[ansel12]

THOMAS JEFFERSON
Bond for Marriage License [23 December 1771]
Know all men by these presents that we Thomas Jefferson and Francis Eppes are held and firmly bound to our sovereign lord the king his heirs and successors in the sum of fifty pounds current money of Virginia, to the paiment of which, well and truly to be made we bind ourselves jointly and severally, our joint and several heirs executors and administrators in witness whereof we have hereto set our hands and seals this twenty third day of December in the year of our lord one thousand seven hundred and seventy one.
The condition of the above obligation is such that if there be no lawful cause to obstruct a marriage intended to be had and solemnized between the abovebound Thomas Jefferson and Martha Skelton of the county of Charles city, Widow,1 for which a license is desired, then this obligation is to be null and void; otherwise to remain in full force.
th: jefferson
francis eppes

GEORGE WASHINGTON

[djf]

Well, this is all very interesting.

Because if you look at Anderson’s Dictionary of Law circa 1906 you will see how he defines “marriage”.

It is totally common law and has nothing to do with statutes at all.

Some of his requirements:

Taking each others name
cohabiting as man and wife
purchasing property in both names
announcement of intent or actual ceremony

and there are a few others.

I am not disagreeing with you, in fact this points out what the supreme court is trying to avoid - by making it the same for all jurisdictions.

But in ALL cases, it is one man and one woman...