One too many wives!

[Spangle]

A direct ancestor, James Teatheredge (aka Teatheridge) was married twice. The first marriage was to Margeret Whiteley, in 1842. They had two children, one born the year before the marriage and one, James, in 1843.

The 1851 census shows that Margaret and the children were gone and that James senior had at the house a visitor and her family. The visitor's three children all bore her own surname, including a boy called James, who was born in 1854.

Then came the 1861 and the "visitor" was now his housekeeper... a couple more children had been born and they were all called Teatheredge/Teatheridge, although their mum remained a Wing.

Finally James made an honest woman of his lady and they married in 1864.

I appreciate that the chances are that there was a spot of bigamy going on here but just in case, where would I look for divorce records for James and Margaret, his first wife?

I can find no trace of her or her children apart from her marriage and their births and so I don't think that James was widowed, unless I am missing something or not looking in the right places, so I am a bit confused. Can anyone advise please?

[Geoffers]

Very few divorce records prior to 1858; even from then you would need to be fairly wealthy.

Have a browse of TNA's research guides - Divorce (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/researchguidesindex.asp?WT.lp=gs-researchguides&j=1#d)

To search for post-1857 divorces using TNA's catalogue (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/search.asp)

Enter a surname in the word or plhrase field
In the department or series code enter J77

Any trace of the first wife having popped her clogs?

[Spangle]

Very few divorce records prior to 1858; even from then you would need to be fairly wealthy.

Have a browse of TNA's research guides - Divorce (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/researchguidesindex.asp?WT.lp=gs-researchguides&j=1#d)

Any trace of the first wife having popped her clogs?


Well my folks certainly weren't wealthy, just ordinary Londoners so that rules divorce out I guess.

And no, there is no sign of any Margaret Teatheredge or varient spellings, or of a Margaret Whiteley dying at that time in the South, merely a handful of Margaret Whiteleys from the North.

I can certainly see that the second marriage was probably bigamous but how the first family just disappeared is a mystery to me.

[Red Kite]

She might have just cleared off and taken another name. Even married again in another name, no one checked after all. Have you looked for marriages in her maiden name, or her mother's maiden name, if you know it?

[Spangle]

I've looked for marriages in her maiden name but nothing appears to be in the Surrey/London area - anywhere else is like a needle in a haystack as I don't know her place of birth or anything of her family.

Oh well, it was worth asking about a possible divorce - thank you both. I think I may have to concede defeat on this one as without further details I am pretty jiggered.

[Peter Goodey]

Deaths were not well recorded in the early years of civil registration and many slipped through the net.

For the 1840s, It may be worth checking burial registers. A lot depends on exactly which parish the family lived in.

[Spangle]

Thank you Peter, that'll be a struggle as I can only guess where Margaret might have died, given that the place of marriage was merely "Lambeth", but certainly worth a try.