Hi Helen
Is it possible they were 'in service'? (working for the gentry...)
They would have met their partners and got married there, but then had
to go back home as a lot of big houses did not support servants and
their partners.
You can always look on the census after 1841 to see if it gives any
details.
sue in east yorkshire
On 20 Jan 2008, at 00:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As the list is quiet at the moment, I will take the opportunity to
pick the brains of all you genealogy experts and historians!
I have a lot of family members on my tree who were born in the 1800s
in villages around Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire, Cambridgeshire,
etc. These are simple, country folk with the men often being farm
labourers and the like. Anyway, there are a significant numbers
(over 30) of marriages in London and I am wondering why this would
have been? For example, you have person A born in village X,
marries B also born in X. They go to London and get married then
come back and their children are all born in or around X. The
districts of London involved vary (St Pancras, Lambeth, Holborn, to
name but a few). Can any of you shed any light on why they would
have married in this way? A lot of the villages would have had rail
links with London but still. Also, would one or both have had to
move there for several weeks to meet the residency criteria - they
would hardly have had the money for a special license, surely - or
was there some sort of way round that?
Any answers would be much appreciated :-)
Regards, Helen (in Vancouver, BC where the earlier snow has now
washed away)
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the
line:
unsubscribe lace-chat [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line:
unsubscribe lace-chat [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
