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.
And just for fun, this is a photo of the watermark on the certificate. I love those crowns.
Copyright © 2021 Nancy Messier. All Rights Reserved.
Do not copy or use any content from this blog without written permission from the owner.
.
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.
ReplyDeleteThank 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.
ReplyDeleteIf 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.
ReplyDeleteI 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