Law and Freedom: Notes on the Background of Kate Chopin's "The Story of an Hour
"
Today's readers of Kate Chopin's 1894 " The Story
of an Hour" know that it is very easy for an unhappily married woman to get a divorce if she wants
one, but Chopin's heroine Louise Mallard lived in the 1890's, long before U.S. women gained most
of the legal rights they enjoy today. In those days, once a woman was married, it was extremely
difficult for her to get a divorce. Indeed, in 1894 -- roughly a generation before American women
got the right to vote and about three generations before the Women's Lib Movement -- most
American married women lived in states where the marriage laws actually considered a married
woman as a "non-person" under the subjection of her husband. There is no doubt that the death of
her husband would throw Louise into the cold, cruel world of the 1890's where women had few
opportunities to support themselves; but it is also true that the death of her husband would make
Louise free, not just in an emotional sense, but also in a strictly legal sense. Under the marriage laws
of that day and time Louise would become a legal "person" with new rights to own property and to
maintain custody of her children.
The marriage law in most states in the
1890's still recognized the legal concept of coverture, a principle in English common law
since the 11th Century which was borrowed into American common law. Up until she was eighteen
or got married, a woman was "covert," that is, legally under the authority of her father or legal
guardian. After she married, she was still "covert," but now she was legally under the authority of
her husband:
Once she married, however, her legal existence as an individual was suspended under "marital unity,"
a legal fiction in which the husband and wife were considered a single entity: the husband. The
husband exercised almost exclusive power and responsibility and rarely had to consult his wife to
make decisions about property matters. ("Coverture")
In other words, in Chopin's day a married woman simply did not exist legally, and -- since a legal "
non-person" cannot perform any legal functions such as owning property or voting or suing or
obtaining custody of children -- "coverture" stripped a woman of most of her rights and most her
feeling of independence. In truth, a married woman was not much more free than the slaves on the
plantations had been before the Civil War. The only practical way for a married woman to become
free was for her husband to die. She would be older than 18 and no longer married. She would no
longer be "covert." She would no longer be subject to man's authority. She would be "Free! Body
and soul free!"
There is no mention of children in
Chopin's story, but if there were any children they would obviously and legally belong to the father
because the mother did not exist legally. As Mary Ann Mason indicates in the title of her book
From Father's Property to Children's Rights: A History of Child Custody in the United
States, in the 19th Century a mother did not necessarily have legal custody of her own
children. Under most circumstances they were "the father's property." (Mason) Once the husband
is dead, however, the wife would have the legal standing necessary to maintain custody of her
children.
Similarly, the death of the husband
would restore the wife's right to own property and to be mistress of any income she might generate
in the future. This would be a big improvement over the situation of a married woman who could
not earn money or own property without her husband's permission. Moreover, if she were allowed
to work, the husband had legal control over any wages or salary the wife might earn. Clearly the
death of a husband in the 1890's could improve the life of the widow in the legal sense.
It is, of course, fairly obvious that
Chopin's story emphasizes a more emotional and psychological sort of freedom than the merely legal
matters that we have been discussing. Nevertheless, the first readers of the story would have been
very aware of the legal ramifications of Brentley Mallard's death. The return of Brentley at the end of
the story not only disappoints Louise's quest for personal freedom. It also send the wife back to the
restrictive legal situation of being a "non-person." It's one more reason why Louise's
disappointment at her husband's return is great enough to strike her dead.
Sources Consulted:
"Coverture," Women in American History. http://search.eb.com/women/articles/
coverture.html. Accessed June 3, 2005.
"Married Women's Property Acts," The Reader's Companion to American History.
http://college.hmco.com/history/
readerscomp/rcah/html/ah_056700_marriedwomen.htm.
Accessed June 3, 2005.
Mason, Mary Ann. The Child Custody Wars. http://www.questia.com/PM.
Accessed June 3, 2005.