ONTARIO-L Archives

Archiver > ONTARIO > 2008-05 > 1211937417


From: "Don Krieger" <>
Subject: Re: [ONTARIO] Illegitimacy?
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 21:16:57 -0400
In-Reply-To: <483C179D.1060503@sympatico.ca>


Thank you, Jackie.



But suppose a husband runs off and marries. His new "wife" doesn't know
anything about it. She thinks she's married, but he's a bigamist. They
have a child. The mother puts the newly taken surname of the husband on the
birth certificate.



What happens if the bigamy is found out? What happens to the names? Are
the wishes of the mother and the well-being of the child honored? How?



Don



-----Original Message-----
From: Jackie Serna [mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 10:16 AM
To: ;
Subject: Re: [ONTARIO] Illegitimacy?



Wonder why we do not carry on the mother's name then. Di8d some more
research and found this.

By an English statute of 1604, upon which later English laws and laws in the
United States have been modelled, any married person who should marry within
England or Wales, the former husband or wife being living, became guilty of
felony. But the statute did not extend to persons whose husband or wife
remained continually "beyond the seas by the space of seven years", nor to a
person "whose husband or wife shall absent him or herself the one from the
other by the space of seven years together in any parts within his majesty's
dominions, the one of them not knowing the other to be living within that
time". The statute thus established an arbitrary period of absence as
exempting from criminality a second marriage. That absence within England
should justify the second marriage, the one marrying was required to be
ignorant of the survival of the absent husband or wife; but respecting
absence "beyond the seas" we are told by Blackstone, "Where either party
hath been continually abroad for seven years whether the party in England
hath notice of the other's being living or no" (Commentaries, Bk. IV. 164),
there can be no felony under the statute. The statute, not otherwise
providing and its violation being made a felony, men prosecuted thereunder
were, according to the general law of the period, entitled to "benefit of
clergy" (Coke, sup.), subject to which conviction under the statute was
punishable with death. The English statute of 1861, now in force, exempts
from punishment a second marriage only where there has been continual
absence of seven years, and the person marrying shall not know the absent
husband or wife "to be living within that time".

A United States Statute declares guilty of polygamy every person, having a
husband or wife living, who "in a territory or other place over which the
United States have exclusive jurisdiction", marries another, unless thee
shall have been absence of five years, the absent husband or wife "not known
to be living and believed to be dead", or unless there shall have been a
divorce or judicial annulment of the previous marriage. The punishment
provided is a fine of not more than five hundred dollars and not more than
five years' imprisonment.

Jackie


Don Krieger wrote:



What does "legitimate" mean for the child, in legal terms. Here in
Pennsylvania and I think for most of the states, it's my understanding that
it's the mother's name which is the important one listed on a child's birth
certificate. She can give a father's name or not.

Bigamy though, is a real crime here. I'm not an expert on the law, but I
think there are lots of protections built into the law for the children.

Don


-----Original Message-----
From: [mailto:] On
Behalf Of Jackie Serna
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 9:32 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [ONTARIO] a basic question re marriage in Ontario


Thanks Sheila, that does make sense.

Jackie

wrote:



The marriage & children would legally be considered legitimate
unless he was 'found out' and legal action taken.
Sheila

On May 23, 2008, at 2:08 PM, wrote:





Message: 5
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 15:26:04 -0400
From: Jackie Serna <mailto:> <>
Subject: [ONTARIO] a basic question re marriage in Ontario
To:
Message-ID: <mailto:>
<>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed

Hi list, just a quick question and probably many opinions.

If a person married in Ontario (1916) and claimed to be a bachelor
when
infact was
previously married in England and no record of a divorce etc can be
found would the
marriage still be considered legit. Would any offspring be considerd
illegit??

Thanks
Jackie





***********
Search Ontario Genealogy & Resources at
http://olivetreegenealogy.com/can/ont/
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to


with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes
in the subject and the body of the message








***********
Search Ontario Genealogy & Resources at
http://olivetreegenealogy.com/can/ont/
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes
in the subject and the body of the message


***********
Search Ontario Genealogy & Resources at
http://olivetreegenealogy.com/can/ont/
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes
in the subject and the body of the message






This thread: