Abbeville press. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1860-1869, 1869-09-03

uniformly refused by the Legisl;
ture and Courts of this State in a
similar applications, it is proper t
determine whether the Courts @
the State arc now invested wit
Jurisdiction to hear. and dcternlin
such cases:
In the Kingdom of Great Britain
the jurisdiction of matrimonial
questions belonged to the Ecclesi
astical Courts, and divorces riuc,,
10 n'at'tmonii were restricted in En- g
to causes which existed at the tim,
the marriage was contracted, sucl
as causo n'ttus, causa impoteutic, can
81 GD'Hitttts, eaasa consongxiaitatis
&C.; ; and though the marriage was
unlawful, a sentence of nullity OF
marriage was necessary to dissolve
the bonds of matrimony.
Marriage was regarded a sacra.
mcnt of the Church, and the Pope
exercising a controlling temporal
power Of Europe, required that tic
cognlzance of such subjects should
be confided exclusively in the Ecclc-
slastical Courts, and that divorces
a rinculo should not be granted
even by that Court for CAUSES ari-
sing subsequent to the marrice.
The dispcnsation Of the head of the
Church being the only recognized
authority to dissolve a marriage for
causes arising subsequent to it's
contraction, though the temporal
power of the Pope has long since
ceased in England tie original iu-
risdlction Of tie Ecclesiastical
Courts las not bec;2 enlarged; they
axe restricted to granting divorces
q monSa ct ho;u, aid the Parlia-
mcnt alone can grant a divorce a
'l"c"lo for adultery or any other
cause arising after the marriage.
This, however, is not tic law in all
tie british Empire. In Scotland.
the Reformation exploded this rule
OF thc Rolnis:l Church, and divor-
ces "a Nnc"io ma!rimonH; for adultery
and wilful or malicious descrtion
have been uniformly granted.
For tie same causes, divorces
" r'"rt'lo arc granted by all the
States Of the American Union. reg
ulatcd most generally by statute,
but having the authority Of the
common law az administered in q
part Of the British Empire; and
for Tic first cause, adultery, the
positive authority Of the Scriptures
WHICH furnish to all Christian IA
tions the highest, pnrcst and safest
rules for social and nlcral action.
Ma}thcw, V: %.
All religions under the Federal
and State Constitutions arc protec-
ted in their full and unrestruincd
exercise, but none are established
and therefore the tcncts or canons
OF none should control the deter
mlnation of the question when, how
and for What causes the bonds of
matrlmony should be dissolved.
1t Is question to be solved by
considerations Of moral. social and
political cNpedicncy and propricty.
When the responsible relation has
been entered into, and one of the
parties utterly fail, from base dcprav-
lily or other grave cause to fulfil its
high and sacred duties, is it not the
duty of the State to provide some
tribunal to adiudge the failure and
order the dissolution of the relation.
This tribunal should be restricted in
the exercise of such powers to causes
OF the utmost gravity only; those
which arc temporary or frivolous,
ought not to be listened to by Court.
"lt is the policy of the law, and
necessary to the purity and useful
ness OF the institution of marriage.
that those who enter into it, should
regard it as relation, permanent as
their own lives; its duration not de-
pending upon the whim or caprice of
either, and only to be dissolved when
the improper conduct of one Of the
parties shall render the connection
wholly intolcrablc or inconsistent
with the happiness or safety of tho
other" Griffin Us. Griffin, B. Mum. !
roe, 120.
Judge Swift observes: .sThc rem.
dcring Of the contract of matrimonv
indissoluble, is running into the Oh. |
posite extreme from that of permit
ting divorces at tho pleasure of the
parties. There arc many persons
who, on the idea that tho MARRIAGE
contract cannot be vacated for anv
will not behave with the
prOpricfu theu yyould 20 tbo ,.~.t