A Strange, but Legal, Family Relationship??

I think every genealogist has come across their fair share of strange family connections and relationships. Some of these relationships seem strange, or even taboo to us, due to the time in which we live. However, one of the things that a genealogist must do is to investigate with perspective in mind. We must not make judgments based on our belief systems, but instead, based on those of the time in which our ancestors lived. I was recently faced with a situation that forced me to put aside my beliefs in order to evaluate the facts that I was uncovering.
It is easy to get lost in my research, in the fluid motions of entering names and dates. It is more difficult to slow down and evaluate each fact that I am entering. I have more than once entered the fact for a marriage between Helen Henderson Kay and her husband James Ruben Waybrant. I knew that both surnames were familiar and that both were a part of my maternal family lines. More than once, I have seen surnames, some just similar others exact, cross paths,  I knew that it was a little strange to see the Waybrant and Kay surnames on the same marriage record, but I also knew that the couple marrying were not my direct ancestors, so I entered the information and put the record aside with the intention of researching it further at a later date.
The other day, my curiosity got the better of me and I started my research. What I found was quite interesting. James Ruben Waybrant, the son of Phillip Henry Waybrant and Ann Splann, is the half-brother of Arminia A. Waybrant, the daughter of Phillip Henry Waybrant and Catherine Kay Britten.  on, 2/15/1888, James Ruben Waybrant, born 3/10/1867, married Helen Henderson Kay who is the daughter of Arminia A. Waybrant and Alexander Kay.
Hopefully, I haven't confused you too much. The conclusion is that James Ruben Waybrant married his half-niece Helen Henderson Kay, born 8/6/1867, the daughter of his half-sister Arminia A. Waybrant. There were 31 years between James and his half-sister Arminia. The chart below will give you a more visual explanation.

Their marriage record further verifies this fact.

So, at this point, some of you might be wondering how this was even considered legal, he was her uncle?? Well, I wondered the same thing and did some research. Based on Michigan Compiled Law Chapter 83, Sections 551.3 and 551.4, it is currently illegal for first cousins to marry in the state.
Michigan
Revised Statutes of 1846 (EXCERPT)
Chapter 83. Of marriage and the solemnization thereof
551.3: Incapacity; persons man prohibited from marrying
A man shall not marry his mother, sister, grandmother, daughter, granddaughter, stepmother, grandfather's wife, son's wife, grandson's wife, wife's mother, wife's grandmother, wife's daughter, wife's granddaughter, brother's daughter, sister's daughter, father's sister, mother's sister, or cousin of the first degree.
551.4: Incapacity; persons woman prohibited from marrying
A woman shall not marry her father, brother, grandfather, son, grandson, stepfather, grandmother's husband, daughter's husband, granddaughter's husband, husband's father, husband's grandfather, husband's son, husband's grandson, brother's son, sister's son, father's brother, mother's brother, or cousin of the first degree.

Based on my research, first cousins share about 12.5% DNA, which is the same percentage shared between a woman and her half-uncle.  The difference is that there are 4 degrees of relationship between first cousins and 3 degrees between a woman and her half-uncle. I provided a chart with some of the relationship statistics below.

Based on the research I have shared thus far, I believe that I should also provide some historical context to this relationship. Please keep in mind the background that I provide is only a brief summary of what is a much larger historically relevant topic.
Based on this research and the statistics provided in the chart above, the relationship between a half-uncle and his niece is actually one degree closer than that of first cousins.
Just a reminder, James Ruben Waybrant, and Helen Henderson Kay were married on 2/15/1888 in Sault Sainte Marie, Chippewa, Michigan. This seemed to be right in the midst of many changes in both public opinion and the laws regarding the marriage of individuals related by blood.
Cousin marriage was legal in all states before the Civil War. However, it was believed that the main purposes of marriage prohibitions were to maintain the social order and uphold religious morality and safeguard the creation of fit offspring. Writers and ministers helped lay the groundwork for such viewpoints well before 1860. This led to a gradual shift in concern from affinal unions, like those between a man and his deceased wife's sister, to consanguineous unions like those of two people from the same bloodline.
By the 1870s, beliefs were changing to reflect the advantages of marriages between unrelated persons. By the 1880s 13 states and territories had passed laws prohibiting the marriage of cousins. During this period thru the mid-1920s, the number of bans had more than doubled. Since that time, the only three states to add this prohibition has been Kentucky in 1943, Maine in 1985, and Texas in 2005.

I have done a lot of research for this blog post, however, I don't believe that I can come to a definite conclusion as to the law pertaining to the marriage of a man to his half-niece. I do know that in October of 2014, the state of New York ruled this type of marriage legal.

I have to admit I have mixed feelings about the relationship. On one hand, there was a very large age distance between my 3rd great grandmother Arminia and her half-brother James, and there was only a couple month difference between James and Helen. Most likely the two grew up together, going to the same school, in the same grade. I can see how they connected with each other more like friends and classmates than uncle and niece, regardless of the blood relationship. On the other hand, I have a younger, by 21 years, a half-brother who is only  3 years old than my daughter. The idea that they could ever be in a relationship besides uncle and niece or, in their case, great friends, seems absolutely absurd to me.
James and Helen went on to live a long and seemingly happy life, married for 38 years and have 3 children.
The photo to the right is of James and Helen Waybrant, with their daughter Mabel, Son-in-law Chester Crawford and their grandchildren, Robert (Bob), Helen and James (Jim).

I will leave it up to you to come to your own conclusion. As for me, family is family, and as a genealogist, it is my job to share their stories.
Blog Signiture

One Comment

  1. Last night I found that A man had married his sister-in-law after their spouses died. What really got me searching was the fact that the sister-in-law last name was the same as the man she was marrying. I think I have found her first husband since on the marriage certificate it said when he had died…………….Also have a couple of first cousin marrying.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.