SELFISH INTENTIONS - K-REx - Kansas State University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

In the United States, legal authorities wanted to maintain the integrity of the marriage union; therefore, early divorce laws made it difficult to get divorced. When two individuals, a man and a woman, signed a marriage contract, their identities as two individuals became secondary to their identities as husband and wife. The “unit” established by the marriage was now a matter of public interest and of greater social importance than either individual. Legally, legislatures writing the laws and the courts enforcing them did their best to maintain this unit. When one member of the unit petitioned for divorce, in effect they were claiming the actions of the other member of the unit had violated the legal and sacred bonds of that unit. In Man and Wife in America, Hendrik Hartog explains the dominant legal thought of the period: Divorce laws belonged to the public, not to the parties themselves. They were not intended to allow couples to escape identities assumed in marriage. Divorce punished the guilty for “criminal” conduct. Conversely, divorce allowed an “innocent” spouse to escape the moral contamination that might accompany continued cohabitation with a guilty spouse. In a world where marital unity meant something, it was important that divorce exist. At the same time, it was still more important that divorce not be understood as a form of voluntary exit available to all married couples. It was, wrote Schouler, because marriage was ‘not on the footing of ordinary contracts, that husband and wife’ could not, ‘on principle, compromise, arbitrate, or modify their relationship at pleasure.’ Or end it. 4 Kansas law did not care whether Mary Elizabeth and Charles Lease had mutually agreed to end their marriage, nor did the law care whether either individual was “happy.” What mattered was whether one of them had so violated their status as husband or wife that the social institution of their marriage was irreparably destroyed. Someone had to be guilty. 4 Hendrik Hartog, Man and Wife in America: A History, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000), 75-76. x
One other factor is important here. Mary Elizabeth Lease filed for divorce as a “wife” and wives had a different status than “husbands.” Traditionally, a married woman had no legal existence separate from her husband’s, a legal status known as “coverture.” When a man and woman were united in marriage, a wife lost control over property, her ability to make contracts, and the right to her own person. The husband would assume responsibility for his wife in all aspects including all of his wife’s premarital debts and obligations. 5 Although Kansas had overturned part of coverture, by granting married women the right to their own property, other aspects remained. When Lease returned to Kansas to file for divorce, she did so as a legal resident of Kansas, not New York. So long as she remained married, her legal residence was that of her husband whether she lived with him or not. More importantly for her, so long as she remained married, her income belonged to the marriage, not specifically to her. Fortunately for Lease, Kansas was a more liberal place to seek a divorce than New York, and it allowed Mary Elizabeth Lease and other Kansas women take divorce law into their own hands and use it for their own individual purposes. The Kansas divorce statutes outlined ten grounds for divorce. A person could petition for divorce in New York only if they could prove their spouse had committed adultery. Kansas also had a shorter waiting period both to establish residency and for the divorce to become final. Lastly, women petitioners were not necessarily looked at unfavorably in the state of Kansas. All of these reasons led to Kansas being known for its liberal divorce laws. Although a number of studies have examined divorce law in the United States, the current historiography has tended to focus on national trends. Mary Somerville Jones’s An Historical Geography of Changing Divorce Law in the United States surveys changes in divorce 5 Hartog, 99. xi
Page 1 and 2: SELFISH INTENTIONS: KANSAS WOMEN AN
Page 3 and 4: Abstract In the United States, lega
Page 5 and 6: Table of Contents Acknowledgements.
Page 7 and 8: Dedication To my Lord and Savior Je
Page 9: after five years away from Kansas,
Page 13 and 14: law analysis. Riley’s study expla
Page 15 and 16: CHAPTER 1 - Divorce Law in the Unit
Page 17 and 18: government regulations focused on t
Page 19 and 20: What is abundantly clear from the N
Page 21 and 22: conception of marriage.” 25 It wa
Page 23 and 24: divorce reflected the changing tren
Page 25 and 26: Constitution. In his dissenting opi
Page 27 and 28: family was poor, a legislative divo
Page 29 and 30: nineteenth century America, divorce
Page 31 and 32: divorce. They had to have been aban
Page 33 and 34: addition, protected the property ri
Page 35 and 36: presented an opportunity for change
Page 37 and 38: divorce was not unheard of in those
Page 39 and 40: The procedure to file for divorce i
Page 41 and 42: the district courts exclusive juris
Page 43 and 44: Many of the features outlined in th
Page 45 and 46: esidence was where her husband live
Page 47 and 48: years, and that into their large an
Page 49 and 50: active part in the city’s most pr
Page 51 and 52: had availed themselves of the quick
Page 53 and 54: CHAPTER 3 - Concerns about Liberal
Page 55 and 56: would come to Kansas for the sole r
Page 57 and 58: Kansans were concerned about the st
Page 59 and 60: tried within six months of the fili
Page 61 and 62:
y default. In a majority of them ar
Page 63 and 64:
Breeze dated July 18, 1899, Thompso
Page 65 and 66:
grounds used to petition for a divo
Page 67 and 68:
marriages. Thus, we are apparently
Page 69 and 70:
e accompanied by other flagrant vio
Page 71 and 72:
in Kansas, the reporter of this art
Page 73 and 74:
equired any divorce plaintiff to st
Page 75 and 76:
District Court for a divorce. This
Page 77 and 78:
only the right to divorce would ins
Page 79 and 80:
using her capital (plus a $70 contr
Page 81 and 82:
Downing therefore asked for divorce
Page 83 and 84:
possibility that one of her sons fr
Page 85 and 86:
Conclusion Ida Marion Selts, Bertha
Page 87 and 88:
etween the promise of the law and t
Page 89 and 90:
Primary Sources Books Bibliography
Page 91 and 92:
Secondary Sources Books Bardaglio,
Page 93 and 94:
________. Untying the Knot: A Study
Page 95 and 96:
Gonzales, Deena, “The Widowed Wom
show all

SELFISH INTENTIONS - K-REx - Kansas State University

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?