(Vol. vii., p. 429.)
The popular idea that a man may legally dispose of his wife, by exposing
her for sale in a public market, may not improbably have arisen from the
correlation of the terms _buying_ and _selling_. Your correspondent V. T.
STERNBERG need not be reminded how almost universal was the custom among
ancient nations of purchasing wives; and he will admit that it appears
natural that the commodity which has been obtained "per aes et libram"--to
use the phrase of the old Roman law touching matrimony--is transferable to
another for a similar consideration, whenever it may have become useless or
disagreeable to its original purchaser. However this may be, the custom is
ancient, and moreover appears to have obtained, to some extent, among the
higher orders of society. Of this an instance may be found in Grimaldi's
_Origines Genealogicae_, pp. 22, 23. (London, 1828, 4to.) The deed, by which
the transaction was sought to be legalised, runs as follows:
"To all good Christians to whom this writ shall come, John de Camoys,
son and heir of Sir Ralph de Camoys, greeting: Know me to have
delivered, and yielded up of my own free will, to Sir William de
Paynel, Knight, my wife Margaret de Camoys, daughter and heiress of Sir
John de Gatesden; and likewise to have given and granted to the said
Sir William, and to have made over and quit-claimed all goods and
chattels which the said Margaret has or may have, or which I may claim
in her right; so that neither I, nor any one in my name, shall at any
time hereafter be able to claim any right to the said Margaret, or to
her goods and chattels, or their pertinents. And I consent and grant,
and by this writ declare, that the said Margaret shall abide and remain
with the said Sir William during his pleasure. In witness of which I
have placed my seal to this deed, before these witnesses: Thomas de
Depeston, John de Ferrings, William de Icombe, Henry le Biroun, Stephen
Chamberlayne, Walter le Blound, Gilbert de Batecumbe, Robert de Bosco,
and others."
This matter came under the cognisance of Parliament in 1302, when the grant
was pronounced to be invalid.
Now, we may fondly believe that this transaction, which occurred five
hundred and fifty years ago, was characteristic alone of that dark and
distant period, and that no parallel can be found in modern {603} times (at
least in a decent class of society, and recognised by legal sanction) to
justify the lively French dramatists in seizing upon it as a trait of
modern English manners. A transaction, however, came before the public eye
a month or two ago, which, should you think the following record of it
worth preservation as a "curiosity of legal experience," may lead your
readers to a different conclusion:
"A young man, named W. C. Capas, was charged at the Public Office,
Birmingham, Jan. 31, 1853, with assaulting his wife. The latter, in
giving her evidence, stated that her husband was not living with her,
but was 'leased' to another female. Upon inquiry by the magistrate into
this novel species of contract, the document itself was produced in
court, and read. It ran as follows:
"'Memorandum of agreement made and entered into this second day of
October, in the year of our Lord 1852, between William Charles Capas,
of Charles-Henry Street, in the borough of Birmingham, in the county of
Warwick, carpenter, of the one part, and Emily Hickson, of Hurst
Street, Birmingham aforesaid, spinster, of the other part. Whereas the
said William Charles Capas and Emily Hickson have mutually agreed with
each other to live and reside together, and to mutually assist in
supporting and maintaining each other during the remainder of their
lives, and also to sign the agreement hereinafter contained to that
effect: now, therefore, it is hereby mutually agreed upon, by and
between the said William Charles Capas and Emily Hickson, that they the
said, &c., shall live and reside together during the remainder of their
lives, and that they shall mutually exert themselves by work and
labour, and by following all their business pursuits, to the best of
their abilities, skill, and understanding, and by advising and
assisting each other, for their mutual benefit and advantage, and also
to provide for themselves and each other the best supports and comforts
of life which their means and income may afford. And for the true and
faithful performance of this agreement, each of the said parties
bindeth himself and herself unto the other finally by this agreement,
as witness the hands of the said parties, this day and year first above
written."
Here follow the signatures of the consenting parties. The girl Hickson was
examined, and admitted that she had signed the document at the office of a
Mr. Campbell, the _lawyer_(!) who prepared it, and that his charge for
drawing up the same was, she believed, 1l. 15s. The latter promised her, at
the same time, that if the wife of Capas gave her any annoyance he would
put in that paper as evidence. The magistrates, considering the assault
proved, fined Capas 2s. 6d., and "commented in very strong terms on the
document which had that day been brought before them." (See _Birmingham
Journal_, Jan. 5th, 1853.) Has a similar transaction come before the notice
of your correspondents?
I may add that we are informed by the _Birmingham Argus_ for March, 1834,
that in that month a man led his wife by a halter to Smithfield Market in
that town, and there publicly offered her for sale.