Genealogy Chat

Thanks Geoff, Not sure if that is referring to India based or not? Im sure I read it was 30 for a man who signed up at 16 and 26 for someone who signed at 14. Perhaps marriage was not allowed at all before?

If I am reading correctly, enlisted men could not marry, but the act was repealed in England in 1888 - see what you think: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/Organizations/healthnet/SAsia/repro2/indranichatterjee.html Sorry about the long URL!

I am still on the track of hubby's GGF, Thomas Jenkins. Thomas appears in the 1881 as a 19 year old private at Norton Barracks, Pershore. In the 1891 he is a corporal at Wellington Barracks, Westminster. aged 29 and shown as single. Now, in the 1901 he has left the army and is a railway porter living in Southwark with wife Ellen and 4 children. The first child, Thomas was born Clerkenwell, circa 1890. There is a gap of 4 years and then the next 3 kids are all shown born Westminster though they were registered in Southwark. I am sure that someone on here said that at that time men had to wait til they were 30 for permission to marry from the army (I take it this was to avoid too many pay outs to grieving widows). So perhaps Thomas waited until he was over 30 to declare his marriage? But why would the 3 younger children be shown born in Westminster (where his barracks were) but registred Southwark. Does any military history buffs know if the army would have provided wives with maternity care at that time?

See below please