Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
Tue Mar 17, 2020, 08:05 AM Mar 2020

And now for something completely different-- wife selling as alternative to divorce...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wife_selling_(English_custom)

Wife selling in England was a way of ending an unsatisfactory marriage by mutual agreement that probably began in the late 17th century, when divorce was a practical impossibility for all but the very wealthiest. After parading his wife with a halter around her neck, arm, or waist, a husband would publicly auction her to the highest bidder. Wife selling provides the backdrop for Thomas Hardy's novel The Mayor of Casterbridge, in which the central character sells his wife at the beginning of the story, an act that haunts him for the rest of his life, and ultimately destroys him.

Although the custom had no basis in law and frequently resulted in prosecution, particularly from the mid-19th century onwards, the attitude of the authorities was equivocal. At least one early 19th-century magistrate is on record as stating that he did not believe he had the right to prevent wife sales, and there were cases of local Poor Law Commissioners forcing husbands to sell their wives, rather than having to maintain the family in workhouses.

Wife selling persisted in England in some form until the early 20th century; according to the jurist and historian James Bryce, writing in 1901, wife sales were still occasionally taking place during his time. In one of the last reported instances of a wife sale in England, a woman giving evidence in a Leeds police court in 1913 claimed that she had been sold to one of her husband's workmates for £1.

<..>


And, of course as all good British customs come to the colonies:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wife_selling#United_States

For divorce-based instances from the colonies before they became the U.S., see wife selling (English custom).
In 1781, in South Carolina, a "Bill of Sale"[3] of a "Wife and Property"[3] for "Two Dollars and half Dozen Bowls of Grogg",[3] the buyer "to have my said Wife for ever and a Day",[3] is, according to Richard B. Morris, "unique of its kind".[4] According to Morris, "although the administration of the law was in a somewhat unsettled state during this ["British"] military occupation [of Charleston], neither at common law nor under the marriage laws then in force in South Carolina would the sale of a wife have been valid".[5][a] The document likely was a way, wrote Morris, for "dissolving the marriage bond"[6] since the state forbade divorce[7] "and the marriage laws of the Church of England were widely disregarded among the poorer whites and in the back country",[8] but it could also have been intended to reduce the husband's liability for debts for support of the wife and her children and for her pre-wedding debts,[9] while it was unlikely to have been for the sale of a Black slave or an indentured servant,[10] though being for the sale of an Indian woman or a mestizo, while unlikely, was not impossible.[1


Now, according to several sources, some wives had no problem being sold to a better mate, and often instigated their sales to their lovers.

Still, to our modern sensitivities, the entire idea seems brutish.
13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

CTyankee

(63,912 posts)
1. I think you should delete this entirely, TB.
Tue Mar 17, 2020, 08:11 AM
Mar 2020

I am wondering what purpose you think this is serving. If it serves a larger goal of fighting for equality and justice for all people, you should state that and back it up.

Otherwise, you have just attempted to ruin my already bad day of isolation.

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
2. Why? It's history and something i just found out about a little while ago...
Tue Mar 17, 2020, 08:14 AM
Mar 2020

What's it called when we delete and ignore parts of history we don't like?

CTyankee

(63,912 posts)
3. Then I would advise putting a little context around it...
Tue Mar 17, 2020, 08:20 AM
Mar 2020

how is it relevant to today's laws, for instance (except in a general way)? Are there some laws on the books in some states where your history would be helpful in a campaign to get rid them?

Try that.

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
4. AFIK, it's already illegal everywhere in the US, so no need to...
Tue Mar 17, 2020, 08:25 AM
Mar 2020

advocate anything.

It is merely an historic curiosity that few seem to know bout.

CTyankee

(63,912 posts)
5. I urge you to share this with the Feminism group, whose participants might have some insights
Tue Mar 17, 2020, 08:28 AM
Mar 2020

on this further. A dialog in that group would be interesting, don't you think?

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
8. Of course, and that was my first thought, but I have gotten into...
Tue Mar 17, 2020, 11:08 AM
Mar 2020

*ahem* trouble in the past posting things that I thought were interesting and not in any way problematic.

Anyone else is free to carry on with a discussion.

Wounded Bear

(58,654 posts)
11. Gonna get a lot of this shit...
Tue Mar 17, 2020, 11:11 AM
Mar 2020

as people have nothing better to do than surf the internet for "interesting" stuff.

ismnotwasm

(41,980 posts)
12. Women were basically property and had little recourse
Tue Mar 17, 2020, 11:14 AM
Mar 2020

I could see how a woman would think getting sold was a way out. I can also see this abused to the depths of horror.

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
13. Women, and many others, were held as chattel throughuot most of history...
Tue Mar 17, 2020, 11:21 AM
Mar 2020

At least b little grateful that we are in a more enlightened age.

I promise I won't talk about what happened to the losers-- men, women, and children, in pre-medievel wars.

But it was bad. Really, really bad.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»And now for something com...