AndrewP wrote:....snipped.............Occupier - was that an old fashioned term for "living with her"?
All the best,
Andrew Paterson
Note that Jessie Wilson is described as "Domestic Servant".
All that "occupier" can be taken to mean is that he was resident at 5 Gourlay Place where Jessie was a servant, and where the birth took place.
Whether or not that means that they were an "item", or that wee Christina was the result of bit of casual houghmagandy can only be speculation without other evidence, but being child number 4 or 5 is fairly strong evidence to the effect of this being something more permanent !!
The registrar was not allowed to draw deductions or be judgmental , - he had to record the "facts" as they were presented to him.
And it's incorrect to say that they weren't married!. They
may have been married by declaration, but never formalised that through the Sheriff Court procedure and then an entry in the marriage register; or, given the other kids, if they represented themselves to the world as man and wife, then they were married by habit and repute !!
And they certainly represented themselves as man and wife in 1881.........
Dwelling: 39 Rosemount Street
Census Place: Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Source: FHL Film 0203639 GRO Ref Volume 644-3 EnumDist 51 Page 1
Marr Age Sex Birthplace
Thos. INNES M 40 M Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Head
Occ: Iron Labourer
Jessie INNES M 38 F Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Wife
David INNES 14 M Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Son
Occ: Message Boy
Jessie INNES 12 F Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Daughter
Occ: Scholar
Thos. INNES 10 M Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Son
Occ: Scholar
Jane INNES 7 F Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Daug
Occ: Scholar
Christine INNES 3 F Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Daughter
Elizabeth INNES 1 F Lanark, Scotland
Rel: Daughter
It wasn't until 1891, when Thomas was 57 and Jessie 47, that they underwent a church marriage that was automatically recorded in the statutory register of marriages
This was 7 years after the birth of the youngest child as shown in the 1891 census! By this time, because of the period that had elapsed, the Sheriff Court route wasn't open to validate a marriage by declaration, - they'd have had to go to the Court of Session, - so they maybe just took the much simpler and less expensive route of a church marriage.
Note that, as long as they were free to marry when the various kids were born, and the marriage register entry shows them as bachelor and spinster, then this 1891 marriage automatically legitimated all the kids, - Scots Law being differing from English law in this respect, where once a b*****d meant always a b*****d ........
David
