Liverpool Divorce Cases


The June 19, 1868 edition of Liverpool Mercury contains an article entitled “Liverpool Divorce Cases.” As the title suggests, this article details two divorce cases, Pryce v. Pryce and Ashcroft and Lownds v. Lownds. The first case, Pryve v. Pryce, is cited as a “suit for a dissolution of marriage sought by the husband, John Lloyd Pryce, on the ground of the adultery of his wife, Elizabeth Ruth Pryce, who was formerly a Miss Hudson, with James Ashcroft” (Liverpool Mercury). After providing a brief description of when the couple married and where their children currently reside, the author notes that Elizabeth Ruth Pryce’s mother owns a public house in Liverpool. Even though the basis of the divorce, according to John Lloyd Pryce, rests on the grounds of adultery, the article first explains, “The respondent did not devote that attention to her house that she should have done, but was in the constant habit of going to her mother’s public house” (Liverpool Mercury). The inclusion of this statement seems to place some sort of blame on Elizabeth for not behaving of the utmost domestic standard. Including this critique of Elizabeth not maintaining her supposed domestic duties suggests her husband is not entirely at fault for his adulterous behavior.
Overall, I found the presence of this type of article in a newspaper to be rather strange. The publication of these divorce cases, their causes as well as the outcomes, makes the divorce a very public affair. Relationships and issues like marriage as well as divorce are usually discussed privately, and often labeled “gossip” if they do happen to be spoken of publicly. When the reasoning, evidence, or justification of a divorce is documented in a case report such as these ones and later published in a newspaper, the issue becomes much greater than just the husband and wife. This public and opinionated portrayal can very easily portray one or both of the divorcees in a very negative light. In this case, although the man was the adulterer, the newspaper still included a minor detail about the wife. This minor detail could have been very dangerous to Elizabeth’s reputation, as Victorian readers would have read her lack of attention devoted to her house as a negative characteristic.   



Liverpool Mercury etc (Liverpool, England), Friday, June 19, 1868; Issue 6364. British Library Newspapers, Part I: 1800-1900.


Comments

Popular Posts