There has been a lot of discussion on FB’s Wirral Genealogy group about why so many Wirral folk got married/were baptised in Liverpool during the 18th and early 19th centuries. There have been plenty of examples thrown in but no good reasons as to why, so I thought I’d raise the question on here, the font of all knowledge.
There might have been problems for Catholics and Nonconformists in finding a local church but the majority was C of E and everyone lived in a parish with an old church which would be in relatively easy walking distance (Wallasey, Bidston, West Kirby, Bebington etc.). Travelling to Liverpool by primitive ferry in the 18th/early 19th centuries was extremely difficult, dangerous and unreliable so why did they do it? I have an example in my family tree of a couple who lived in Wallasey Village, a few hundred yards from St. Hilary's, both of "full age" (no parental permission needed) who chose to get married in Liverpool, St. Nicholas in 1792. Very odd!
I’m coming round to the idea that perhaps the simple answer is that in Cheshire if you weren't a regular churchgoer you didn't get to use the facilities and the Liverpool churches weren’t too bothered. Any suggestions welcomed.
Something I noticed myself though most of my family started life in Liverpool, 19th, late 18th century and some finally made their way over here. Some of those who were born in Liverpool and lived here in Birkenhead at the time of their marriage went back over and seemed to have married in the church of their baptism or their partners. Perhaps Liverpool had an easier outlook to marriage in general, mixed religious marriages and maybe a kinder view on naughty girls. Maybe the greater population of Irish in Liverpool helped the Catholic church in particular have a greater understanding of peoples needs. Would a relativity out the way marriage able those who need parental permission to tell fibs? a kind of nearby Gretna Green. Interesting subject.
I would also be interested to find out the answer to this question. My grandfather (Dad's Dad)and his spouse were married in Saint Nicholas church, Liverpool in 1895 even though they lived in the middle of Birkenhead adjacent to the town hall and I've always wondered why.
My brother in law has seen this a few times and has a theory that the people who do this have something to hide.
Maybe they were already living together as a married couple and didn't want to get caught getting married. No-one left to ask now so it's all conjecture. Still be interesting to hear oyher peoples ideas though.
Just a thought, perhaps it was cheaper to get married in Liverpool, maybe some churches had a conveyor belt system in operation or multiple services, no fuss, a kind of religious registry office wedding that was over and done with quickly, something the churches on this side of the water wouldn't offer.
Saint Nicholas church has long been know as the seafarers church and as so, has attracted many seafarers to wed thier sweethearts there. Try checking out a bit of family history, it may be that he was an old seadog.
My brother, wallasey born and bred was married in St Nicholas church after a career at sea. That was around 1998ish.
This obviously dosn't answer why all the other churches where chosen by Wirral folk.
Got a link?, cannot find it on FB
Someone suggested to me that it was difficult to get around on the Wirral back then and it was easier to just jump on a ferry and go to Liverpool.
Roman Catholics found it hard to get employment in Victorian Times so some got married in their local Parish Church in order to get work, as Protestant employers would not employ them. It was a common practise when I was young in the 1950's,that some RC's did not employ Protestants and vice versa.
I am on the Electoral Roll of St Nicholas Church Liverpool, and I do know that there is a strong tradition for people to marry there because their grandparents or parents did so.
If I find anything out to answer your query I will let you know.
I have come across this with a few of my ancestors and wondered about it too. I seem to remember reading that you could get married at St Nicholas's without a licence but I might be wrong. I even have ancestors who have travelled from Shrewsbury to get married there. I have found one case of a pregnant bride which might also explain it. The interesting thing is that the bride and groom always had the same address in Liverpool on the marriage certificate. Maybe they just used any address and no questions were asked.
Perhaps Liverpool Record Office would know. Their phone no is 0151 233 5817. you can send them an online email by completing the form on liverpool.gov.uk
The same address or street address was for the reading of the banns, they could be read in only one parish, that's if the couple were from different parishes. The banns were read and posted to give anyone with an objection to the marriage a chance to say so.
I too have family that married in St Nicks in Liverpool, but I believe they went there to get married in the early 1900's because Mum and Dad didn't approve, so maybe it was very similar to Gretna Green.
Just a thought.
Brian
Quite a few of the ancestors in my family tree were married in Liverpool. Never thought about it really but, thinking aloud, I wonder if it was anything to do with the fact that Liverpool was Lancashire and Wirral was Cheshire?
Just saying.
A lot of my ancestors got married in St Nick's because they were Senior Service, some that got married there were Army. It is a beautiful church though (and that's coming from a Wiccan). I've been lucky enough to have been to a lot of services in there and I always see something I've never noticed before. Definitely worth a visit if you've never been!
I have also come across this with my ancestors from Birkenhead
who were married in St Nicks and often wondered why.
It appears from what little information is available on this subject is that some churches were very lenient towards couples of certain circumstances, with child, without parental approval and runaways, etc. This leniency was not always shown to the inhabitants of Liverpool itself, especially those who would likely be around to answer questions and come under scrutiny. However people traveling to Liverpool to take part in these quick, no questions asked ceremonies did so with the full knowledge of the churches involved that they would return from where they came unlikely to be seen again. The fact that palms may have been greased would have been beneficial that they were not seen again. With evidence of not only couples from Wirral but the four corners of Great Britain travelling to Liverpool to marry I think it proves a no questions asked, no refusal ceremonies took place.
Thanks for all the responses and suggestions. When looking for something else, I’ve come across the following which might be relevant, in the St. Hilary’s Church (Wallasey) parish magazine of 1875:
A CAUTION.
In January a parishioner of Wallasey was married in a church in Liverpool without a license and without publication of banns in the Parish Church. It is necessary, therefore, to draw attention to the fact, clearly enough stated in the Prayer Book, that "when persons that are to be married dwell in divers parishes the banns must be asked in both parishes," unless a license is obtained. The marriage is an illegal act if these rules are not observed; and wilful breach of the law on this subject, or deliberate false statement about residence, &c, renders the offender or offenders liable to be brought before the magistrates, and to be by them committed for trial at the Assizes. It is to be hoped that this caution will be sufficient. The clergy cannot permit the law to be continually broken with¬out seeming in a manner to be parties to this misconduct; although, of course, they do not like to have their parishioners had up to be tried for what is in the eye of the law a felony. The reasons for these regulations are quite plain. If people could get married anyhow without their relatives and friends knowing anything about it, we should soon have a very uncomfortable and awkward state of things in our homes and households. We hope that we shall hear of no more irregularities of this kind in the parish, and that our people will disapprove and hinder so far as they can anything of the kind, if attempted.
It seems that many of our ancestors may have been actively breaking the law by making “deliberate false statements” and it would be interesting to find out if any cases made it to the Assizes. What I can’t work out is how Civil Registration fits in.
It looks like the above is a bit of scaremongering, a last ditch attempt to keep his church actively involved in his parishes marriages. Perhaps our ancestors did stretch the law but whether they were breaking the law is debatable. It seems to me the marriage act of 1836 allowed them to stay within the law providing they had an address within that parish where the banns were being read or a licence applied, hence the reason for many couples living in the same street. The 1836 marriage act also provided couples with marriages away from church or in a church of their choosing, between 1763 and 1836 marriages had to be conducted by a minister and were only recognised as legal if they were carried out by the Church of England,in a church or chapel. I think it would have been very difficult to prove that someone didn't live in a parish were a licence was applied for or banns were read for the short time the law required.
I am on the Electoral Roll of St Nicholas Church Liverpool, and I do know that there is a strong tradition for people to marry there because their grandparents or parents did so.
If I find anything out to answer your query I will let you know.
Have been advised the Public Record Office best place to check further but they are closed at present and will re-open in 2013.
Thanks for asking this question and also for the FB link - I didn't know there was such a group.
I know DH has various relatives who married in St. Nicholas' even though they resided on the Wirral but the only one I can find right now is his gt.grandparents who married in 1872. Both said they were living in Richmond Row but all the census returns, certificates etc. have them permanently in Birkenhead. I need to look at the census returns to see if any family member was in Richmond Row.
The bride was 2 months pregnant but there is a chance that they might not even have known at the time of the marriage or maybe the child was born early so I did not feel able to assume that was the cause of hopping over the Mersey.
The bride was 3 years older than the groom and it looks like he lied about his age as their wedding certificate shows him to be older than her. Both were under 21 so maybe that was why they were in Liverpool? The marriage certificate shows both fathers as deceased but I've not been able to find a death for the bride's father so maybe he was alive and opposed it? Banns had been published.
I had just assumed that St. Nicks was a church used by older generations that I had yet to clarify but you have piqued my curiosity more now!