Divorce in the 19th Century

After today’s class, I began to think about the question that was raised: “Why didn’t Mr. Rochester divorce Bertha?” I was curious as to what the divorce laws in the 19^th century were. 

·         For a male to get a divorce, he had to say that his wife had committed adultery.  I think that it would be challenging for Mr. Rochester to say that Bertha was being unfaithful. Because she is locked up, Bertha does not have the opportunity to have an affair.

 

·         Here is a little side note about divorce laws in the 19^th century.  Women had a much harder time obtaining a divorce. Unlike men, women had to prove that her husband had been unfaithful. In an era with zero technology, proving adultery would be quite difficult.  In addition, a woman had to prove that her husband was committing incest, cruelty, bigamy, or desertion. Men, however, were not expected to be faithful. It was socially acceptable for a man to have a mistress or a brothel.

 ·         Divorce laws directly addressed the issue of insanity. One source said, “According to the 1835 English Marriage Act, if both spouses were sane enough at the time of the wedding to understand the nature of the contract involved, that marriage contract could not be dissolved in the event of subsequent insanity -- even if the case was compounded by other extenuating circumstances, such as desertion, adultery, or physical abuse.” (Jane Eyre and Insanity)

 ·         Marriage was a big thing for women in the 19^th century.  A woman who was unmarried was looked down upon and pitied. Her brother was supposed to take care of her (which may explain some of Mr. Mason’s interest in visiting Thornfield). Her options were few: a factory job or a maid in a wealthy family.

http://staff.washington.edu/cgiacomi/courses/english200/finalprojects/websitep/supplementary.html

http://victoriancontexts.pbworks.com/w/page/12407471/The%20Law%20of%20Divorce

http://www.stanford.edu/~steener/su02/english132/MoralMadness.htm