The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1873-07-08
From tho Providence Journal.
Some Thoughts Suggested by n Scccut
Divorce In High Life.

From tho Providence journal.
Some Thoughts Suggested by n Recent
Divorce In High Life.
The Independent, which claims 10 be
the chief religious journal in the country
gives us the following inside view of q
recent divorce. As the notice is n friend.
ly one, and the religious journal offers no
crfeA'sm on the course pursued by the
parties, but rather commends it, we may
suppose the statement correct. On the
parties to the suit, it says:
" Not the slightest impropriety was al.
legged on either side. 1t was a match OF
affection, but both parties were so mature
and so fixed in their ways and habits OF
life as not to harmonize Each found that
mistake had been committed, so to rem.
edy it as far as possible,
quietly to Europe, and by her protracted
and intentional absence, has given to MI
the statutory right to claim di.
vorce on the technical ground Of aban.
donment all parties meanwhile remaining
on terms of respectful tenderness"
Opponents Of the present very liberal
not to say lax, laws of divorce, would
find in the above statement some very
strong points in support of their views.
The marriage from which the parties
sought release was not hasty one, for
the public prints were full of it for months
before it was consummated. The parties
were not in the ignorance and inconsider-
ateness of youth, Their apologist says
expressly, and urges it as ground of di.
vorcc, that they "were SO mature and SO
fixed in thei. ways and habits of life as
not to harmonize," and this is the only
ground alleged. There was not the
slightest impropriety alleged it was q
loys-match and to the last, and the pres.
ent, call parties remain on terms Of re.
spectful tenderness" 1t may well be
doubted whether the law was designed tc
afford relief for such cases; or rather il
is evident that, in the opinion Of the par.
ties. this state Of things did not afford
ground for divorce One of the parties
therefore, quietly goes to Europe, and
stays long enough to give the other the
right to sue for divorce on the ground Of
desertion, the Independent, however, as.
suring Us that it was only technical
ground" We should say not, with such
respectful tenderness" still existing be.
tween them.
Stripped OF technicalitics and cuphem.
isms, the statement is that this husband
and wife having disagreed, and wishing
to separate aud be freed from each other,
but having no ground for divorce, pro.
ga technical ground on which they may
obtain the divorce.
The law makes subornation crime in
certain cases. Yet here is law which
itself practically suborns crime by offer.
ing reward to the wife for deserting her
husband, and to the husband for separat.
ing from his wife. Probably there is no
other such absurdity on the statute book
as this divorce law, which invites men
and women to violate their most sacred
obligations, and promises legal benefits
for violations of aw deliberately planned
and continued for the purpose of obtain.
ing such benefit, What makes it still
worse is that tbe separation of husbands
and wives, which the law thus encourages
and rewards, is to both constant temp.
tation to ether and even worse crime.
We say nothing here Of the moral
sense which could allow individuals, and
especially those in high position, who
ought from that position 10 give examples
of fidelity to trust and right-for so
slight cause to annul by technically the
most binding of all human contracts, and
even by bubble which is little better
than fraud to secure the foundation OF
the technicality. Such an example with
the tact approval Of religious journals
will find out too many followers in the
humber walks of life.
Our objection is to the law itself, and
not simply to any exceptional evasions or
perversions of it, though it may well be
doubtful whether the perversions are not
more numerous than the proper and just
applications of it. Its tendency is to
create and foster the very evils it propos-
es to remedy. 1t reduces the most i'm
portant relation OF man and woman to the
level of business partnership, whose dis
solution is less difficult than to separate
from an obnoxious business partner. 1t
destroys respect for law and legal sane
tions. 1t leads to rash and thoughtless
assumption of obligations, by profferiug
a ready and easy release. 1t tends to cre-
ate and foster the very evils it proposes
to remedy. Younger people than these
so very mature aud SO fixed in their hab.
its Of life," find it hard work to " narmo-
nize," and so ask the courts to cut the
Gordian knot. Nobody believes that, if
public opinion now held marriage sacred
us i. did in the days of our fathers, these
parties in high society would have found
it so difficult to harmoDize; certainly they
would not, cherishing toward each other
feelings Of " respectful tenderness" have
appeared in court as plaintiff and defend.
aut iu divorce suit, And for this change
Of opinion the change in our divorce laws
is largely chargeabe. Better thous-
and times that those larties should have
borne the ills incident to their inharmon-
ious condition, than by example to sane
tion such use of the law. Better for so.
ciety to endure all the ills these divorce
laws seek to remove, than to be under.
mined by the abrogation OF marriage.
A FATAL Prescription The evil Of
ten produced by the injudicious prescrip
tion Of intoxicating liquors for the pa.
| tianfs has racentlv baen forciLIy ;Ii,,