CHANCES are the plan wouldn’t gain much traction now, but there was a time when it was perfectly possible for a man to sell his wife.
Naturally the Church was aghast, so, ostensibly, were newspaper editors of the day, who railed against it but rather hypocritically published details of the “sales”, presumably to boost circulation among the curious who wondered if they’d missed a bargain.
Despite all the opposition, the process was not an uncommon event in early 19th-century Worcester and if that raises eyebrows today, it is worth remembering before 1857, when the Divorce Court was set up, legal dissolution of a marriage was impossible, except for those wealthy enough to obtain a special Act of Parliament.
Wife-selling had no basis in the law of the land, but many poor folk believed that over the years the practice had gained its own legality, providing all the formalities were observed.
In fact the “formalities” were quite strict. To start with on the morning of the sale, the husband had to purchase a new halter, which was put around his wife’s neck. Holding the end of the rope, he would then drive her through the nearest tollgate, where he paid a toll for her at the usual rate for a cow, a horse or a pig. Sometimes the woman was driven through three tollgates to make the proceedings more binding.
With a crowd of admirers, acquaintances and possible purchasers following, it was necessary to keep to exact time, arriving at the market place as the church clock was striking the hour.
The husband acted as his own auctioneer, pointing out his wife’s good points and bad and the reason why he had decided to part with her. Descriptions often included: “ ‘Er’s sound in wind and limb”, “ ’Er can bake, an’ wash an’ brew” or “ ‘Er can swear like a trooper an’ fight like a game cock”.
Then he’d ask: “Who’ll bid for ’er?” Someone would offer a penny, but the usual sale price was around five shillings. At that the wife was “knocked down” and everyone, ex-husband, ex-wife, new husband, friends and associates repaired to the nearest pub.
The halter was removed and the purchase price spent on spirits and beer, everyone drinking together to mark the end of the divorce. A document was drawn up by “a learned clerk” and the transfer duly signed.
It had also been the practice in Worcestershire to require widows on remarrying to pay a fine to the Crown. Although this had largely died out by the mid-19th century, its repeated use gained it some degree of legitimacy.
In 1775 Berrow’s Journal reported on a remarriage in St Swithin’s Church, Worcester, which showed how to get round another “legality” of the day.
Its report read: “A widow, being married again, to exempt her future husband from payment of any debts she might have contracted, went into one of the pews and stripped herself of all her clothes except her shift. In which she went to the Altar and was married, much to the astonishment of the Parson, Clerk etc.” Which was possibly an understatement.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel