Anyone know what the legality of unmarried men and women living together in New York City in the early 20th century? Not just whether it was socially frowned upon, but whether or not there legal barriers to such an arrangement?
I’m researching an ancestor who may have been in such an arrangement circa 1910, and I’m wondering if that may explain why he disappears from the census during that period (yes, I know there’s lots of other reasons it could be, too, but the odd coincidence got me to wondering about whether it was legally permissible)
What are the particular circumstances you are looking for? Into the later part of the 20th century, perhaps even now there are laws around the country that restrict unrelated people from occupying domiciles. I doubt marriage certificates were required for general purposes by couples living together as man and wife in the early 20th century. Was your ancestor living with a woman in an openly declared unmarried relationship?
In the 19th and early 20th century, the majority of U.S. states recognized common law marriages; romantic relationships conforming to a pattern of marital behavior, including living together, but never solemnized through a legal ceremony (Bowman, 1996; Dubler, 1998). The acceptance of common law marriages was widely debated in the U. S. court system throughout the 19th century, and between 1875 and 1917 began to lose legal standing; by the mid 20th century, a majority of states no longer recognized common law marriage (Bowman, 1996; Dubler, 1998).
The circumstances seem to be that neither the woman nor the man appears in the home of the census in 1910, but they got married in 1911. And had a child a few months later. I don’t know where they were in between 1910 and 1912, but since they weren’t formally married but were apparently having relations, I’m guessing they may have been living together. But it was really just a broader question that occurred to me because of that discrepancy, I don’t really have enough evidence one way or another about that particular couple.
Just wondering if they were, in fact, living together for a year or so before marriage whether that would have been a legal thing…or if it was legal, would they have had difficult time finding someone to rent to them?
I’m not sure what this means - are you looking at a particular address and they aren’t there or are you saying you haven’t found any record of them anywhere?
They probably wouldn’t have had any trouble finding someone to rent to them around 1910 ish - not unless they were very open about being unmarried and in a sexual relationship. If they claimed to be married, the landlord wouldn’t have been looking for a certificate and it wasn’t unusual for a household to contain unrelated boarders.
I haven’t found any record of them. Which could be for a million different reasons, it’s just what prompted me to worry about what it would be like for someone in that time to find a place to live.
Also, I mean to type “in the home of their parents, or anywhere else”, but since I somehow left that phrase out, I see why the sentence is confusing.
Countless people have been born in that circumstance. Nothing unusual about it. It’s not polite to count the months between marriage and childbirth.
I didn’t say it was unusual.
This isn’t a question about my ancestors…it’s just that situation that made me wonder about what the situation was in 1911 for the countless people in that circumstance.
Old people (at least in my neck of the woods) had a saying:
“The first one can come anytime. All the rest take nine months.”
New York state has never legalized common law marriage, although it does recognize legal common law marriages from other states.
That makes the question whether New York was one of the states that criminalized cohabitation and fornication in 1910. Both were extremely common, if not universal, prohibitions so it’s very likely.
Given the number of people who would have guilty at the time, such laws were only prosecuted when no other cudgels were available. A landlord, e.g., could have used them as a weapon if they wanted to get rid of them. But that would be unusual.
Right…tha’ts my question. Not about common–law-marriage, but was there a specific prohibition against cohabitation. I’ve vaguely heard people speak of such prohibitions, but I’m struggling to find actual evidence of it.
AKA an 8-pound 3-ounce 5-month premature baby.
I found this
That depends on where you live. Cohabitation and/or fornication are illegal in 36 states, although such laws are largely ignored and rarely applied. Cohabitation is not a crime in New York, New Jersey or Connecticut. New Jersey is the only place in the tri‐state area with a law against fornication.
in a 1977 NYT article.
The entire circumstance wasn’t unusual. Just like today, many people didn’t get married until a child joins the picture. Back then they had to keep up appearances and pretend it wasn’t a sexual relationship.
I would assume they didn’t live together as a couple until they were married. The separation could be thinly veiled, but as single childless people they might lived in with parents or friends or rented rooms and be seen together frequently but still keeping up the appearance of a sex free romantic relationship that wasn’t fooling many people.
thanks…I was curious about the early 20th century, 1977 is a bit later than that.
I know - but I’d be really surprised if there had been laws prohibiting either cohabitation or fornication that were repealed prior to 1977. Especially considering that adultery is still a crime in New York.
Lots of people go uncounted in census. The US government has never made assurances that their census is 100% accurate. Sure lots of steps have been taken since the prior turn of the century to improve the accuracy of the census, but still not 100%.
I realize that. I acknowledged as much, when I said there could be a million reasons why this happened. I don’t think I’ll ever know why they weren’t on the census in 1910 (or the state census in 1915, after they married)