Marriage and Divorce. Slave Marriage. Effect of Emancipation

1919 The Yale law journal  
Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the mid--seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries. We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non--commercial purposes. Read more about Early Journal
more » ... out Early Journal Content at JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not--for--profit organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please contact 5 I 6 YALE LAW JOURNAL with subsequent conduct of the parties (and without evidence of any specific agreement to become man and wife) is sound sense and sound law. See (i9i8) 27 YALE LAW JOURNAL, 702, commenting on Schaffer v. Krestovnikow (09I7, N. J. Ch.) I02 AtI. 246, which the principal case affirms. A strong technical argument can be made on the other side. See (i9i6) 26 YALE LAW JOURNAL, I45. But the whole strength of the position that a second ceremony, though informal, must be shown, depends on a supposed necessity, to constitute common law marriage, of a conscious contract at some definite time to enter upon the relation. Though no language expressly so stating has been found, it is believed that the cases-the more modern cases particularly, cited in the comments indicatedcan be interpreted to mean only that simple agreement to be husband and wife, such as continues practically throughout a normal marriage, is all that is necessary to constitute a common law marriage, and all that need be shown to prove one. Cf. note below.
doi:10.2307/786006 fatcat:m2cmn6gacbg4jhr2wyrumcuplu