Divorce Records from 1880

[rthom]

Hi Valda:

Many thanks for the interesting and informative background.  

In the case of my great-grandparents, the 1880 index record appears to indicate that it was my g-gf who was the petitioner, as there is what I assume to be a third-party co-respondent named alongside the entry for my g-gm.

My g-gf had a boot & shoe manufacturing business, and while he was fairly comfortably off, I wouldn't have expected that there were large amounts of money available for prolonged and expensive divorce proceedings.

I will contact TNA to see what is involved in obtaining the case record (for which I have the ref #).

Regards, rthom

[stanmapstone]

The only mention of divorce costs that I can find in 'The Times' is in the case of Kemp v Welch, May 1910, where the husband was ordered to pay his wife's costs which were £296. This seems to be equivalent to about £17,000 using the retail price index, and of course he would have his own costs as well.
There are also a couple of bankruptcies where divorce costs were given as the reason.

Stan

[Valda]

The only divorce I have in my extended family was in the 1880s. The woman committed adultery with her husband's young assistant. Her husband was a funeral director in Lambeth so again owned his own business, but would not have been what I would term in any way wealthy. However he obviously was very angry and though he never married again I presume he divorced her to make absolutely sure she could have no further contact with their two children and also in an attempt to ruin his young assistant by suing him for damages (it didn't quite work as he was the illegitimate son of a man of some propriety and was able to set up in the local vicinity as an undertaker too).
When she married her first husband she was 20 and it was a step up for her. Her father had been a licensed victualler but had married her step mother, probably his barmaid just before he died of congestion of the brain. Her stepmother took over the business (her step daughter was only 6) and married a few years later and had her own children. Consequently on marriage the future divorcee was just an ordinary servant.
The case records were very informative and especially useful because the newspapers steered clear of the case. They obviously found an older woman's love for a man 13 years her junior and at that time under age not quite to their taste. Nevertheless after the divorcee and as soon as he was old enough, the couple married and the second marriage appears to have been one which was successful.

Regards

Valda

[rthom]

Hi Valda:

My, that's an interesting glimpse of Peyton Place in London in the 1880s!  About the same time and not far away from my folks in London, as well!  The full story of my great-grandparents' separation awaits the case file, of course.  I do know that my g-gf remarried in London in 1884 and went on to have two more children with his second wife.  But I have no idea what became of my g-gm after 1880, there being no further mention of her in the family oral history, which suggests she became a family outcast.  It has become my quest to find her.  She was only 33 at the time of the divorce and could easily have gone on to have a second family herself.

Regards, rthom

[rthom]

Hi Stan:

Thanks for your insights into the numbers and costs. My g-gf evidently weathered the firestorm of the divorce, so presumably the judgment went in his favour such that he wasn't saddled with his wife's costs and upkeep. Maybe the co-respondent had to cough up.

Regards, rthom

[Valda]

rthom

what were the details of your great grandmother and perhaps we can help you find her. If the co-respondent sited by your great grandfather did not go onto marry her, her future may have been somewhat grim as she had every chance of being disowned by her own family as well. Women on their own not in some way financially supported by a man such as their father or husband usually had economically difficult lives.
The divorce case notes though interesting are not likely to help you with any information on your great grandmother after the divorce apart from perhaps some indication whether she committed adultery with a married or single man and where her place of abode was at the time of the divorce.

Regards

Valda

[rthom]

Hi Valda:

Thanks for offering to help.

My great-grandmother was Mary Elizabeth Pearson, born Sep 16, 1847 in Northampton, Northants.  She married William Thomas Hemmings in 1866 in Chelsea, London, and the couple went on to have three children in Chelsea (Ellen Louisa, Emily Kate, William Frederick). In 1871, the family is living at 36 College St in Chelsea; Mary is recorded as Elizabeth M. 

The next glimpse is the 1880 divorce petition (Record No. 6730) by William Thomas, where Mary Elizabeth is again recorded as Elizth Mary Hemmings and a co-respondent named Turner is cited.  In 1881, William Thomas is living in Ramsgate, Kent with his son William Frederick, giving himself as a widower; his two daughters are living with an old neighbour in St Pancras.  In 1884, William Thomas remarries in a church in Clerkenwell, giving himself as a bachelor.

I have William Thomas and his three children fully tracked in the 1881, 1891 and 1901 census, but have not yet found any clues for Mary Elizabeth (or Elizabeth Mary) after 1880. She does not seem to be with her Pearson relis back in Northampton. It would be wonderful to find out what happened to her to bring some closure to this unfortunate event which has remained in the family closet.

Regards, rthom

[Valda]

Nothing in The Times newspaper. I think you are going to have find out more information from the case papers about the co-respondent and see if she can be tracked through him.

Regards

Valda

[rthom]

Thanks for looking, Valda.   
We'll see what the case papers turn up.

More information on the case papers can be found in this thread:

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,290565.msg1736428.html#msg1736428

Regards, rthom