Taken from the Freeman’s Journal, 26 February 1841
Dublin Police- Henry Street Office
CHARGE OF BIGAMY
An interesting-looking young woman, named Anne Kirwan, applied to Mr. Duffy, the presiding magistrate, to have informations taken against John Kirwan, her husband, on a charge of bigamy.
Mr. Duffy inquired what means she had of proving the offence?
The complainant produced a marriage certificate to show that she had been legally united to her faithless spouse, and said that with respect to the second marriage, she had the word of the other injured woman for it.
Mr. Duffy said, that evidence was not sufficient, and she should thereforego away until she could bring forward satisfactory proof of the second marriage.
Complainant- Oh, murdher, and is your worship going to let him live with another woman this blessed season, and I, his lawful wife, here before you?
Mr. Duffy – You see he has not appeared before me, and under the circumstances it is quite impossible that I could afford you any immediate redress.
Complainant- Faith, then, small blame to him, and every other man, to get as many wives as they like, when the law will give no more satisfaction than this against them.
Katie Barclay thought this example of early feminism fascinating. She is trying to figure out what all these bigamy cases tell us about the stability of marriage in the past.
I don’t know if it’s of interest, but I’ve written about two possible bigamy cases in my own family history. If true, it appears that both husband and wife in this marriage were involved at different times in bigamous relationships:
http://mprobb.wordpress.com/2011/02/03/the-bigamous-marriage-of-elizabeth-robb-and-edmund-john-vineer/
http://mprobb.wordpress.com/2010/11/06/joseph-boden-early-victorian-dentist-and-bigamist/
It would be interesting to know how common this was, and what drove women and men to bigamy in the 19th century. Was it simply the difficulty and expense of divorce?
Martin Robb
Sorry Martin, this got caught in my spam filter due to the links and I never noticed until now! Oops.
Bigamy, or simply cohabitation after separation without a divorce or remarriage, appears to have been reasonably common amongst certain groups, although it is very hard to put a number on it because, of course, people didn’t advertise it, and if both spouses had agreed to the split, then there was no one pushing for prosecution. Ginger Frost has written a book about this, which has just been reissued in paperback- Living in Sin (Manchester UP).
We do know that in some communities such behaviour is regulated, so that ‘divorce’ had rituals like tearing up the wedding certificate or jumping backwards over a broomstick. If this was done with mutual consent and in front of the community, it was often accepted and the law need never know! And, yes, it happened because divorce was unaffordable or inaccessible (as the grounds for divorce were very limited).