New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-04-15
LETTERS From THE PEOPLE.
DEFECTS IN OUR DIVORCE LAWS
To the Edttor Of The Tribune.
L. L. LIZ

DEFECTS IN OUR DIVORCE LAWS
To the Edftor Of The TRIBUNE
SIR: Early in the year 1870 lady received
an Offer of marriage from professional gentleman OF
means and ability. In response she toh the ioo"inB
story which the most careful investigation has shown 10
be strictly true: Her father was resident OF Albany,
and though in moderate circumstances, was an esna-
e man AT le age Of - she was induced to leave her
home candestney and marry JourneymaD printer ana
after two years she gave birth to child During her
confinement her husband treated her Drhtiy anu ohco
straneed her so that she bore the marks OF MS nhgorS
for weeks because she protested against hs puhishhg
the child for crying although IL was only ree months
OF age. In due tmo o second cmld was oorn' "hun
lived but q few moments, and two years aiter"ar'
came third The husband abused her with kicks Guns,
and blows one morning In the eighth year aftcr ther
marriage he knocked her down three tmcs her
parepts upon learning this fact, had MN NJ
rested and put under bonds to Keep tho peace
He Immediately aferward deserted her. she beng
girl % years Of age with two children to care Tor ana
with only IA cents In her pocket To cripple her still
further he sold her sowing machine and wrote note
IN tho owner NJ the house which he had hired, telling
him 10 take the furniture for rent She returned to her
fathers house hut became apparent that, with
his limited income he would 10 unable to support 80
large an addition to his family and, leaving her tle
ones under his roof she went out into the world to earn
her own living Those who know the obstacles when
Young man OF ability meets before he can succeed can
coi,v Imagine the difficulties which surrounded this
little woman. For two years and nine months she
worked bayey and herocaly 10 support herself and to
ALL her Their I'm supporting her little AZ The end
Of this time she was Informed that her husband had OBJ
tanned divorce and that tho decree gave him the care
and custody of her children. She had no money TO
employ counsel and supposed that there was no hope OF
redress and with this belief she kept her troubles to
herself until the Offer of marriage compelled her to tell
her story.
A copy Of the record OF the proceedings, which APP
pcared to be regular procured. There was asworn
return that personal service had been made by giving
her due notice Of the tendency OF The suit and OF the OPP
pointment OF Upon closer Investigation u APP
pears that no notice given 70 the defendant OF the
pcndency Of the suit Tie service purported to have
been made in the City OF New York. the 23d of December
1865 but 1t can be shown by the evidence Of at least
three dlsinteesed parties that from the DIST to the
25h Of that month she was the City Of Boston. The
referee was a lawyer in the Office with the attorney
who brought the action. The two leading witnesses
were persons whose characters could readily be i'm
peachcd, the principal witness having aiiegei thiI to
defendant boarded in house Of fame, winch WaS
entirely false. IL was further aScera.heu that tlo con-
lion of his and date OF tho entry OF the decree
Of divorce, had repeatedly been guilty or ad9itery
Tendency OF the suit these facts would have
undoubtedly been shown. IL also appeared thaG
The plaintiff had remarked aud by this second wife bad
child Hinder The decree tine defendant is prohibited
from'mar wing again during TIE lifetime or ne complain
ant should She marry I'm "a where both parties are
permitted, upon the entry OF decree AGAINST ciher
party, to assume new marital relations, tl ~
hut should into this state, 1t would be ques
ton upon which good lawyers disagree whether me CON
tract would be recognized by our tOurt ana ~n'ther
nny children that migLt he born would be legitimate
An eminent lawyer was consulted II regard 10 me pro
prety OF endeav0ng TO get the decree OF divorce set
aside HIS decided opinion that the decree OF the
Court could not be set aside for the following reasons
since IT, entry. SecOHd That would he against public
policy as innocent parties 1 second WHO ana @mg
what can this poor woman dol $500. +. >.
point out OF the radical errors IN orr divorce sys-
lem, which may be- briefly stated FUs.: The iniquity
of The system Of appointing referees To tke testimony
ana report Whcn tA.Fe y no NY iaHo9 - on p , -
the defendant. Upon the tpse di1l OF single man
and that too often the creature in the employ or
tne c0mplanaIt-tho defendant may De not oiy uo-
prved Of her children, but branded az an adultercss
during the lifetime OF the other party second per
who has repeatedly been guilty may bring an acton
to IT, Third The impdss6iity Of rectfying wrong
because by setting aside judgment Of thE kind limo
cent parties might .iftr inj-ty.
would suggest the following changes in our divorce
system: First: Ripd penal enactmrnts AGAINST the
crime Of adultery Second The complete abandonment
OF referee SYSTEM aud the trial OF all cases before
jury in open court as the state Is party IN the case,
and Il IL against public policy to have divorces granted
without sufficient cause II there is no appearance Tor
the defense. the D,trctAttorney should IN every IN
be compelled to oppose, IN behalf OF the people,
the granting OF such petition ihtTd Ihe complainant
should be compelled To STATE ndcr oh' III LIE pc Iol,
that he has never beon guilty OF adultery undeT such
circumstances would cntlile the GcIthdthl 10
against him. II IL De shown at any time within I'VE
years after Judgment in LIS favor that ne was so guilty,
a e fS1 or 'I p f2e' Fou Give the Supreme Court
discretionary power In from three to i've years after the
entry decree Of divorce 10 permit the person against
whom such decree Il cn,efcd 20 MARI AGAIN II II Is
to punish the guilty party by prohibition against marry
ing IL just to set definite limit To the duration or
tins punishment II the denda has been gnty. such
law would stimulate her to Lead correct and yirtuos
lle II suit has been wTongully brought partial re-
lief without interfering with the rights OF innocent
parties would be furnished IL 1t can be shown that the
defendant is leading ewd life the Court can ID It's dis
erection, withhold the relief demanded.
AeU- York, March 20, 1871. ". W A