RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: lisat on Friday 13 November 15 21:18 GMT (UK)
-
I recently discovered that my husbands great grandfather Edward Weinberg, divorced his wife Martha Beatrice in 1914 for incestuous adultery with her sisters husband Abel Cassell. He was granted custody of their four children all under 6 years old, and granted payment of £500 from his wife and her lover. What I want to know is how unusual was this in 1914, considering that they were not very rich.? Particularly, how unusual for him to get custody of the children? Would it imply anything about his wife as a mother? Would it have been a scandal in those days? I don't think the War had a bearing on any of this, he was born in Russia, came to England sometime between 1891 and 1901.
-
Divorce at that time always involved an 'innocent' and a 'guilty' party, and the guilty party would expect to be punished by the court. An adulterous wife would be considered an unfit mother and would very likely lose custody of her children. Yes, it would be considered a scandal, and was probably reported in the newspapers - you might get more information there than in the divorce papers themselves. Did you also spot the divorce petition brought against Abel Cassell by his wife in the same year?
-
Luton Times and Advertiser - Friday 22 May 1914
Local Divorce Case.- A divorce case was heard by Mr. Justice Bargrave Deane on Tuesday in which the petitioner was Harry Weinberg, a moneylender carrying on business at King-street Luton, and lately living at Brondesbury, who applied for a divorce from Martha Weinberg. Abel Cassel, of 1, Hollis-crescent, Nottingham was cited as co-respondent, and they were undefended. After hearing the evidence of the petitioner, the jury assessed the damages at £500, and he was granted a decree nisi and the custody of the children, with costs against the co-respondent.
Nottingham Evening Post - Saturday 13 June 1914
"Damages in the Divorce Court, losses by betting, and consequential neglet of business, and wife's extravagance," were alleged by Abel Cassell, furrier, residing at 1, Holles-crescent, The Park, Nottingham, and trading at 14, St. Peter's-gate, as the causes of his failure.
Stan
-
Nottingham Evening Post - Tuesday 07 April 1914
This is to Certify that I, ABEL CASSELL will not be responsible for any Debt or Debts contracted by my wife SARA PEARL CASSELL, 1, Holles-crescent, Park, Nottingham, after this date, April 7th, 1914.
(Signed) ABEL CASSELL 14, St. Peter's-gate, Nottingham.
Stan
-
The papers aren't yet available on Ancestry but are available at the National Archives; not yet digitised so you'd need to visit or get someone to look for you (or in extremis get TNA to copy the file for you).
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C8008026 ref J77/1145/4751
These files vary from mildly interesting to very powerful indeed....I have solved one mystery this way.
-
Stan,Graham and Mean Genie, I can't thank you enough, what an amazing forum this is, never fails to be of immense help. Last night after spending too many hours researching, I mistakenly called him Edward when he is actually Harry. Those newspaper articles are terrific, so interesting about Sara Pearl. Just shows that you can't really tell what's behind the facts. I wonder if she incurred debts and gambled, and ran the business down, because she knew her husband was being unfaithful!
Graham, is the link at TNA , to find the relevant newspapers?I will have to make a trip there soon I think. Bit nervous of how to handle searching there.
Mean genie, I have seen Sara Pearls petition against her husband Abel and her sister Martha on Ancestry. Doesn't have much else to say. But all fascinating. Thanks to you all.
-
Graham, sorry, I realise that the link at TNA is about their divorce now. I've seen these papers on Ancestry. Would the papers at TNA have more info or would they be the same do you think?
-
I think - don't know for sure - that Ancestry will have the same papers.
Don't worry about searching at TNA, it's reasonably helpful. Do read the info before you go, though: pencils only, no loose-leaf paper, transparent bags.... You'll need ID documents to get a reader's ticket, so again read before you go. Ordering documents is easy with the computer system; they take 30-40 minutes to arrive so it's worth coming prepared for some research in the library on on FindMyPast or Ancestry (both free) while you wait. I have stopped transcribing and note-taking now and tend to photograph documents with my phone to print/transcribe at home - a better use of time. Just check the quality of the image before you hand the document back!
-
Thanks Graham. Helpful advice.
Lisa
-
I think - don't know for sure - that Ancestry will have the same papers.
Ancestry recently updated their coverage of J77 to include cases up to 1914. The file at TNA will be the same as you see online.
-
Thanks Bookbox, I thought so. Didn't want to waste money duplicating things.
-
My great grandfather divorced my great grandmother in 1918 on the grounds of her adultery. He was a worker in a cement factory at the time. I obtained the divorce papers from TNA and according to them he was granted financial assistance with the divorce because he was a "Poor Person".
-
That's interesting. I found some info online that said from 1914 some legislation was introduced to do precisely that, making a divorce cost under £10, and thus making it more available for the poorer people. My husbands Jewish ancestor may have been better off than I reckoned, he states on the Divorce papers that he was a moneylender! Also, the corespondent was a furrier, so although they weren't aristocracy, they weren't really poor. Thanks.
-
When my 2xgt.aunt divorced her husband in 1903 she was also classed as a Poor Person ( In Forma Pauperis); she was a midwife.
-
It is a common belief that you had to be wealthy to get a divorce after 1858, the very poor could sue without payment of fees 'in forma pauperis' if they could prove their lack of means. The real opening of divorce to all classes did not take place until the 1920s, with the extension of legal aid, and the provision of some local facilities.
In 1914 poor persons possessed of less than £50 (excluding clothes and trade tools) or a woman earning less than £2 a week, could be given the services of a solicitor and counsel without charge, providing that the out-of-pocket expenses of the solicitor and witnesses were paid. Eighty-eight did so that year. This effectively reduced the cost of a divorce to less than £10. By 1920 some forty per cent of divorces were thus assisted. The remainder normally cost about £50 to £60.
https://familysearch.org/learn/wiki/en/Divorce_in_England_and_Wales
Stan
-
Very interesting Stan. I hadn't realised that.