"... The term "common-law marriage" is a misnomer because
it refers to a "law of marriage" which we supposedly inherited from England
when we adopted its common law on July 4, 1776 [see the www site for all
footnotes] This is because there was no common law of marriage in England
on July 4, 1776. The early Anglo-Saxon form of marriage involved a betrothal,
by which the bride's father or relatives agreed to
transfer the "mund," or custody for protection, of
the bride to the bridegroom. In return the bridegroom agreed to make a
transfer of property to them, or make a settlement of property upon the
bride, and, in addition, to care for and protect her. Following the betrothal,
the bride's family delivered the bride to the groom, who made the promised
settlement in return. After the Norman Conquest, the power to regulate
marriage was given to the Church and the ceremony took place in the presence
of a priest. The wedding ring was given as a pledge that the bridegroom
would perform his covenants. The additional ecclesiastical requirement
of thrice publishing the banns for all church marriages was imposed and
marriages had to be conducted in church and by a priest.
When the English Reformation transformed the Roman
Church and ecclesiastical establishment into an English church, the marriage
ceremony and the church's requirements did not change. However, the Church
was willing to recognize two kinds of informal marriage, known as "sponsalia
per verba de praesenti" and "sponsalia per verba de futuro." The first
took place when the parties exchanged promises that they would be man and
wife from that moment on. The second required an exchange of promises to
be man and wife in the future, followed by sexual intercourse. When the
parties presently took each other as man and wife, a valid marriage was
formed. Consummation was not required. In the case of the promise to marry
in the future, a valid marriage resulted only when the parties consummated
their promise by intercourse.
Until the middle of the eighteenth century these informal
marriages were held valid by the ecclesiastics who had the jurisdiction
to determine the validity of a marriage.
In 1753 Lord Hardwicke's Act required a parish church
ceremony in the Church of England, publication of banns, and a license
as a condition to the validity of a marriage. The purpose of the Act was
to prevent clandestine marriages, "Fleet" marriages and other fraudulent
or irregular marriages. The Act governed only marriages contracted in England,
leaving Scottish and Irish marriages subject to the earlier rules allowing
informal marriage, and did not apply to Quakers and Jews.
In the American colonies marriage was regulated by
the civil authorities, and informal marriages were recognized as valid,
at least in the absence of a statute requiring a ceremony. This enabled
parties, such as the pioneers, to contract valid marriages when there was
no clergyman or civil officer available to perform a ceremony.
English law also recognized several impediments to
the formation of valid informal and formal marriages. A close relationship
between the parties, either by blood or marriage, was a reason for declaring
the marriage invalid. The range of the relationship which disqualified
the parties from marrying was narrowed in the early sixteenth century,
after the Reformation, to the Levitical degrees.
Infancy was also an impediment to marriage. Children
below the age of seven were incapable of marrying. After the age of seven
they might marry, but the marriage was voidable until they were able to
consummate the marriage, which the law presumed to be at age fourteen for
boys and twelve for girls. Beyond those ages the marriages were valid,
even though the parties were under the age of twenty-one and did not have
their parents' consent. Later statutes imposed the requirement of parents'
consent.
The English method of entering into an informal marriage,
known as "sponsalia per verba de paesenti", was adopted in New York. Its
legal definition of a common-law marriage is an agreement, in words of
the present tense, made by parties competent to marry, to take one another
as husband and wife. Ordinarily, common-law marriages are unlicensed. Cohabitation,
repute, holding out, and the like generally are regarded as bits of evidence
which are more or less cogent in showing that such an agreement, in fact,
was made, but they are not a substitute for or the equivalent of the actual
agreement.
Common-law marriages were abolished in New York on
April 29, 1933, as the result of an amendment to Section 11 of the Domestic
Relations Law, which enumerated the persons by whom marriages must be solemnized.
Prior to that date, common-law marriages were generally recognized as valid
if entered into in this state, with the exception of the period between
January 1, 1902, and January 1, 1908, when such marriages were rendered
invalid by statute.
While common-law marriages were abolished in New York
on April 29, 1933, common-law marriages contracted prior to that date and
at a time when such marriages were valid in New York, are as valid as ceremonial
marriages, and the long standing rule of conflicts of law is that recognition
will be given by New York to a common-law marriage that is valid at the
place where it was contracted. Currently, 13 states and the District of
Columbia permit common-law marriages to be entered into within their borders,
although such states differ as to requirements of proof...."
Excerpted from http://www.brandeslaw.com/clmart.htm
A WORK IN PROGRESS!
If you have comments or suggestions, e-mail me at walkers@vaix.net