Sherry-Ann McGregor, Contributor
MCGREGOR
IT IS not unusual for people to comment that a woman has married well because she has found a wealthy partner, whose economic and social position results in the elevation of her own status. Back in the 19th century, the converse was perhaps true. Men attempted to annex themselves to women who stood to inherit substantial wealth so as to improve their own position.
HOW DID THIS WORK IN THE 19TH CENTURY?
You will recall from last week's article that a woman lost her legal identity when she got married. Well, she also lost any real property (i.e. land or building), which she owned prior to the marriage, or inherited or acquired while she was married. Further, she was not entitled to own real property or collect any rent or profit which might have been earned from such property. Her status also meant that she could not dispose of any property under a will or by sale during the marriage.
The single woman's position was quite different. She had a greater prospect of acquiring wealth than her married counterpart. She possessed an independent legal identity, and was therefore allowed greater autonomy in the handling of her own affairs. The married woman only stood to attain these rights if her husband predeceased her, in which case her property would revert to her; and if she predeceased him, her property was likely to pass to her heirs.
ENTITLEMENT
On the other side of the coin, a married man's property remained his own, whether he had acquired such property prior to, or during, the course of the marriage. If her husband predeceased her, a widow would be entitled to a life interest in one-third of his properties, provided she could have borne a child of his who was capable of inheriting the property.
It is clear what injustice such laws wreaked on women, because many husbands used the income from their wives' property to maintain their sweethearts. In some instances, the income was in mismanaged or wasted, thereby leaving the entire family in penury.
THE LAW HAS CHANGED
It was not until 1882 when the Married Women's Property Act was passed in England that real change finally occurred. This Act was the product of a 27-year campaign for women's property rights and resulted in the recognition of a husband and a wife as two separate legal entities. It also acknowledged a wife's right to own or dispose of her own property.
We continue to be the beneficiaries of these laws today, as women (whether married or unmarried), enjoy equal rights to men with respect to the ownership of property. However, with the advent of the long-awaited Property (Rights of Spouses) Act, one may ask whether some of these rights may not be eroded by provisions which allow one party to apply for a share in property acquired by the other prior to or during the course of the marriage.
Sherry-Ann McGregor is partner and mediator with the firms Nunes, Scholefield, DeLeon & Co. Send feedback and questions to lawsofeve@yahoo.com.
