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]
