Divorce 1920

[Norfolk Nan]

Hi, divorce papers show that a decree nisi was granted but later rescinded because the petitioner (husband) hadn’t been honest about his own circumstances (apparently he had fathered a child while divorcing his wife for infidelity). He’d made the original petition as a ‘poor man’ which sounds like a plea for legal aid and after the petition was rescinded he was ‘condemned to the king’s cost’ which I suspect means he had to pay the bill. Is that right?

This was in 1920 and he eventually remarried in 1922 so would that mean he had to apply again for a divorce being more honest and paying the costs? I’m not sure what the grounds would be, both parties were living with other people and equally to blame. Any insight would be very useful. Thank you.

[AntonyM]

If he applied for a divorce again, it should be in the records (almost all are for that period) so you will find it on the TNA index.

On the 1922 marriage how was he described ? As a bachelor, or as "previously the husband of ..... from whom he obtained a divorce " (or similar).


The divorce courts did have a procedure known as "in forma pauperis" which was an early form of legal aid - sounds like he may have been disqualified for having applied with false/incomplete information perhaps and had to pay some or all of the costs ?

[Norfolk Nan]

Yes, I think that was it - he was described as ‘a poor person’ and I suspect he had to repay the legal aid. He is a bachelor on his second marriage in 1922, a surprise as he openly stated divorced on the 1921 census form. He doesn’t appear again in TNA records so I can’t confirm they divorced for certain.

[Thunder]

Could you let us know the source of his divorce records for 1920?, TNA's catalogue does have errors, so we might be able to trace any records for 1922 otherwise there may be a bigamy file if his name is in TNA's catalogue.

[Norfolk Nan]

TNA provided a digital copy of J 77/1436/4207 for me this week and I went back to the original index looking for a second petition. I didn’t find one but I have an open mind about what might have happened. Anything is possible with this family.

[AntonyM]

Being described as a bachelor on his second marriage in 1922 tells you that he wasn't divorced, or at least claimed not to ever have been married before when he gave notice (or had banns read).

[Norfolk Nan]

It certainly would be seen like that now but he declared himself divorced in 1921, the year before this marriage and more than a year after the failed divorce. It’s not consistent, is it.

[Mick Loney]

It certainly would be seen like that now but he declared himself divorced in 1921, the year before this marriage and more than a year after the failed divorce. It’s not consistent, is it.

Since when has genealogy been consistent

[Norfolk Nan]

Totally agree, Mick...I've just tripped over a divorce petition for a Walter Pearce, citing his wife's adultery - guess who the wife was? Yes, my chap's wife. It seems that she had been married and widowed, married and divorced, married again to my chap. She married Mr Pearce in 1909 and he petitioned for a divorce in 1911 but I can't decide if it was granted because although that nisi is signed off there's no evidence of an absolute. The co-respondent denied the claim. Whatever happened to them, she reverted to her first married name and widowed status when she married my man. Now, it's possible she was a bigamist and the third marriage to my chap didn't require a divorce! Maybe he was a bachelor? It's a messy tangle...