Breach of Promise court records

[Bob Spiers]

I would like to confirm a surname of a man named either James Eden or Eaves. I am told by a family member that he is known to have brought a 'breach of promise' case against the mother who bore his son (and obviously declined to marry him) circa 1941 (the year the child was born).

The case was brought it is believed in Warwickshire/Worcestershire , but most likely Birmingham. It may have made the papers or not, and the outcome of the case is not as important, as establishing the surname from the court records.

Does anyone have any pointers on where best to find these records? I have some results from searching under both surnames, but am loath to spend more time without knowing which surname prevails. Does anyone have any ideas on how to locate the court records, or any other avenue that might prove fruitful.

 

[AndyMick]

Today is the last day of my 1 month for £1 on FMP (thanks Peter). I did a quick search of the newspapers for both James Eden and James Eaves in the 1940s without success. Sorry

 

[Bob Spiers]

Today is the last day of my 1 month for £1 on FMP (thanks Peter). I did a quick search of the newspapers for both James Eden and James Eaves in the 1940s without success. Sorry

Thanks AndyMick I tried FMP myself.

However update after I posted, an eldery Aunt now suggests the surname may have been Eades. I still favour Eden as other aspects seem to favour him, but just in case family know best a wildcard search of Ea?es or even Ea* would likely work. However nil to date.

 

[Heather]

Hi Bob, I've had a look at FMP and Ancestry with and without wildcard search but no joy, sorry. Have you tried the British Newspaper Archives site?

 

[Liberty]

I always thought breach of promise suits were brought by a woman who had been 'let down' by a man. I hadn't realised/ didn't think it worked the other way, too. How confident are you of this family story, Bob?

 

[Bob Spiers]

I always thought breach of promise suits were brought by a woman who had been 'let down' by a man. I hadn't realised/ didn't think it worked the other way, too. How confident are you of this family story, Bob?

By no means certain and known to but a couple of people, both of whom are adamant that it did happen. In essence a family member (a cousin's husband in fact) was born out of wedlock because the mother did not (would not) marry the father. This was known to all within the family, and in his teens by the person himself who also learned the name of his bloodline father.

After the death of his mother and learning via me that his bloodline father had also died some years back, he asked me to help him explore his paternal line to see if there were step-siblings (his father later married) and/or cousins as his father had a brother who had also married. For his own part he consulted a very elderly aunt and learned from her -and since supported by another family member - that the father was distraught that the woman to whom (it is said) he was affianced, refused to marry him and (again it is said) sued for Breach of Promise.

Most people, including my wife incidentally, believe Breach of Promise is as you say Liberty, when a woman is 'let down' by a man'. However as it is also known as a 'breach of contract to marry' it follows that a man could bring such an action. Beyond this as Manuel would say in Fawlty Towers "I know nothing"!

I have been successful in putting him in touch with a cousin who - in great family tradition -knows nothing of his Uncle's pre-married life. I am currently exploring siblings where he might have more success, although it is doubtful. I have uncovered nothing on the Breach of promise but will post more as and when the picture unravels.

 

[Liberty]

It's an intriguing story, Bob. I do not for a minute doubt that the woman decided not to marry the man and all that followed. It may be that it was perfectly permitted for man to sue a woman for breach of promise. (Although, as many women found in the past, the fact that the rules do not specify a sex doesn't mean that opportunities are equal - note the women who e.g presented themselves to study at medical school, on the grounds that the rules said 'anyone' not 'any man' and were unsuccesful.)
Whether it was OK to do so or not, I would guess that a man would not really want to go to court to declare that 'although she was pregnant by me she refused to marry me'. I suspect that his friends would talk him out of it, as it would only add public ridicule to his existing distress. The notion of Breach of Promise when brought by a woman was that her honour/reputation had been damaged, if not that she had actually been landed with an illegitimate child. I'm not sure if she would hope to make the man marry her, or get financial compensation. Somehow, it doesn't seem to make much sense the other way. Keep us posted!

 

[Bob Spiers]

Whether it was OK to do so or not, I would guess that a man would not really want to go to court to declare that 'although she was pregnant by me she refused to marry me'. I suspect that his friends would talk him out of it, as it would only add public ridicule to his existing distress. The notion of Breach of Promise when brought by a woman was that her honour/reputation had been damaged, if not that she had actually been landed with an illegitimate child. I'm not sure if she would hope to make the man marry her, or get financial compensation. Somehow, it doesn't seem to make much sense the other way. Keep us posted!

Yes that makes a lot of sense and Paul (to give my cousin's husband a name) thinks along the same lines. He tells me his step-sister (same mother different father) clings to the B of P story passed on by her/their mother long ago. Mind you it was she who also muddied the waters by saying she remembers her mother passing on the surname of 'his' father as Eades, rather than Eden (see my first posting). And family being family, the elderly Aunt is adamant that the man -a friend of her late husband - was Eden. For what it's worth so do I and hope to prove it.

I am currently muting a y-Dna test (à la Peter) between Paul and the newly found cousin or even better a bloodline step brother if I can pin one down. I am sure Paul would not mind footing the bill but its a little early to suggest (and explain) at this stage. Meanwhile I am on the case mes amis and will let you have the outcome in due time.

 

[peter]

In case anyone was thinking of trying it, you can no longer sue for "breach of promise" in England, as this blog explains. It also suggests that many cases never got to court, but were settled between the parties.

 

[Bob Spiers]

In case anyone was thinking of trying it, you can no longer sue for "breach of promise" in England, as this blog explains. It also suggests that many cases never got to court, but were settled between the parties.

That was very interesting and one particular paragraph struck home under the heading 'The role of the Church'. I recall reading an Extract of the Minutes of a Baptist Chapel Meeting held in Birmingham circa 1818-1821 in which some congregation members -including my great x 3 Grandfather - were admonished by the Elders for some transgression or other. The Minutes recorded the vote and action taken which could (certainly for re-offence) lead to expulsion. The Minutes would invariably be posted on the Chapel Notice Board.

Being admonished by the Chapel Elders went far beyond the chapel walls and would soon be known to the entire neighbourhood. I can quite easily imagine them dealing with a (lady) chapel member reporting another for a breach of promise. Taking the matter to court would be quite unnecessary. The Elders would summon persons to give witness and if an admonishment was issued, the best thing for the guilty party would be to leave the district and avoid joining another Chapel at all costs.