What does either mean in this marriage law?

Factual Questions
1

In a thread about marriages, @robby linked to a 1970s Texas law that gave a long list of who may perform marriages. It ended with this line:

YOU, ОR EITHER OF YOU, ARE HEREBY AUTHORIZED TO JOIN In the Holy Union of Matrimony

Why “either”? Wouldn’t “any” be a more natural usage? The law has its own vocabulary for the usual arcane reasons, I know, so this probably has some ancient roots. And the phrasing is ambiguous in another way. Who is “you”, the couple being married or the officiants listed?

2

I read “either” in the sense of “any and all of you” and it was probably inserted into the law to eliminate ambiguity (in modern English, “you” is used as both a singular and a plural).

From the context, I read it to mean that the law authorizes all those who are of one of the enumerated classes of people to join in matrimony (I.E., to marry in the sense of officiating at the weddings of) the brides and grooms.

3

That seemed the mostly likely explanation.

It sounds like you haven’t seen this usage of “either” before. I can’t remember ever encountering it, in law or elsewhere. I wonder where it came from, and if Texas law has always used it.

4

Apparently “either” in reference to more than two things is an old meaning, although it is not completely extinct as shown below. It is of course common in legal terminology to use archaic language.

The OED gives several meanings of “either” where it applies to more than two things:

I.4 Each of more than two. Obsolete. 1565–1893
(example citation) 1867 Just above the feet, at either of the three corners, is an exquisite..female bust.

II.6 Any one of more than two. Now nonstandard. 1616-
(example citation) 2006 The lack of statistically significant context effect in either of the three studies is explained against the background of Finn’s..‘transfer feature theory’.

5

It isn’t uncommon in legal documents. It refers to “joint or several” rights and liabilities. They apply to people together as a group, or to each person separately on their own.

6

The semicolon is important in that marriage license. The first sentence addresses either:

  • a single religious official,
  • a single civil official, or
  • both a religious official and a civil official simultaneously

In the first two cases, “you” is appropriate. In the latter case, “either” is appropriate. In the second sentence, Texas asks the person so authorized to certify the marriage within thirty days. If there were two officials and both were authorized, both could certify the marriage on different days, and two marriage licenses would enter the books.

~Max

7

I looked up a marriage license and was referring to this semicolon:

To all licensed or ordained Christian Ministers and Priests, Jewish Rabbis, Persons who are Officers of Religious Organizations and who are duly authorized by the Organization to conduct marriage ceremonies; and Justices of the Supreme Court, Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals, Justices of the Courts of Appeals, Judges of the District, County, and Probate Courts, Judges of the County Courts At Law, Courts of Domestic Relations and Juvenile Courts, Retired Justices and Judges of such Courts, Justices of the Peace, Retired Justices of the Peace, and Judges and Magistrates of the Federal Courts of this State, Greeting:

You, or either of you, are hereby authorized to join
In the Holy Union of Matrimony

_______

with

_______

In Accordance With The Laws Of The State Of Texas

Herein Fail Not, that you make due return of this, your authority, to my office in the City of Houston, Texas, within thirty days after performing the marriage, certifying in what capacity you performed the same.

In Testimony whereof, witness my hand and seal of office at Houston Texas, on this _____ day of __, 19.

Anita Rodeheaver,
County Clerk, Harris county, Texas
By _______, Deputy

~Max

8

That’s an interesting interpretation. Very possible. I wonder if Texas has other laws written that way.