New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-07-03

case 10 sad, and only more so because Tor
you There is no hope, no relief but IN tne
grave! Society and my holy religion
command that you drink in your husband
fetid breath, yield your person to his brutal
blows, or what is worse, his loathsome en-
braces, until death comes a. your only mer-
ciful deiverer."
The picture is too revolving to be i'm
agined, aud, at the risk of being dubbed .
hereto, l must say such doctrine will mol
pass for religion, or even sound morals IL
the light OF the nineteenth century.
Hence, in vindication of rational. liberal
Christianity, I submit that the Savior's say
ing az to divorces rather indicated q primer
pie than established a cast-iron rule, IN
~chsngeable for all time. In one sense, .
another, if it be true, it will be progressive
susceptible of adaptation to the progress o.
science and civilization. Possessing moi
this vital element, it must go to the wall,
tor science and civilization, like JohI
Browns. soul, are "marching on" aud
creeds must abide the test OF their increas.
ing light, or fail to satisfy the soul. But
am no theologian, and do not care to pur-
sue further the religious view Of this ques-
ton.
Passing to the consideration of the histor-
ical facIs you cite, it is respectfully. sug-
gested that they are go Enthusiastically
double edged that a competent reasOner
could make one or two strong points upon
them against your position.
Says the proverb, Matches are made IN
heaven" II so, matches are one thing and
rare, while marriages are another. and CON-
mon. What a commentary upon the I'm.
written, unspoken history of welded Life
are the facts, that in the refined city OF
Paris, in less than three months after the
door was opened the divorces nearly Tailed
with the marriages, and that in the whole
kingdom within the short space of eighteen
mouths more than forty thousand persons
broke harness and were free! At the same
rate you do not inform us how long it would
have taken to have unmarried the entire
French people, and l have not the data fer
solving the problem.
You say these facts 'should upset the pc
culiar divorce theories OF certain bralnle.s
~scribblers." at the risk of being classed
with the hollow-headed aforesaid, 1 can not
refrain from asking, why so?" Do such
facts establish even the expediency OF max
ing marriage in~dissoluble? When forty
thousand witnesses virtually testify that
they have found the relation q solemn
cheat, is the inference logical that there
should be no escape save by committinga
crime? Alas. sir, / fear that from such
chapters of history a bachelor might be il
clined to infer that between the sheets Of
wedlock there is concealed from the gaze VI
the uninit a.ed NOR, If unsa,isfied expecti-
tons, more of regret, more of WEAKNESS 0 fliie
and j0nging for the cozier rest OF the grave,
more OF uualloyed despair, than is pent up
in all the jails, peaitentiaries. hospitals and
asyluIhs OF all this Republic! Understand
me, 1 do not say so startling an inference
would in fact be justified, but that it would
not be wholly groundless. Considering what
Incompatible happiness shonid result from
the marriage relation, l believe that nearly
One-haIf OF the matchss consummated in
civilized lands are, to use u popular word,
failures; and that until means can be de-
vised to prevent so many i'll advised alli-
auces, the facilities for releasing the parties
should be very liberal.
True it is, and never to be overlooked,
that offspring are incident 10 the most I'M
happy marriages, and their dependence upon
parental care, instruction and support,
should often modify the terms of separation,
and many times forbid 1t entirely. Quite
frequently the voice Of children crying
would deter parties from asking a divorce;
for parental love will continue to be, as it
has been, the strong link to blend two lives
in one, whose Welded experience would
otherwise be a chapter of misery.
need not notice, todeny them, the many
evils which you assert would follow divorces
on slight grounds, because they are conelu-
sions OF your mind, and you do not give the
facts upon which they are based, save Us
you refer to the history OF France. Nor Can
| dwell very long upon your inference that
her divorce laws 'sauk the nation into a
state OF degradation from, the effects of
which it never has recovered" because,
while l indorse no such idea, the full dis.
cussion CT it would require volumes Of
space and months of time. Besides, the
most eminent philosophers Of modern times
have discussed the French revolution in all
its bearings, leaving little room for a fresh
idea, though it must be conceded yours is
of that order.
Time was when theologians were wont to
cite the excesses of that revolution, in
argument against infdelity; but consider
tolerance had to do with producing that
revolution. tle reference was scarcely for
and is seldom pressed.
so, too, the advocates for the rigid OBJ
servance of the Christian Sabbath, some
times referred US. to the same epoch of
French history, assuming that France
then and thereafter because she
abolished the observance of it, even as a
day of rest, prescribing that every tenth
of every seventh day should be a
Possibly this argument has also
IOct pOpuidIty, lOi ~ ID HoL 81 UlLcU du.
as formerly.
The opponents of popular government
nave often pointed out exuitingly TO France |
n the wild paroxysms of her first enfran-
as proof that man was unfit to be |
lis own law.maker. Remembering these
acts, it is in some sort refreshing to see
excuses cited at last against common
and in behalf Of Interchangeable con-
lubial life.
Copa;lor;nr %hrc 1afas$ 1oo NTH forronr
Uses that have been made in argument of
french revolutionary history, l almost in
Voluntarily exclaim What next?" For
Example, there is the practice indalged in.
md. if | mistake not, encouraged among
'ur Quaker and Methodist friends, of allow
ne women to speak and teach IN the public
congregation. Personally, / like it, but it is
o gIaringiy at variance with the ruling of
good cid bachelor, the Apostle Paul
see Corinthians xiv, "a, $50, that suppose
personal likes in the premises are only
phase of inherent G%epravity.
Or, there is the still more sweeping limo.
alton known as the "WOman's Rights
with which i have to confess
considerable sympathy, but which wOu
eem to be prosecuted in reckless defiance of
he teachings Of the same great apostle. who
v:dently regarded woman as the weaker
essel, SO weak in fact, that in all conditions
he should be subordinate to AN (see l Cor.
XII, SO; l Timothy II, Ola. Why
OF set up these Pauline rules and teachings
5 Interchangeable, and prove the danger of in.
ovation by reference to what France said
r did in the days of her frenzy as to women?
o far as my reading extends this would be
out in a new field. Who knows
hat laurels might be wen. CELEBS.
An interviewer gives the following as
Mactavish's statement of the way
difficulty arose in Winnipeg:
Rarortnr. Thnrp 6oaS MT Soor ~ have