Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: 1930s divorce

  1. #11
    Loves to help with queries Tederator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Maclean Queensland Australia
    Posts
    190

    Default

    Hi, reading through this thread brought to mind the year 1895 or a bit later, my great grandmother left my great grandfather and went to live with another man, a child was born of this relationship. Although I have done a bit of research no record of a divorce has been found, I did read somewhere that if a woman or man wanted to go with another spouse that they could do so, possibly no bigamy laws in those days. Searching throuigh my Grandfather's army records I notice he gives the name of his mother with the surname of her second spouse? very strange, if there was somewhere I could find divorce records of those days I would be very interested. As a matter of fact my great grandmother died 1908 and my great grandfather died in the workhouse at Fulhma in 1912. Just a few observations of my own after reading this thread. All this was in London UK of course
    Tederator.
    Last edited by Tederator; 20-11-2015 at 3:55 AM. Reason: adding extra info

  2. #12
    Super Moderator christanel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Wairarapa New Zealand
    Posts
    9,350

    Default

    I found this very interesting and in depth review by Dr Tanya Evans, of Living in Sin: Cohabiting as Husband and Wife in Nineteenth-Century England by Ginger Frost
    http://www.
    history.ac.uk/reviews/review/830

    Divorce was expensive and mostly beyond the members of the working class so 'living in sin' was the only option for some.

    Here is another interesting article on the subject.

    The National Archives holds divorce records 1858 to 1937 which can be downloaded. See their research guide Here

    Any person could, and still can, adopt any name they like as long as it wasn't for criminal purposes. I didn't have to be done through official government channels although some do choose that route.

    Christina
    Sometimes paranoia is just having all the facts.
    William Burroughs

  3. #13
    Loves to help with queries Tederator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Maclean Queensland Australia
    Posts
    190

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christanel View Post
    I found this very interesting and in depth review by Dr Tanya Evans, of Living in Sin: Cohabiting as Husband and Wife in Nineteenth-Century England by Ginger Frost
    http://www.
    history.ac.uk/reviews/review/830

    Divorce was expensive and mostly beyond the members of the working class so 'living in sin' was the only option for some.

    Here is another interesting article on the subject.

    The National Archives holds divorce records 1858 to 1937 which can be downloaded. See their research guide Here

    Any person could, and still can, adopt any name they like as long as it wasn't for criminal purposes. I didn't have to be done through official government channels although some do choose that route.

    Christina
    I think that is what my great grandmother did lived without divorce, as you say it was too expensive. regarding name changes my grandfather dropped his cultural surname and used his given names only, I only found this out whilst I was researching my family history, needless to say I changed my surname back to my cultural surname, legally through the BMD system. that was about seven years ago.
    Tederator.

  4. #14
    Reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    16,501

    Default

    Proof of divorce wasn't necessary
    Proof certainly has to be produced today but I don't know exactly what regulations applied when.

    We must remember that back in the 1930s and 40s there was still the concept of guilt and innocence in a divorce. Proving that one was the innocent party in a divorce by producing a copy of the decree might have been an issue if the second marriage was to be conducted in church.

    PS I realise now that this is an ancient thread that has been resurrected for some reason. The original questioner hasn't logged in for many years and I don't suppose we'll get an update.

  5. #15
    Name well known on Brit-Gen
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    4,857

    Default

    A bit of history and background

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrim...auses_Act_1937

    My late mother married a GI in 1944 ( no children ofr the union) yet married my father in 1948, neither the GI's family nor I have found any record of a divorce.

    I asked my father about the paperwork presented when he & mother married and he said none was asked for.......he was more worried about the changes in ID as late as 1999 in case the pension people asked for evidence of a divorce.....

    Ironically the GI & my late mother died within weeks of one another, it was only after their death, his name appeared on ancestry and I made contact with the family, so that begs the question what is our relationship of their father & my mother if the parties were not divorced ?

  6. #16
    Knowledgeable and helpful
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    661

    Default

    A Superintendant Registrar explained to me why they needed to have a copy of the divorce decree. A Portuguese man applied to marry; because he was a foreign national, they asked for his decree, which he gave. Upon getting it translated from the Portuguese, it proved to be a receipt for a washing machine! So, was he free to marry or not? pwholt
    Last edited by pwholt; 20-11-2015 at 7:44 PM. Reason: added to, for clarity

  7. #17
    Brick wall demolition expert!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    4,010

    Default

    From the TNA website research guide http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/h...ides/divorces/

    "The survival rate of divorce case files is:

    1858-1927: almost 100%
    1928-1937: 80%
    After 1937 : less than 0.2%" Which may be why nothing is coming up on the TNA search

    Which is a shame as my grandparents were both divorcees when they had been married around 1945.

    According to an article in a recent issue of WDYTYA magazine, the wording on a subsequent marriage implies who was the party who obtained a divorce (i.e. petitioner) and who had been divorced (i.e. defendent). I'll have to dig out the article and post the actual wordings.
    Michelle

  8. #18
    Name well known on Brit-Gen
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    4,857

    Default

    #16
    So, was he free to marry or not?
    Same question I ask myself about my late mother who would NOT discuss this!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Select a file: