November 23, 2009

            I originally searched for bigamy in the National Police Gazette because I thought it would be interesting to read about other instances of bigamy in light of Ann Carson, and because you really don’t hear about too many cases of bigamy now. First of all, this makes me wonder how prevalent bigamy was in the early republic. I can imagine that it was more common, and the two articles about bigamy that I pulled up provide pretty good reasons for bigamy at such a time. In one of these instances, the man forged divorce papers to show to his new wife (Article 10). I think this is an interesting example of bigamy because of what it says about the prevalence of counterfeiting in different forms. Just as we have seen in the texts we have read, early Americans did not only counterfeit bills, but also their identities. In a changing republic when everyone is just figuring out what it means to be an American, people can “counterfeit” practically anything to test both the boundaries of the law and their own will.

            I also think this example is interesting because it shows how we prove or believe in important facts or truths about ourselves. The idea of counterfeit divorce makes me wonder what it really means to different people to be married. You can be married but “separated” (without documentation), or you can be legally separated with a court order. It seems strange that a document or a court decides when a committed relationship is over. Wouldn’t it make sense that if one party in the marriage feels strongly enough to create forged documents of divorce that the divorce should be recognized? That marriage is more than likely over, no matter what the law says. The idea of declaring your own divorce reminds me of an instance on The Office when Michael wants to declare bankruptcy so he walks out into his office and yells, “I declare bankruptcy!” Then one of the accountants has to let him know that that is not how bankruptcy works. I am also reminded of how Brazil was made independent by a declaration of the Prince of Portugal one day out in the forests of Brazil. And how America’s independence was declared by a (I would imagine) illegal document… Really, if a country can declare its independence in a self-made document, why can’t a man claim independence in the same manner? There are other factors here (he wasn’t sending the divorce papers to his first wife but to his second), but the principles remain the same.

            The other incident of bigamy I thought was interesting because the woman, Margaret Hastings, had a husband who was a sailor (Article 5). The article does not mention how long her husband has been away, but I would imagine it has been a long time because she has been the housekeeper at her new husband’s house. This incident also questions the principles of marriage. How long do you remain married to someone you haven’t seen in years? Apparently, legally you stay married indefinitely. I also think that this instance of bigamy is interesting because it says that another man made the “complaint” about this bigamous marriage. I have always wondered why bigamy is a social or legal issue at all. How is it hurting anyone else to have more than one spouse? I’m not pro-bigamy by any means, but I’m just not sure how it is the government’s business. And this argument then makes me wonder about government involvement within marriage at all, which could obviously get into a controversial contemporary debate. That’s kind of a long digression, but I do think it points out that the issues of the early republic are still at the heart of issues we struggle with today.

            I also thought some of the language in this second article was interesting. The bigamist Margaret is described as “the fair Margaret.” The writer gives the opinion that Margaret is “fair” or attractive.  A journalist does not need to give such an opinion, and it is interesting that he would give a favorable opinion of a criminal. On the same page two robberies are described as “daring.” I wonder when journalists started to be more objective. This also might be an interesting discussion point- what do we learn about society’s views of crime and criminals from the rhetoric of journalism?

 

Works Cited:

Article 10-

The National Police Gazette (1845-1906).  New York:Jan 17, 1846.  Iss. 19,  p. 176  (1 pp.)

 

Article 5-

The National Police Gazette (1845-1906).  New York:Jan 31, 1846.  Vol. 1,  Iss. 21,  p. 189  (1 pp.)