User:Macdonaldeh/sandbox

= Divorce Petition of Lewis and Dorothea Bourne =

Overview
In 1824, Lewis Bourne, a small farmer in Louisa County, Virginia, publicly accused his young wife, Dorothea, of having a sexual relationship with their neighbor's slave, Edmond, which had resulted in the birth of at least one "mulatto" child. While interracial relationships in the Antebellum South were not uncommon, the Bourne case is an anomaly; despite overwhelming evidence of Dorothea's affair with Edmond, the Virginia General Assembly did not grant Lewis the divorce.

Background
Antimiscegenation laws were first adopted in Virginia in 1662, and specifically banned the marriage, cohabitation, and sex between peoples of different races. However, under Virginia law, children resulting from interracial relationships followed the status of the mother. In the case of Dorothea Bourne and Edmond, any children from their relationship would be free in Southern society, despite Edmond being enslaved. Additionally, any child of Dorothea, regardless of paternity, was "the responsibility of the spurned husband."

Dorothea, also known as "Dolly," and Lewis were married in 1812, and in the beginning had a happy marriage despite their age difference. About six or seven years prior to Lewis's petition for divorce, and after giving birth to two children by Lewis, Dorothea's behavior changed; she began sexual relationships with the neighbor's slaves, and according to Lewis, "live[d] in open adultery." Dorothea, at this time, moved out of the main house, opting instead to live on her own in a cottage on the edge of Lewis's land. During this period, she had a history of sexual relationships with black men, and although there is some speculation as to how many–Lewis's divorce petition only mentioned Dorothea's affair with Edmond, but court testimonies suggest additional affairs with slaves–her relationship with Edmond was most public. Although "interracial relationships [in the Antebellum South] were tolerated only insofar as they left norms of racial and sexual privilege intact," by having a child with Edmond that was now the financial responsibility of Lewis, Dorothea Bourne challenged the racial and sexual hierarchy of the South, resulting in Lewis's petition for divorce.

Testimony
In November 1823, Lewis's relative and neighbor, William Bourne, whom had become Lewis's confidant, found Dorothea in bed with Edmond in her cottage, finally forcing Lewis to file a petition for divorce. That winter, Lewis took his petition to the Virginia state legislature. In preparation for presenting his petition, Lewis had been gathering depositions in his defense from neighbors– including Edmond's master, John Richardson–for almost two years. By that time, Dorothea's affair with Edmond was common knowledge among the community and "provided a delicious scandal for rural Louisa County as dozens of people scurried off to the magistrates to relate stories of adultery and interracial sex or to testify to Lewis' good character." Of the thirty-six witnesses who signed depositions, only one was in defense of Dorothea–Keziah Mosely, Dorothea's midwife. Mosely claimed in her deposition that she had "acted as Midwife for Dolly...with every child she has had...and that she never delivered her of a colored child." As Dorothea was a woman, and thereby a dependent of her husband, she was unable to call her own defense; thus, "the divorce bill passed easily enough through the House...but then foundered in the Senate after [Dorothea]...visited the legislature." Dorothea did not want a divorce, as she was dependent on her husband, and her reputation for "taking up" with black men would have left her destitute and a social pariah. In her testimony, Dorothea argued that Lewis had sold her dowry to William Bourne, which violated her right under a Virginia law that "specified that a husband could not sell property without his wife's permission."

Ruling
In several of the depositions, witnesses claimed that due to Dorothea's affairs, Lewis had taken to trying to beat her into submission prior to him filing the petition for divorce, "yet in the eyes of Lewis Bourne's friends the disgraceful conduct of his wife justified whatever abusive behavior he may have displayed, and made Lewis entitled to divorce." However, despite Lewis's neighbors claiming his abusive tendencies were justified, the Virginia legislature did not. Repeated allegations of domestic abuse coupled with the issue of Lewis selling Dorothea's dowry to William Bourne, the court sided with Dorothea and did not grant Lewis the divorce, despite Virginia laws criminalizing interracial relationships. In the eyes of the law, "Lewis's inability to control his wife in spite of probably violent behavior," settled the issue in Dorothea's favor; since the beatings did not refrain her from continuing her affair with Edmond, "Lewis became the party at fault." As the petition did not pass due to conflicting testimony, Lewis tried again in the fall after catching her with Edmond in the slave quarters, yet even though Dorothea admitted to having sex with the slave, Lewis was still not granted a divorce.

Implications of Rape
In the Bourne's divorce case, it is interesting to note that although this was an affair between a black man and a white woman, the community blamed white woman who is blamed for the relationship. During the affair and the petition, Edmond's behavior and involvement was never a factor to local or legal authorities. As such, Edmond was never called upon to explain his transgressions in any public forum, let alone in a deposition. However, Edmond's master testified on his behalf, saying, "I have good reason for believing this man of mine has been disposed to forsake this woman which has produced considerable discontent in her and has been the cause of her often visiting my negro houses and staying all night in the quarters." This testimony and many others from Lewis's petition imply that Edmond was not interested in having a sexual relationship with Dorothea, but instead that Dorothea, took advantage of her standing as a free white woman and coerced him into their affair.

Historical Significance
The Bourne Divorce Petition is historically significant because unlike the traditional stereotype of the black male as inherently a rapist who lusted after white women, Dorothea Bourne was blamed entirely for the affair with Edmond. Interracial relationships in the Antebellum South such as Edmond and Dorothea have "confirmed a marked absence of white outrage and violent retribution toward the participating black man, whether slave or free." Had this affair occurred in the Jim Crow era following the Civil War, Edmond would have been lynched for having a sexual relationship with Dorothea, regardless if it was consensual or not.