Bland-Hughes 1796 Washington County Marriage Bond

Friday I went to the Washington County Clerk’s office for a little research – some for the blog, some for myself.  Down the winding staircase, into the dungeon, to the old, old records!  First I checked for the oldest marriage records in the locked room.  I was interested in those marriages starting in 1792.  They were not to be found.  The original marriage bonds are kept in large grey boxes, divided into folders by years.  These old marriage bonds, along with consents, have been laminated to protect them – a good move on the part of the clerk!  The first box contains 1792-1799.

I searched and searched, finally went upstairs to ask the clerk and she came down with me.  Finally found them on the bottom shelf of the tax records!  What a scare!  I decided to spend most of my time making copies of those early records – so now I have copies of all the original marriage bonds of Washington County from 1792 through 1800!  Just a little crazy, huh?

Know all men by these presents that we, Daniel Bland and Robert Hughes, are held and firmly bound unto his Excellency, the Governor of Kentucky, in the sum of fifty pounds current money, to the payment of which well and truly to be made to the said governor and his successors.  We bind ourselves, our heirs, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents, sealed with our seals and dated this 12th day of January 1796.

The Condition of the above obligation is such that whereas there is a marriage shortly intended to be solemnized between the above bound Daniel Bland and Elizabeth Hughes, for which a license has issued.  Now if there be no lawful cause to obstruct the said marriage then this obligation to be void, or else remain in full force and virtue.

Daniel Bland, Robert Hughes

Witness, John Reed

Washington County, Kentucky

2 thoughts on “Bland-Hughes 1796 Washington County Marriage Bond”

  1. I would love to get into that room. My Carters started appearing in Washington county around 1830 from Lincoln County. I have not been able to determine why there, but see other family names there earlier: Wright, Lambert,Brown, Lancaster,Best, Drury to name a few

  2. I think I used the wrong term when writing about the old marriage records at Washington County Courthouse, and what the clerk has done with the older marriages to preserve them. I said they were laminated – that was wrong. Laminating, as one kind person brought to my attention, would be the wrong avenue to saving a record. It could not be recovered since the lamination would stick to the record itself. The records at Washington County are encapsulated – enclosed within two sheets of Mylar film. The top could easily be cut off and the record taken out if need be. I wanted to correct my statement before any damage was done to any of your old, precious records! Happy researching!

Any thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s