GENBRIT-L Archives

Archiver > GENBRIT > 2005-04 > 1112439309


From: Eve McLaughlin <>
Subject: Re: even more OT, but personally pertinent
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 11:55:09 +0100
References: <68.528511b7.2f7c89a1@aol.com><24d22f544d%Graeme@greywall.demon.co.uk> <d2gra0$krb$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk><g9R+5VB+6HTCFwd+@varneys.demon.co.uk> <1a24cf.814d06@fmlynet.org><d2jfah$cs1$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk> <3b514kF6fp398U1@individual.net><d2jo6b$fjd$1@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk> <3b578eF6dkcv1U1@individual.net><424ddbd3$0$3094$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>



>
>> Such a marriage was not permitted
>> until early in the 20th century.
>
>
>Dave,
>
>Just when did that change?
from 1922. It had been possible for a man to marry his deceased wife's
sister from 1908, but the matching provision for women was not made
until the 1921 act.
>
>In 1941, eight years after my father died, my mother married his (divorced)
>brother.

Perfectly legal by then (but if the family were Catholic, the divorce
bit would be what they were fussing about.)

--
Eve McLaughlin

Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians
Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

This thread: