divorce, or of being a widower? Would stating he was a bachelor solve it? The same question applies to Ellen.
Jacky Knight
AJames Sheldon would not have been divorced when he married Ellen Jervis in 1855. As Hannah was still alive, we must accept that he married bigamously. At this
point, divorce was obtainable solely by Private Act of Parliament – an option for only the wealthiest of couples. The 1857 Matrimonial Causes Act made it somewhat easier to obtain a divorce, although the practice was still rare (particularly among the working classes) until further legislation after the First World War and beyond.
Banns read in Anglican churches prior to a marriage, and the marriage service itself, gave opportunities for community members to come forward if they felt that there was any reason why a marriage should not go ahead. Since James was living 20 miles away from his hometown, and Ellen was hundreds of miles from her Scottish birthplace, it’s probable that nobody in the local community knew that either of them had been married before.
If a marriage was by licence, rather than by banns, an ‘allegation’ (or before 1823, a ‘bond’) might be entered into by a prospective groom when registering the marriage, as a guarantee that there was no known impediment to it taking place.
Ruth Symes