Analysis: Elopement advertisements were placed by aggrieved spouses to notify the public that their partners had deserted the marital home
On 8 May 1797, readers of the Belfast News Letter were informed that Margaret McMinn had run away from her husband, William McKinizie. The couple had lived together near Glasdrumman, a townland on the border of Ballynahinch in County Down.
Bearing the headline 'ELOPED' and printed on the front page of the newspaper, the notice informed readers that Margaret had run off ‘without any just cause’ and that William would not pay any debts that she might thereafter contract. When she left, Margaret also took their pet, a little lapdog aptly named ‘Friendship’. A reward of half a guinea was offered for the dog’s safe return.
Notices like this were not a rare occurrence in 18th century Ireland. In fact, readers of Irish newspapers would have been quite familiar with them. Between 1750 and 1800, about 900 such notices were placed in the News Letter alone. Similar numbers of these ads were also posted in Saunders's News Letter, a Dublin-based newspaper.
Known as elopement notices, these advertisements were placed by aggrieved spouses to notify the public that their partners had deserted the marital home. The ads reveal much about marriages gone wrong and the strategies used by unhappy spouses to shame, cow, and destroy the reputations of their absent partner. I use these ads in my new book, Pious and Promiscuous. Life, love and family in Presbyterian Ulster, which reveals for the first time the personal stories that shaped the rhythms and rituals of Presbyterian family life in 18th and 19th century Ulster.
Most elopement notices were placed by husbands. Like William McKinizie, men used the ads to disclaim legal responsibility for any debts that their awol wives might rack up. Husbands were, after all, expected to provide and pay for the upkeep of their wives and families. The phrase 'without just cause’ was inserted by deserted husbands as a form of legal protection too. Women who ‘voluntarily’ left the marital home could not later try to claim maintenance.
Some husbands also took the opportunity to publicly shame their wives for eloping by suggesting that their wives had been unfaithful. In June 1799, William Pearley from Lurgan in County Antrim cautioned the public 'not to credit' his wife Elizabeth who he claimed had not only ran off ‘without any just cause’ but had ‘behaved very improperly’.
Ralph Leigh from Aghalee in County Antrim was much more direct in his denouncement of his wife, Mary. In February 1739, he announced that not only had Mary been 'extravagant' in her spending, but she had ‘taken herself to a loose way of Living’.
Wives seldom posted notices in response. Some historians believe women did not need to advertise their marital woes in public newspapers because they were able to get their side of the story across through the means of informal gossip networks. Men, on the other hand, had less recourse to the whisper network and so felt that they had to make public announcements to protect their reputations.
When women did post publicly, they denied that they had absconded from the marital home freely. Many justified their decision to flee by alleging that their husbands had failed to support them or that they feared for their lives.
This is what spurred on Jane Kirk's decision to publicly defend herself against allegations that she had unjustly fled the marital home and stolen property as she carried out her midnight flit. In October 1755, Jane’s husband, David Cuddy, a farmer from the parish of Ballylinny in Co Antrim, had posted an ad in which he claimed that Jane had eloped in the middle of the night and 'Pillaged’ his house, taking with her four cows, a heifer and a horse.
Fired by a desire to clear her name, Jane took to print. Within days of her husband's notice, Jane posted in response. Her allegations against him were damning. David, she said, had 'used her on all Occasion’s in a cruel unbecoming Manner’ and had even threatened ‘kill her’. So bad was his treatment of her, Jane was too frightened to sleep alone in the house. Her neighbours had even stayed overnight to ensure her safety.
David was not only violent, but he had failed as a husband because he could not provide. Jane claimed that it was 'by her Industry' alone that David ‘had any Thing to lose’ in the first place. She had taken property from the house because he had threatened to turn her ‘out of Doors’. The items she took were also things she had procured from her own hard work.
Elopement advertisements offer interesting snapshots into marriages gone wrong in Ireland centuries ago. At first glance, airing one's dirty laundry in such a public way might seem strange to us today. But the trend is actually very familiar. Modern social media posts — from messy breakups on Facebook to celebrities announcing splits on Instagram — do much the same thing. In a world where reputation is everything, who doesn’t want to get their side of the story across?
Pious and Promiscuous. Life, love and family in Presbyterian Ulster is published by the Royal Irish Academy. The author will take part in a panel discussion on women in Ireland, struggle and resilience across three centuries, at this year's Dublin Book Festival on November 6th at the Royal Irish Academy.
Follow RTÉ Brainstorm on WhatsApp and Instagram for more stories and updates
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent or reflect the views of RTÉ
