116:
definition of marriage. The case clearly spelled out the characteristics of marriage, such as a voluntary union involving one woman and one man for life and 'to the exclusion of all others'. However, it fails to confine the “juristic” or constitutional idea of marriage, giving a broad definition of
333:
and worked as a missionary to France. In 1856 he had a change of heart and began to oppose Mormon teaching and left the LDS Church. In his later years. he campaigned in opposition to the LDS Church. He died in
253:
153:, which was the basis for his suit for divorce. The court denied his petition on the grounds that the relationship he had entered into did not constitute a marriage under the law of England.
179:
as marriage. Similarly, he found that cultural traditions of which the court had no knowledge could not form the basis for a court decision. The court dismissed John Hyde's claim.
626:
214:
186:
I conceive that marriage, as understood in
Christendom, may for this purpose be defined as the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others.
616:
326:
134:
586:
101:
209:
537:
264:
The heavy reliance on Lord
Penzance's definition of marriage has been criticised on two distinct grounds. First, the original statement was an
515:
463:
241:
171:, unless they resemble the equivalent English institution. With respect to marriage, English law could therefore not recognise either
382:
596:
109:
70:
197:
130:
234:
621:
606:
293:
230:
226:
167:, Lord Penzance found that institutions in foreign countries (including marriage) cannot be considered as valid under
591:
222:
601:
355:
611:
288:
203:
163:
195:
This definition has been an influential consideration in a number of recent landmark decisions, including
631:
387:
457:
479:
532:
364:
417:
282:
245:
217:
in
Australia. In addition, the phraseology has had a direct influence on numerous pieces of
396:
150:
146:
142:
580:
467:
330:
265:
97:
182:
The case established the common law definition of marriage. Lord
Penzance stated:
571:
168:
411:
313:
55:
113:
105:
527:
272:. Second, this dictum was a defence of marriage and not a definition of it.
269:
176:
421:
137:(LDS Church), brought an action of divorce against his wife, Lavinia, for
249:
172:
138:
82:
368:
218:
149:
from the LDS Church. His wife left him, and subsequently remarried in
126:
252:, as did the 2017 amendment to the Australian Marriage Act 1961 by
248:
in
England and Wales, the common-law definition of marriage is now
353:
Jorgenson, Lyn
Watkins (1991), "John Hyde, Jr., Mormon Renegade",
254:
Marriage
Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Act 2017
141:. He had left the LDS Church and began to write and publish
329:(LDS Church) in 1848. He was married to Lavinia Hawkins by
16:
Landmark case of the
English Court of Probate and Divorce
325:John Hyde Jr. was born about 1833 and converted to
76:
66:
61:
51:
36:
28:
23:
572:Mormomism: Its Leaders and Designs by John Hyde
327:the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
184:
135:the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
343:Lavinia, re-married and died on 1 April 1910.
8:
627:Marriage, unions and partnerships in England
20:
268:, meaning it did not establish a binding
617:Christianity and law in the 19th century
305:
528:"Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013"
416:, New York: W.P. Fetridge & Co.,
7:
242:Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013
102:English Court of Probate and Divorce
558:, vol. 9. no. 3, 2007, pp. 322–336.
554:: Defining or Defending Marriage",
383:"John Hyde, Junior—An Earlier View"
587:Marriage law in the United Kingdom
413:Mormonism: Its Leaders And Designs
14:
210:Wilkinson v. Kitzinger and Others
446:Ardaseer Cursetjee v. Perozeboye
388:Brigham Young University Studies
381:Hart, Edward L. (Winter 1976),
145:, a move that caused him to be
108:was heard 20 March 1866 before
556:Child and Family Law Quarterly
244:(UK) came into force allowing
1:
129:who had been ordained to the
312:Hyde v. Hyde and Woodmansee
294:List of polygamy court cases
231:Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977
32:Court of Probate and Divorce
227:Matrimonial Causes Act 1973
648:
540:, 17 July 2013, 2013 c. 30
482:3 S.C.R. 698, 2004 SCC 79.
223:Civil Partnership Act 2004
215:ACT Same Sex Marriage case
24:Hyde v Hyde and Woodmansee
516:Commonwealth v ACT (2013)
356:Journal of Mormon History
81:
314:{L.R.} 1 P. & D. 130
289:Legal status of polygamy
56:{L.R.} 1 P. & D. 130
492:Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza
448:10 Moo. P. C. 375, 419.
410:Hyde, John Jr. (1857),
204:Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza
40:20 March 1866
597:Mormonism and polygamy
434:Warrender v. Warrender
188:
164:Warrender v. Warrender
125:John Hyde, an English
112:, and established the
538:The National Archives
504:Wilkinson v Kitzinger
436:2 Cl. & F. 531. .
240:Since 2014, when the
233:, and the Australian
480:re Same-Sex Marriage
235:Marriage Act of 1961
143:anti-Mormon material
622:Common-law marriage
607:1866 in British law
395:(2), archived from
550:Rebecca Probert, "
533:legislation.gov.uk
246:same-sex marriages
592:Mormonism and law
466:29 March 2014 at
283:Corbett v Corbett
198:Same-Sex Marriage
121:Facts of the case
89:
88:
639:
602:1866 in case law
559:
548:
542:
541:
524:
518:
513:
507:
506:EWHC 2022 (Fam).
501:
495:
489:
483:
477:
471:
455:
449:
443:
437:
431:
425:
424:
407:
401:
400:
378:
372:
371:
350:
344:
341:
335:
323:
317:
310:
221:, including the
62:Court membership
47:
45:
21:
647:
646:
642:
641:
640:
638:
637:
636:
612:1866 in England
577:
576:
568:
563:
562:
549:
545:
526:
525:
521:
514:
510:
502:
498:
490:
486:
478:
474:
456:
452:
444:
440:
432:
428:
409:
408:
404:
399:on 7 April 2014
380:
379:
375:
352:
351:
347:
342:
338:
324:
320:
311:
307:
302:
278:
262:
193:
159:
123:
43:
41:
17:
12:
11:
5:
645:
643:
635:
634:
629:
624:
619:
614:
609:
604:
599:
594:
589:
579:
578:
575:
574:
567:
566:External links
564:
561:
560:
543:
519:
508:
496:
484:
472:
450:
438:
426:
402:
373:
345:
336:
318:
304:
303:
301:
298:
297:
296:
291:
286:
277:
274:
261:
258:
192:
189:
158:
155:
151:Utah Territory
147:excommunicated
122:
119:
87:
86:
79:
78:
74:
73:
68:
64:
63:
59:
58:
53:
49:
48:
38:
34:
33:
30:
26:
25:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
644:
633:
630:
628:
625:
623:
620:
618:
615:
613:
610:
608:
605:
603:
600:
598:
595:
593:
590:
588:
585:
584:
582:
573:
570:
569:
565:
557:
553:
547:
544:
539:
535:
534:
529:
523:
520:
517:
512:
509:
505:
500:
497:
493:
488:
485:
481:
476:
473:
469:
468:archive.today
465:
462:
460:
454:
451:
447:
442:
439:
435:
430:
427:
423:
419:
415:
414:
406:
403:
398:
394:
390:
389:
384:
377:
374:
370:
366:
362:
358:
357:
349:
346:
340:
337:
332:
331:Brigham Young
328:
322:
319:
315:
309:
306:
299:
295:
292:
290:
287:
285:
284:
280:
279:
275:
273:
271:
267:
266:obiter dictum
259:
257:
255:
251:
247:
243:
238:
236:
232:
228:
224:
220:
216:
212:
211:
206:
205:
200:
199:
190:
187:
183:
180:
178:
174:
170:
166:
165:
156:
154:
152:
148:
144:
140:
136:
132:
128:
120:
118:
115:
111:
110:Lord Penzance
107:
103:
99:
98:landmark case
95:
94:
84:
80:
75:
72:
71:Lord Penzance
69:
67:Judge sitting
65:
60:
57:
54:
50:
39:
35:
31:
27:
22:
19:
632:Polygamy law
555:
551:
546:
531:
522:
511:
503:
499:
491:
487:
475:
458:
453:
445:
441:
433:
429:
412:
405:
397:the original
392:
386:
376:
360:
354:
348:
339:
321:
308:
281:
263:
239:
208:
202:
196:
194:
191:Significance
185:
181:
162:
160:
124:
92:
91:
90:
18:
552:Hyde v Hyde
459:Hyde v Hyde
363:: 120–144,
219:legislation
177:concubinage
169:English law
93:Hyde v Hyde
581:Categories
300:References
229:(UK), the
225:(UK), the
131:priesthood
117:marriage.
114:common law
85:, marriage
44:1866-03-20
270:precedent
260:Criticism
157:Judgement
494:UKHL 30.
464:Archived
461:casenote
369:23286428
276:See also
213:and the
173:polygamy
139:adultery
83:polygamy
77:Keywords
52:Citation
161:Citing
104:. The
100:of the
42: (
37:Decided
422:414648
420:
367:
127:Mormon
365:JSTOR
334:1876.
96:is a
29:Court
418:OCLC
250:moot
106:case
175:or
133:of
583::
536:,
530:,
393:16
391:,
385:,
361:17
359:,
256:.
237:.
207:,
201:,
470:.
316:.
46:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.