The Economic Functions of Marriage in America, 1750-1860
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 2016 Uniting Interests: The Economic Functions of Marriage in America, 1750-1860 Lindsay Mitchell Keiter College of William & Mary Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the American Studies Commons, Economic History Commons, Family, Life Course, and Society Commons, United States History Commons, Women's History Commons, and the Women's Studies Commons Recommended Citation Keiter, Lindsay Mitchell, "Uniting Interests: The Economic Functions of Marriage in America, 1750-1860" (2016). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539791829. https://doi.org/10.21220/6m1q-7765 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Uniting Interests: The Economic Functions of Marriage in America, 1750-1860 Lindsay Mitchell Keiter State College, Pennsylvania B.A., History with Honors, the Pennsylvania State University, 2006 B.A., Women's Studies with Honors, the Pennsylvania State University, 2006 M.A., History, the College of William & Mary, 2008 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the College of William and Mary in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The Lyon G. Tyler Department of History The College of William and Mary January 2016 © Copyright by Lindsay Keiter 2015 All Rights Reserved APPROVAL PAGE This Dissertation is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Lindsay Mitchell Keiter Approved by the Committee, November, 2015 - CeifuYiittee Chair ProfessorKarin A. Wulf, History The College of William & Mary/ Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture Professor Leisa D. Meyer. History, American Studies, and Gender, Sexuality, afnd Women s Studies The Colleae^WillianL& Mary Professor Scott R. Nelson, History The College of William & Mary Professor Cynthia A. Kiftmer, History George Mason University ABSTRACT This dissertation, “Uniting Interests: Money, Property, and Marriage in America, 1750-1860,” examines how marriage was an essential economic transaction that responded to the development of capitalism in early America. Drawing on scholarship on the history of economic development, household organization, law, and gender, I argue that families actively distributed resources at marriage as part of larger wealth management strategies that were sensitive to regional and national economic growth. I focus particularly on women’s property holding and how families deployed the legal protection of women’s property as bulwarks against financial disaster. This project restores the family and women to the narrative of capitalistic development, breaking down the fictive divide between public and private economies. Early chapters explore how families planned for wealth distribution when children married and the strategies they employed to attract financially suitable partners. Subsequent chapters explore how some couples negotiated or rejected protection for married women's property, how individuals mobilized kinship networks created by marriage to their advantage, and the balance related families struck between financial assistance and self-interest. The final chapters explore how property was central to families’ responses to married women's distress and to suspicions of female infidelity. In so doing, I demonstrate that the economic functions of marriage fundamentally shaped American families and relationships throughout the eighteenth and well into the nineteenth century. Despite regional differences in social and economic development, the legal structure of marriage was widely shared and remarkably durable. I argue that even progressive developments in marriage law and practice were often motivated more by the desire for financial security than by concerns for female independence. More broadly, this project reveals how sexual inequality in early American was in large part created and maintained through the laws and practices of marriage. TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements in Dedication iv List of Tables v List of Figures vi Prologue “Meer mercenary motives:” The Constant Association of Marriage and Money Introduction “I suppose mutual affection and constancy... may be desired, but if poverty be their companion what do they but aggravate misery?” 22 Chapter 1. “A worthy young man with handsome prospects before him:” Financial Calculation gnd Social Capital in Courtship 57 Chapter 2. A Solid Foundation: Gifts, Dowries, and the Material Basis of Marriage 112 Chapter 3. Protecting the Female Fortune: Marriage Settlements, Equity Law, and Women’s Property 132 Chapter 4. “The consideration due to him as the head of his family:" H usbands’ Rights, W ives’ Protection, and Marital Property Negotiations 163 Chapter 5. “To maintain a Family in the Stile of a Gentleman:” Leveraging Kinship and Managing Resources During Marriage 186 Chapter 6. “I fear some interference will become necessary to resque her:” Property and Private Responses Marital Breakdown 215 Chapter 7. “Unhappy Differences Have Arisen:” Legal Separation, Divorce, and Property 255 i Conclusion 286 Bibliography 299 Vita 340 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express my appreciation to Professor Wulf, under whose guidance this investigation was conducted, for her patience, keen insights, and sharp editorial eye. I am also deeply grateful Professors Kierner, Meyer, and Nelson for their careful reading and criticism of the manuscript. I must also thank my long-suffering family for their support during my graduate career, especially my mother for so thoughtfully moving to Philadelphia just in time for me to commence my research and for voluntarily proofing early drafts. As an undergraduate, Lori Ginzberg’s sharp mind and wit encouraged me to pursue history, and William Pencak’s buoyant cheer was a key source of support both as undergraduate and in my early graduate school years. Dallet Hemphill, who only knew me through conferences, generously offered her thoughts and encouragement and asked about my progress each summer. I have had the great good fortune to form a number of academic friendships that supported me both intellectually and emotionally throughout the sometimes- painful processes of researching, writing, presenting, and applying that collectively created this dissertation. For their animated conversations, sympathetic ears, and inspiring intellects, thanks to: Laura Ansley, Kelly Arehart, Hannah Bailey, Kathryn Boodry, Sarah Chesney, Emily Conroy-Krutz, Libby Cook, Alex Finley, Louis Hyman, Lucia McMahon, Yael Merkin, Dael Norwood, Sean Trainor, Beth Wood, Sarah Woodyard, and Sonic Woytonik. Connie Schulz kindly opened her home in Columbia to me on numerous occasions, and offered wonderful insights about the project as well. Chris and Cindy Bowman and Nancy and Kyle Setz also offered shelter to an itinerant researcher. I had the further good fortune to be hired by the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation during the final year of work on this dissertation, for which I must thank Ted Maris-Wolf. Joe Beatty, as my m anager, deserves profuse thanks for his flexibility and patience as I brought this project finally to completion. And last but not least, thank you to Bryce and Thaddeus, neither of whom read this, and one of whom is a cat. Bryce, thank you for keeping the home fires burning throughout long research trips and numerous conferences, and for your unwavering acceptance of my unintentionally long and winding path to completion. Thaddeus, thanks for pinning me down and encouraging me, by alternately purring and snoring peacefully, to sit still and keep working. iii Dedicated, with gratitude for their brilliant minds and warm hearts, to the memories of William A. Pencak & C. Dallet Hemphill who never doubted my ability to finish this project but did not live to see it done. You are missed. LIST OF TABLES 1. Frequency of Property Types Included in Sample of South Carolina Marriage Agreements as Percent of Total, 1751- 1850 145 2. Characteristics of Random Sample of South Carolina Marriage Settlements, 1751-1850 159 v LIST OF FIGURES 1. Groom's Occupation Listed in Sample South Carolina Marriage Agreements, 1751-1850 147 2. Percent of Widows in Sample of South Carolina Marriage Agreements, 1751-1850 148 3. Percentages of South Carolina Marriage Agreements in Sample Including Slaves, Goods, Town Lots, Land, and Livestock, 1751-1850 148 4. Inclusion of Enslaved People and Shares Thereof in Sample of South Carolina Marriage Agreements, 1751-1850 152 5. Distribution of Enslaved People in Sample of South Carolina Marriage Agreements, 1751-1850 153 6. Average Number of Slaves by Groom's Occupation in Sample of South Carolina Marriage Agreements, 1751-1850 154 7. Percentage of South Carolina Marriage Agreements in Sample Including Slaves, Stocks, and Bonds, 1751-1850 157 8. Relationship Between Percentage of Sole Estates and Percentage Including Stocks and Bonds in Sample of South Carolina Marriage Agreements, 1751-1850 161 vi Prologue “Meer mercenary views:” The Preoccupation with Money and Matrimony in Language and Literature British and American literature reveal a long tradition of comparing marriage and business, and the continuation of this trend throughout the nineteenth century