It seems to me that this entry, while admitting and recognizing that a divorce was in place or about to be brought to finality, does not grant that legal relationship. Thanks, Rob. Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: Rob Jolly
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 9:55 PM
Subject: Re: divorce in antebellum America
Although I do not have a copy of any divorce decree from the court order
book, the following transcription, from Essex County Deed Book 33,
1786-1793, pp. 386-87, seems to indicate that Richard & Mary Howerton
Jeffries were divorced in the eyes of the June 1792 Essex Co. court:
To all to whom these presents shall come Know Ye that we Meriwether Smith
and William Latane arbitrators mutually chosen by Richard Jeffries and Mary
his wife to settle the unhappy differences subsisting between them and for
the purposes appearing in a Bond date the fifth day of March 1792, entered
unto by the said Richard Jeffries to John Howerton, William Howerton,
Richard St. John and Gabriel Dix to the said Richard Jeffries of the same
date, both with conditions for the said Richard Jeffries's and the said
Mary's performance of the award -- that we should make, have met at the
house of the said John Howerton and after having advised a reconciliation
between the parties to no purpose, and they agreeing to a final separation
and Divorce from Bed and Board, have made the following arbitraiment and
award, to with that the said Richard Jeffries deliver up to the said Mary
his wife all the Lands and slaves which he holds in right of, or which he
has a Right to by virtue of her being his wife, in the condition they shall
be at the time of delivery, and that the said Richard Jeffries also deliver
up to the said Mary his wife, the goods & chattels allotted to the said Mary
as her part of the personal estate of William Howerton dec'd, her former
husband, in quantity, quality and kind as contained in the following list,
according to the Judgment of three appraisers of any tow of them, being
first sworn, or that he pay the full value thereof or any part thereof which
he shall not restore in kind to be appraised as aforesaid, in money
according to the appraisement contained in the said List, at the option of
the said Richard Jeffries, an that the said Richard Jeffries do on or before
the first day of May next ensuing the date thereof, execute proper deeds of
conveyance of all the said Estate to Trustees or a trustee for her use so as
to bar him from ever take the same to his own use
[appraised list of ~50 personal items & livestock detailed here]
And we do award that from this time the said Richard Jeffries shall give her
no molestation under pretend [?pretense?] of her being his wife. And we do
further award that for the consideration above mentioned the said Mary shall
by proper deeds such as the said Richard Jeffries or his counsel shall
devise, release, relinquish and disclaim any Interest she may have in any
part of the said Richard Jeffries's Estate, except as before mentioned,
either that he has now in pofsefsion or may have at the time of his death
either real or personal, and that from this time the said Mary shall give no
molestation to the said Richard Jeffries or claim further maintenance from
him, In Testimony of the being our award we have hereunto set our hand &
seals the 29th day of March 1792
M. Smith
W. Latane
At a Court held for Efsex County at Tappa. On the 18th day of June
1792--This award was ordered to be recorded.
Teste
?W?T? Lee, Clk
on 8/10/05 6:36 PM, Paul Drake at [log in to unmask] wrote:
> I am aware of that, thanks, H.B. The question was could the circuit court or
> any other court of general jurisdiction declare that from then forward till
> reconciliation or final divorce there would exist a relationship of a couple
> as "divorce a mensa et thoro". I was in error, and the correct answer to that
> question is that the best sources seem to reveal that the Colonial VA courts
> had no such jurisdiction. Thanks for the comments. Paul
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: H. B. Gill
> To: Paul Drake ; [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 6:21 PM
> Subject: Re: Fw: divorce in antebellum America
>
>
> For what it's worth, Virginia county courts could grant a separate
> maintenance for a spouse but could not dissolve a marriage.
> HBG
>
> At 03:51 PM 8/10/2005 -0500, Paul Drake wrote:
>> I know that definition well. I believe I have found the answer, and as I
>> stated, I was in error; I sure thought the court had authority to
>> establish a mensa et thoro. Thanks anyhow. Paul
>>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.5/67 - Release Date: 8/9/2005
>
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.5/67 - Release Date: 8/9/2005
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
|
