Estranging David Copperfield: Reading the Novel of Divorce

Abstract

Halfway through David Copperfield (1849-1850), the chapter which David becomes engaged to Dora (in fact, just a week before he proposes), David observes a case at Doctors' Commons. One Thomas Benjamin appears before the Court and successfully sues for a under what David calls ingenious little statute.' This statute is the loophole created by the sloppy wording of the Marriage Act of 1753-an act which put an end to clandestine marriages by requiring a parent's consent for a minor to marry. The act also, as Lawrence Stone points out Road to Divorce, made null and void any marriage which there was the slightest mistake, however trivial or accidental, the wording of the banns or licence with respect to and thus accidentally opened up a new avenue for self-divorce . . . pushed up the number of nullities the London Consistory Court and created scandal by giving the appearance of being the equivalent of divorces.2 Thomas Benjamin's divorce has nothing to do with age but rather rests on the fact that his name on the marriage license appears simply as Thomas. As David puts the matter, Thomas Benjamin conveniently leaves off his last name in case he should not find himself as comfortable as he expected. Not finding himself as comfortable as he expected, or being a little fatigued with his wife, poor fellow, he now came forward by a friend, after being married a year or two, and declared that his name was Thomas Benjamin, and therefore he was not married at all. Which the Court confirmed, to his great satisfaction (33:391). That Dickens twists the law which David-in a moment of ironic