Divorce in the Desert: Unhappy Marriages and Female Autonomy in Arizona, 1870–1930

While many believe that frequent divorces are a new phenomenon in our society, divorces were not uncommon during Arizona’s territorial period. In 1900, the Arizona Territory ranked eleventh highest in the nation, per capita, in the number of divorces.¹ Although divorce rates were rising all over the nation during this time, divorce occurred much more often in the West, where the population’s mobility may have contributed to marital instability. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, as Americans viewed these developments, many were concerned and believed that increasing divorce rates threatened traditional ideals. On the other hand, a few argued that divorce could provide a positive outcome for those in unhappy marriages. In addition, some women’s rights advocates stated that divorce should be available to free wives from alcoholic or abusive husbands.²

Territorial Arizona’s first legal code, the Howell Code, established the legal framework for divorce in 1863, and it was modified over the years. From 1864 to 1886, Arizonans could obtain a divorce through a territorial district court or the territorial legislature. After 1886, only district courts granted divorces.³ This article examines divorce laws and causes of divorce, those granted by the territorial legislature, as well as district courts, and the experiences of divorced women. Women petitioned for and obtained two-thirds of all divorces. Although some divorced women were convicted of committing adultery and ended up in prison and some women of color lost property in divorce due to miscegenation laws, this examination of divorced women’s experiences reveals that divorce provided a favorable option for many Arizona women. In fact, some divorced women went on to work in various fields or remarry after leaving an unsatisfactory marriage. As women’s rights leaders had argued, access to divorce could lead to greater female autonomy.⁴

Unless a person of some prominence divorced, it is difficult to learn much about the conditions surrounding divorces—especially those approved by the territorial legislature. The divorce of Governor Anson Safford and a few other sensational divorces received some attention in local newspapers, while other legislative divorces went unmentioned. Although uncovering the stories and struggles of divorced women in territorial and early statehood Arizona can be difficult, it is not impossible. In fact, a sampling of two hundred women who lived in Arizona during the territorial and early-statehood periods reveals that many women sought divorce to end unhappy marriages.⁵ Approximately 16.5 percent of this sample divorced at some point in their lives. These women obtained divorces through territorial and state district courts, not through the territorial legislature. The women in this sample came from a broad spectrum of the population, including many homemakers, ranch women, teachers, community builders, professional women, artists, and politicians.⁶

The territorial legislature established divorce law through the Howell Code, which began by stating that marriages prohibited by law were considered void, and in those circumstances, no legal procedure or divorce was necessary. Some types of marriages were prohibited, including those between a man and woman when one of the parties still had a spouse living; when one of the parties was underage; when either of the parties was “insane or an idiot”; or when the marriage was between a white person and “a negro.” In addition, when either party was imprisoned for life, the marriage was automatically dissolved.⁷ In 1865, the territorial legislature further prohibited marriages between a white person and an American Indian or person of Chinese descent.⁸

The Howell Code allowed divorces under certain circumstances, including for adultery; the physical incompetence of one of the parties; imprisonment of a husband or wife for three years or more; when either party deserted the other for at least two years; when a spouse was a habitual drunkard; or due to extreme cruelty. In addition, divorces were granted due to the willful neglect of the husband to provide for the wife. The court could make decisions regarding minor children of divorced parties and alter its decree in the future, based on the complaints...