2ND battalion Scot's guards

[Debra A]

Originally Posted by Cogidubnus

Hi Debra

Yes I'm aware the average age for women for a formal marriage was 25.1 years...what I'm genuinely not aware of is how that figure was calculated...was that first marriages only? If it included second marriages, did it include the huge second marriage bulge (particularly among Jewish women), of the 1870/1880s?

From various websites it appears that formal marriages could be concluded at an age as low as 11/12 years...I really don't know...one site I visited even suggested a theoretical 7 years old for a bride (but did mercifully say the marriage could only be legally consumated at 16 years)...I really don't know...

But significantly, among the vast number of other things I don't know, is whether the Kelly/Davies "marriage" actually formally took place, and if it did, where it might've been concluded, and using what names...

Hi Dave,
Perhaps the figures were calculated by including 2nd marriages also, I couldn't say for definite they weren't. I still don't think it was that common from my own research experiences, but I can't prove it statistically.

The legal age for marriage for a female was 12 I think, but a 12 year old could not marry without parental consent, which was needed right up until the age of 21 as I understand it. A woman marrying at age 21 or above was classed as full age on certificates up until a certain period when it then became common to include an age (another thing which could skew the marriage age figures I guess).

If MJK was not legally married I don't understand why she suddenly felt embarrassed enough to lie about being married to the collier, to Barnett? She was forthcoming in telling him of her other relationships and co-habitations, she also started living with Barnett the day after she met him on the streets and never married him. It wasn't as if it would have been a shock to Barnett to find she hadn't been legally married to the collier when she lived with him? Why the need to lie?

I just don't get it. I think she may have been older than she let on to Barnett.

Debs

[Cogidubnus]

I just don't get it. I think she may have been older than she let on to Barnett.

Hi Debra

Yes I suspect you're right - it was on that hunch I was looking back as far as 1870 for Kelly/Davies on the Welsh Colliery disaster website - why couldn't she marry a miner called Spoonwackett ?

All the best
Dave

[Robert]

Hi Debs

The story of the tragic marriage to the collier, the tragic death of her husband and (perhaps) the delay in being paid compensation, necessitating the switch to prostitution, all might have been calculated to arouse Barnett's sympathy and make him feel protective towards her. She would have been saying, "It's only bad luck that forced me to go on the streets." Maybe she spun this yarn to every man she met.

[DanaeChantel]

It appears to me that MJK was rather, not so much vague about her past, but that she possibly lied about her past and her age and could have even fabricated the entire story of being married to a collier just for sympathy from Barnett or from anyone for that matter. Did anyone ever actually see a letter from her supposed "brother"? Maybe he wasn't her brother but a friend or a lover perhaps, or he was someone she cared for as a brother. How does anyone know her siblings lived on London? Did she speak of them to anyone? Its odd that they would not have attended her services, even if they were ashamed.

[lynn cates]

Hello Danae.

"It's odd that they would not have attended her services, even if they were ashamed."

Precisely!

Cheers.
LC

[DanaeChantel]

Yes exactly! Back in those times it was easy to lie/and or change your name or even ones identity alltogether. Computers and fingerprinting and the like were not available during those days and times. Maybe MJK didn't even have siblings or maybe she had been a ward of the court, or an orphan. She could have said anything to anyone and it possibly would not have been questioned. It doesn't appear that she had many friends other than the prostitutes she associated with or men she dated/serviced. I feel she may have altered her past altogether. Had she siblings or even a brother, I feel certain he would have come to claim her belongings and at the very least assist in her burial as all her siblings would.

I don't think she had anyone to be truthful. What parents she did have were probably dead.

Did McCarthy try to contact her brother??

[lynn cates]

Hello Danae. Yes, it's almost as if she were a person with her identity changed.

Reminds me of a witness protection program where an informant is given a "new identity."

Cheers.
LC

[DanaeChantel]

I would be willing to bet that this is what happened or possibly she had committed a crime in another town or another part of London. Nothing about her really makes much sense. The other victims families were found and contacted to my recollection and it wasn't really hard to find the other victims families. A lot was known about the other victims, such as how many children they had, husbands, etc. Nothing is really known about MJK. I personally believe she was hiding something.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Danae,
According to McCarthy's great grand-daughter, Mary's brother [ who was in the army] was contacted, and belongings were parcelled up and sent on .
It would appear that he was rather anxious that all of this might hinder his army prospects.
Regards Richard.

[Debra A]

Originally Posted by Robert

Hi Debs

The story of the tragic marriage to the collier, the tragic death of her husband and (perhaps) the delay in being paid compensation, necessitating the switch to prostitution, all might have been calculated to arouse Barnett's sympathy and make him feel protective towards her. She would have been saying, "It's only bad luck that forced me to go on the streets." Maybe she spun this yarn to every man she met.

Hi Robert,
Yes,that definitely has more of a ring of truth about it. Thanks.