Tuesday, November 2, 2021

A Poor Copy But It Gets the Job Done: Marriage Certificate of Andrew Doyle and Elizabeth Laws

Below is the 1863 U.K. GRO (General Register Office) marriage certificate for my great-great-grandparents, Andrew Doyle and Elizabeth Laws.  This looks like a scan of a poor photocopy.  The background is dotted with spots.  The type is light and hard to read.  But it's legible.  And it's a certified copy.  As a certified copy it gets the job done for family history research.  (And I have no complaints about the GRO.  They've done very well by me.)
1853 UK Marriage certificate for Andrew Doyle and Elizabeth Laws
Here is a transcription of the record.  Even though the date looks like 1862 I will trust that it's 1863 because that's what the GRO tells me.
1863. Marriage solemnized at Woodhorn Church in the Parish of Woodhorn in the County of Northumberland
No.  177
When Married.  Novr 14
Name and Surname.   Andrew Doyle, Elizabeth Laws
Age.   full age   full age
Condition.   Widower   Spinster
Rank or Profession.  Miner    ----
Resident at the time of Marriage.  North Seaton   North Seaton
Father's Name and Surname.  William Doyle   Robert Laws
Rank or Profession of Father.   Miner   Miner
Married in the Parish Church according to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Established Church by me, after Banns[Illegible first name] T. H. Ashhurst, Curate
This Marriage was solemnized between us  Andrew Doyle    Elizabeth Laws
in the Presence of us,  John Mitcheson   Martha Doyle

This certificate is in the collection Year 1863, Quarter D, Volume 10B, Page 463.

FreeReg.uk.org tells me Andrew and Elizabeth were married in St. Mary the Virgin Church in North Seaton.  I've yet to find an image of the church marriage record.

This is the full page of the record as it appeared when it arrived in my mailbox. 
1853 UK Marriage certificate for Andrew Doyle and Elizabeth Laws

And just for fun, this is a photo of the watermark on the certificate.  I love those crowns.
-–Nancy.

Copyright © 2021 Nancy Messier.  All Rights Reserved. 
Do not copy or use any content from this blog without written permission from the owner. 

.

4 comments:

  1. It really does look like 1862. In case you are not aware, the date the marriage was reported to the registrar is also shown in the register, but cut off in this photocopy. And marriages are indexed under the year of registration. The way the GRO in England presents their certificates is not ideal in this regard, I'd prefer if they just issued a photocopy of the whole page of the register, or at least the whole entry. Keep an open mind as to which year they married, in case there was a delay reporting it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you so much for this great information, Dara. I hope I can find a church record for this marriage! Family information tells me they were married in 1861. Looks like I have some inconsistencies to sort out. Thanks again.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If you zoom in, it's definitely a 3 - the handwriting was much different back then. It appears the parish registers aren't available and the Bishop's Transcripts for those years are missing... At least the GRO had its copy still.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was sure it was a 3, too, Tess. Thank you for confirming that. Are the church records definitely not available or are they just not available online yet, do you know? I haven't searched other than at FreeReg and a brief search at FamilySearch.

      Delete

I appreciate your comments and look forward to reading what you have to say. Thanks for stopping by.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...