The Chords of Marital Disharmony

By Lucy Marin, author of Whoever Lives In Love

Ending a marriage in Jane Austen’s time was no simple matter. Divorce was difficult to obtain, especially for women, and while it was possible to secure an annulment, it was not simple or without cost, both financial and societal. There were strict conditions for when an annulment might be possible. These rested on whether the marriage was valid or not at the outset. A union was valid if it followed the provisions of the Hardwicke or Marriage Act of 1725. If the marriage was valid, it could not be annulled. Of note is that the Marriage Act applied only in England and Wales, and that Quakers and Jews were not bound by it.

To understand why annulments might occur, we need to understand some of the provisions of the Marriage Act.

First, a couple was required to make a formal declaration of their intention to marry and adhere to residency requirements. This was commonly done via the reading of the banns. On three successive Sundays, the announcement was made in the parish church of both the bride and groom. The marriage ceremony was then necessarily performed in one of these churches. Couples could also marry via common licence, which replaced the banns. In this case, the ceremony had to take place in a parish in which the bride or groom had lived for at least four weeks. In Pride and Prejudice, Mrs Bennet declares that Elizabeth and Mr Darcy should be married by special licence, which allowed for marriage ceremonies outside of a church and erased the residency requirements, but few people outside of the aristocracy and men in the public eye obtained them.

Despite the residency requirements, not meeting them was not considered grounds for annulment. However, if the banns were not properly published or read, an annulment might be possible. This seems to have most often taken place if the wrong name was used.

The second key provision of the Marriage Act was parental (or guardian) consent. Any person, male or female, below the age of twenty-one who had not previous been married required permission to marry. If minors married without it, the marriage was null and void—unless the couple was married after the banns had been properly read. A parent or guardian could stop the banns from being read, which would mean the wedding never took place. But as long as the reading of the banns was completed properly, it was as though consent had been given for the marriage. 

What if the couple were married by licence? Part of obtaining the licence, which was done from a bishop or archbishop, required affirming that the bride and groom were either of age or had parental consent (or had previously been married). If the person applying for the licence lied about this, the marriage could be considered void. It is interesting to note that anyone obtaining a common licence was required to provide a bond of ₤100 which was forfeit in the case of dishonesty regarding age or consent.

Because the Marriage Act did not apply in Scotland, parental permission was not required, which was one reason couples eloped to Gretna Green or another border town. Boys were considered old enough to consent to marriage at fourteen, and girls at twelve, shockingly young by today’s standards. Societal attitude changes in the early 1800s meant that many no longer agreed with this and felt that girls were only old enough to marry once they were seventeen—older than either Georgiana Darcy or Lydia Bennet when Mr Wickham convinced them to elope.

Contrary to what one might assume, non-consummation was not grounds for annulment of a marriage. However, the inability to consummate the union was, for example, if a woman was tricked into marrying another woman or discovered her spouse was a eunuch.

Impotency was also grounds for annulment, although it was rarely claimed. The bride had to prove she was a virgin, and the groom had to be examined to demonstrate he was incapable of consummating the marriage. If he later fathered a child, the annulment could be reversed. In other words, impotency was expected to be a life-long condition.

‘Voidable’ marriages could also be annulled. These were unions between two people the Church of England prohibited to marry, such as those closely related by blood or marriage. One’s intended spouse could not be a parent, parent-in-law, sibling, or sibling-in-law. Interestingly, marriage to the brother or sister of one’s late spouse was not illegal, but it could easily be voided, and many clergymen refused to perform such marriages. Yet, if the couple did marry and it was not contested during either of their lifetimes, they could remain so and their union would be considered valid.

Other grounds for annulment included bigamy—that is, if either the bride or groom had a living spouse—or if either party was unable to give consent to the union due to insanity or because of their young age. Under the Royal Marriages Act of 1772, royal marriages entered into without the king’s permission were considered illegal, and thus would be annulled.

Annulments were not given on the grounds that the groom lied about his position in life, such as titles, rank, or possession, or if the bride was already pregnant with another man’s child.

All of this shows that it was very difficult to end a marriage through annulment. The act of obtaining an annulment required a suit in the ecclesiastical court. It was tried by the bishop of the see in which couple’s parish was located. This process was not without cost, including of time, which added yet another barrier to ending a marriage, including those that legally should never have taken place.

Finally, we must recognise that an annulment might not be in the best interest of the couple or their family, especially the bride. The reason was simple: scandal. While a non-consenting parent or guardian of a minor child or ward might be able to have the union declared void, they might decide not to, especially if the marriage had been consummated. The bride especially would faced social ruination.

Annulment meant the marriage had never taken place. While divorce ended a marriage, annulment erased it. This means that any children of the couple became illegitimate, with all the complications that come with being born outside of marriage. Sons would lose the right to inheritance of titles and associated properties and to estates such as Mr Bennet’s which were entailed. Daughters and sons alike would see their marriage prospects and place in society severely damaged. Under such circumstances, it might seem wiser to overlook an improperly sanctioned marriage.

Remember that the Marriage Act did not apply in Scotland. There was no question of being of age, having parental permission, parish residency, or publicising the intention to be married. This means that, had George Wickham succeeded in eloping to Scotland with Georgiana Darcy, or if he had brought Lydia Bennet there, as she had supposed he would, their marriage would be legal and not open to annulment. Both girls were considered old enough to consent to marriage, thus Mr Bennet or Mr Darcy and Colonel Fitzwilliam could not argue that they were too young to marry without their permission.

While we might imagine Georgiana Darcy’s noble relations using their influence to free her from an imprudent marriage, it would be extremely unlikely and unadvisable, especially given she had chosen to elope with Mr Wickham, travelling from Ramsgate to Scotland with him—a distance of some 370 miles!—without the benefit of proper chaperonage. Her reputation would be ruined, and such a scandal would affect more than just her. Her brother would become embroiled in it, as would her cousins, especially other girls. The risk to their futures was too great.

No matter how unhappy it was, the difficulty of escaping a marriage—whether by divorce or annulment—combined with the steep social cost, highlight why it was so vitally important to choose one’s spouse with extreme care.

______________________________________________

Image Sources (all public domain) and References

Matrimonial Harmonics, James Gillray

Emma, Chris Houghton 1898

An Elopement by Moonlight, Charles B Newhouse

The Village Doctor, David Teniers the Younger

The Humbug Wedding, Ramblers magazine 1788

Le Nouveau Paris illustration, Mercier

Knowles, R. (2015, 28 November). Why did Regency lovers elope to Gretna Green? https://www.regencyhistory.net/blog/regency-why-did-lovers-elope-gretna-green

Knowles, R. (2020, 11 June). Marriage of minors in Regency England. https://www.regencyhistory.net/blog/regency-marriage-minors

Knowles, R. (2022, 31 March). When could a marriage be annulled in the Regency? https://www.regencyhistory.net/blog/regency-when-could-marriage-be-annulled

Koster, K. (n.d.). A primer on Regency divorce and annulment. https://www.kristenkoster.com/a-regency-divorce-primer/ 

Nancy Mayer Regency Researcher (n.d.). Dissolving a marriage. http://www.regencyresearcher.com/pages/marriagedis.html

Nancy Mayer Regency Researcher (n.d.). Marital Law.  http://www.regencyresearcher.com/pages/marriagelaw.html  

Nancy Mayer Regency Researcher (n.d.). Marriage.  http://www.regencyresearcher.com/pages/marriage.html