A History of Matrimonial Institutions, Vol. 2 of 3Howard, George Elliott
History
A History of Matrimonial Institutions, Vol. 2 of 3
Howard, George Elliott
Families; Marriage -- History
The early colonial laws, generally, required that all marriages
should be celebrated before a justice of the peace or other
magistrate, sometimes under penalty of nullity for those solemnized
in any other way.[363] Where no statutory provision to the contrary
existed the common-law marriage by private consent was valid.[364]
The question now arises as to the causes which determined the
establishment of civil marriage in the New England colonies. Was
it set up in imitation of the practice in Holland? Did it come
as a natural result of the general tendency of Protestant, and
especially of Puritan, thought? Or was it perhaps the product of
both influences combined? Already in the middle of the eighteenth
century colonial historians were at a loss to account for it. Thus
Governor Hutchinson makes a difficulty of understanding why the
lay celebration was introduced. "Their laws concerning marriage
and divorce," he says, "are somewhat singular. I suppose there had
been no instance of a marriage, lawfully celebrated, by a layman
in England, when they left it. I believe there was no instance of
marriage by a clergyman after they arrived, during their charter;
but it was always done by a magistrate, or by persons specially
appointed for that purpose.... It is difficult to assign a reason
for so sudden a change, especially as there was no established form
of the marriage covenant."[365]
[Footnote 363: The fact that ministers as such were not allowed
to celebrate in New England until near the end of the seventeenth
century is, of course, well known to students. Very many,
however, who now insist on the religious ceremony are ignorant of
the fact; and it is not a little surprising to find so reputable
a writer as AUGUSTE CARLIER, speaking of the "émigrants dans la
Nouvelle Angleterre," declaring that marriage "se formait sous
les yeux et avec l'approbation du chef de famille; il était
consacré par le pasteur; d'après les prescriptions impératives
de la loi, mais surtout pour obéir à la conscience d'un devoir
religieux."--_Le mariage aux États-Unis_, 8, 9.]
[Footnote 364: BISHOP, _Marriage, Divorce, and Sep._, I, 176,
178; FRIEDBERG, _Eheschliessung_, 471, 472.]
[Footnote 365: HUTCHINSON, _Hist. of Mass._, I, 392. Compare
COOK, "Mar. Celebration in the Colonies," _Atlantic Monthly_,
LXI, 351, who, following Hutchinson, thinks that the colonists
instituted "a form of marriage celebration unique in modern
times."]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account