The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1868-08-08
DIVORCES AND DIVORCE LAWS.
The "Nsw ERglaAder" for July-PF0sI-
deAt WOolkeY On DlYOKCe.


The "Naw ERgIaAder" for JuIy-PrssI-
deAt WooIsoy On Divorce.
The NeD Highlander for July is just published.
The Relo highlander Is not u technically theo-
logical review, but this number Is to a consider
able extent of a theological character, and the
subjects discussed are important.
Professor Fisher contributes an article on the
AugustiEian and the Federal Theories OF Original
Sin, in which the differences are brought out
between the two systems of theology taught at
Princeton and New Haven. The doctrine of sin
is, of course, of fundamental importance in the
Christian system; but 1t should be distinguished
from theories OF human invention which attempt
to elucidate 1t, although these theories are OF
unequal merit. Three theories are noticed in
Pro essor Fishers articlC-the Augushniau doc
trinc of our participation IN Adams sin; the
Federal theory maintained at Princeton) Of the
lmputation of Adams sin, on the ground OF
supposed covenant OF God with him, participa-
ton being denied; and the semi-Federal theory,
which united participation with covenant head
ship, and was the transition point from the
Augustinan to the modern theory.
The cctice traces the course of theology on
this great subject from the Latin father down
through the middle ages and the Writings of the
RefoI mers. prominent feature OF 1t is the
investigation into the origin of the so-Called
Federal theology, and of the process by which
it gradually supplanted the older view IN the
Calylnistic theology.
The object of Professor Timothy Dwights
article, which is review of DIR. Hodges Com.
mentary on omans, V. 1918, Is to show that
DR.. Hodges Interpretation OF the several words
aud phrases OF the passage is not as he claims,
'the simple and natural oue,' and that the great
majority Of the best commentators do not accept
his view. This is done by examining each OF
The impor ant parts of the passage, and proving
that DR.. Hodge Is mist Gkel ii st, in his eXpla-
nation of the phrase "they all snned, !" in verse
II; secondly, in his view of verses 13 aud Ia in
their bearing upon that phrase; thirdly, IN his
statements respecting the thought contained in
verses lt-17; aud fourthly, in his Interpretation
of the words "were made sinners of verse 10,
and their connection with the 18th verse.
The meaning given by the Princeton theolo-
gians to the phase they all sinned,' viz,
"sinued putatively,n is asserted by Professor
Dwight to be inconsistent with the usage of the
verb in the Greek language; he further remarks
that it is not required by the aor.st tense, and is
inconsistent with the proper meaning of the kim
dred noun "sin," which is found four times
in the immediately preceding and succeeding
context.
In regard to the reference to Infants which
DR.. Hodge finds IN the 18Th and l4th verses,
Professor Dwight maintains that this interpreta-
tion throws confusion into the whole reasoning
| OF The verses; that no reason can be given toe
referring to the infants before the tune of
Moses rather than those siuce that time; that
the words used not only do not naturally refer
to infants, but that any such reference is incon
sistent with Pauls use of other words in the
yerses-as e. g., the words TdnsgreSsloh and
| The IdaC.
cussed, and the four reasons given by DR.. Hodge
ae osteOiishins his oenstruotion and esplan tion
| OF those verses are eX mined and asserted by
! Professor Dwight to be without foundation.
| And finally the reviewer remarks that his state
| ment that the phrase, ''were made siuners,n in
| verse 10, is equivalent TO were regarded as
sinners,r is one which cannot be maintained;
but that, on the contrary, Paul shows by the use
of these words that he refers to actual and not
| putative SHINING.
| is the fifth of a series of most valuable and
| interesting articles on this subject, now becom-
| ing of such practical Importance. The present
| article on divorce Legislation in the United
| tS IN q parpful examination nf 10
statutes of tWentythree States, including nearly
| all the older ones. The facts brought out are
startling, and deserve the thoughtfui considera-
! ton of all good citizens.
Another article of nearly fifty pages is in re-
| view of the Positive Philosophy OF N. Auguste
| Comte.
The present number is a very valuable one,
We quote some passages from President Wool
| sey's article on Divorce, conveying tntorma tion
not hitherto put together in such compact form.
DIVORCES IN NEW ENGLAND.
1--WE must remind our readers that
to the two original causes of divorce in Connec-
| tlcut-adultery and desertion-there were
added two others in 1843, 'habitual intemper-
ance and intolerable cruelty, and that in ls49 a
| new batch OF causes was superadded, vlz.:-
| sentence ofimprisonmeut for life, bestiality or
| any other infamous crime involving violation
| of conjugal duty, and punishable by imprisOn
! ment in the State Prison, and-what we have
| already spoken of-any such misconduct of the
| other party as permanently destroys the happi-
ness of the petitioner, and defeats the purpose
| OF the marriage relation. This last is generally
| known as the omnibus clause' 1t appears that
| alter each of these advances in legislation there
was an increase of divorces, that the divorces In
1864 were five times as many rs in lS49, although
| the population had gro Wn by the addition of
| less than one-half, of which one-haf Catholics,
who did not swell the divorces, formed not q
| small part; and that the Omnibus clause, both
directly, and by its influence, when other causes
were weak, aided the petitioners for divorces
not little.
The statistics we shall present under the
heads OF the ratio OF annual divorces TO annual
| marriages, and, as far as we are abl', to fami-
! lies, and to population, and shall then seek 10
! gather any lessons from them that they may
convey.
ia Vermont the ratio of annual marriages
stands thus:-
| Years. Dil,Oress HTgyJ'iQ0eS T1HLiOs