On my last visit to England, I was struck by the number of individuals at all levels of society who form long-lasting family units….but never bother getting married.  A friend of mine and the father of their child finally tied the knot shortly before he retired. Apparently, marital status impacts retirement benefits.  I Googled around on my return and found that my observations were not far off the mark. The proportion of men and women getting married is below any level recorded since 1862, the year in which stats were first kept! And there are 25% fewer marriages per year than there were in the 1950s. All this has my mind in a whirr about the impact of government welfare and taxation policies on marriage… so it is soothing to slip back to 1823, when the government made an attempt to ensure marriage was treated as a solemn and binding commitment. 

Picture
Pearlware figure celebrating The New Marriage Act, circa 1823.
The figure above is referred to as “The New Marriage Act” and it was made to celebrate the passage of legislation that reinforced marriage. For centuries, cumbersome English marriage law made couples jump through a series of hoops to get wed. These persnickety requirements made marriage difficult, and  they also made it quite easy to make a mistake. If any of the numerous rules was not adhered to, the marriage was not legal. This meant that either party then had a ready-made excuse to nullify the marriage—and annulment might happen many years (and many children) later. Even if both parties were quite happy to have their marriage end, annulment had disastrous consequences for their children who unexpectedly found themselves declared illegitimate! By 1823, it was time for parliament to act.

The case that brought England’s problematic marriage law to parliament’s attention concerned the young Earl of Belfast. On the threshold of the earl’s marriage, his uncle stepped forward, disputing the earl’s legitimacy and declaring himself heir presumptive to what the earl had thought was his inheritance. The basis for this challenge was that the earl’s parents, the Marquis and Marchioness of Donegal, had married without the parental consent that the law mandated. The earl’s noble marriage was postponed while the marquis and marchioness tried every legal maneuver to establish the validity of their marriage and their children’s legitimacy. When all failed, parliament legislated the “New Marriage Act” as a remedy. Society expected marriage to last for life, so the Marriage Act of 1823 made it no longer possible to annul a marriage because of a petty violation of the marriage law.

The plaque on the figure reads THE NEW MARRIAGE ACT. JOHN FRILL AND ANN BOKE AGED 21 THAT IS RIGHT SAYS THE PARSON AMEN SAYS THE CLERK. In other words, whatever the true age of either John or Ann, who claimed to be 21 years old and thus of marrying age, they were married. Amen. No going back. How times have changed!

To get back to our figure: I particularly like this example because the enamels are pretty, the modeling is vigorous (just look at the expressions on those faces) and the condition is great. Even her finger sticking out in expectation of a ring has not snapped off. The only restoration here is to the tip of the ribbon titling the plaque. You can understand why it broke off, sticking out as it does.

New Marriage Act groups also occur in arbor form.
Picture
Picture
Two arbor New Marriage Act figure groups, circa 1823.
Both these groups are The Real Thing. The plaque varies in its placement--yes, the plaque is broken on the second group. Beware reproduction New Marriage Act groups made in an arbor. These date to the 20th century. Their different color palette and very dead modeling betrays their late origins, but they can be easy traps for the novice. You can see one alongside an original figure group by clicking on the REPROS tab at the top of this page. If in doubt, ask me before buying.
 


Comments




Leave a Reply