Perspectives: Robards | Jackson
Marriage in Natchez | Divorce Laws

Contradictory Evidence
Remini found several pieces of evidence that do not reconcile with Judge Overton's narrative and contradict his story in significant ways. It would appear that Overton's dates are off by one year and the dates are important because they were offered as proof that Andrew and Rachel were innocent of charges of adultery and bigamy by Robards and Jackson's enemies.

The first contradiction relates to the time of arrival of the Stark party in Natchez. Rachel Donelson Robards decided to flee for Natchez in January 1791. According to Overton, it was "in the winter or spring of 1791," almost six months after Rachel heard the rumor of Robards' intentions that Rachel, Jackson and Stark and his family floated down river from Nashville to Natchez. According to Spanish records, the Spanish kept precise records requiring you to sign an oath upon entry into their territory, including Natchez, Stark arrived in Natchez on January 12, 1790—not 1791.

A second piece of evidence supports the likelihood of this date. It is a letter written by George Cochran in Natchez to Jackson, dated November 3, 1790, which he concludes, "My best respects wait of Mrs. Jackson." Could Jackson have been, "married in the fall of 1790 as this letter suggests? But Robards did not obtain legislature approval to begin divorce proceedings until December 20, 1790. Did Jackson "marry" even before the Virginia legislature acted?

In addition, a second letter from Cochran to Jackson, dated October 21, 1791, states that Jackson's letter of the previous April 14, was the only communication Cochran had received from him since his "departure from this country." If the marriage occurred in Natchez in the summer of 1791, as Overton contended, Cochran would hardly have made this statement.

Another piece of evidence indicating that Andrew and Rachel "married" a full year earlier than was later claimed is an inventory of the estate of John Donelson, Rachel's father. The July and October 1790 terms of the Davidson County court list Rachel as "Rachel Donelson," but the January 1791 term lists her as "Rachel Jackson." (There is no mistaking the date; it is given twice, January 28, 1791.) Thus, at the approximate time Overton said she fled to Natchez, she was already officially referred to as "Rachel Jackson."

If this is true, they "married" when Rachel was still legally bound to another man (Robards received legislative approval for the divorce proceedings December 20, 1790). Remini says it's also possible they never married in Natchez (which would explain the absence of documentation) and simply lived together as common-law husband and wife. This would not have been unusual on the frontier. Indeed cohabitation often preceded formal marriage in the west because a minister or a justice of the peace was not always available when needed.

TIMELINES: Official | Remini’s

Sources:

Robert V. Remini, Andrew Jackson, Volume One, The Course of the American Empire, 1767-1821 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998) Chapter 5, "Marriage"