Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1873-02-16


When a man hath taken a wife and married
her, and II come 10 pass that she finds no favor
In his eyes, then let hfnn write her a bill OF
divorce, and give il in her hand, and send her
out OF his house.
This is the law our own dear little
Ledger says is the best ever Illuminated
for the regulation of the marital rela-
tions; and the Trenton Gazette sustains
Colonel Kerr's bill because it more
nearly approximates that nice Jewish
law than any in Tennessee's Code.
1t is plain from the verse quoted, and
from many other passages scattered
through the Bible, that, under the Scrip
tural law, only husbands had the right
to claim divorces; wives had no right
but the right to obey. They had to stay
or 90, as their husbands commanded.
II man had q sickly, broken-down or
faded wife, or if by nature he was fond
Of variety, and liked new wife every
year or every month in the year, all he
bad to do was to seribble that little bill
of divorce, put it into his wife's hand,
take her by the shoulder and shove her
out Of the house. This was called "put-
ting her away"
In those days it was quite common
for men TO put their wives away. Wom-
en- had to be exceedingly nice and prop
er to their husbands, or they got them
selves "put away" at short notice, and
without warning. Old King David
flew into q pet with his wife Michsl,
Saul's daughter, and put her away. Mrs.
Michal disapproved of David's style Of
dancing, and expressed her disapprOval
rather plainly. The King instantly
''put her away"
Queen Vashti was "put away" by
King Ahaseurus, because she refused TO
obey his drunken command to exhibit
herself before his carousing companions.
Christ took cOgnizance of these abuses
and 50 far amended the law as to forbid
men to put away their wives "saving
for the cause of fOrnicatjon."
Nowhere in the Bible does il appear a
wife had any light to demand divorce
because of her husbands adultery, or
for any bad conduct. If the husband |
"put his wife away because of her |
adultery, or even because Of her uDchas- |
tity before marriage, if he SO stated in |
the bill of divorce he put in her hand, |
and the adultery or unchastity was
proved, then the law came down on the
woman with terrible force. Thus il is
written in Deut. xxi, 2l:
Then thou shalt bring out the woman TO the
door OF her fathers house, and the men OF the
city shall stone her with stones that she die.
For more than a thousand years this
wicked law ruled the unhappy women
of Israel. Then Christ, the merciful,
came, and when they brought to him a
shining woman, be stopped and wrote
on the ground, while her accusers, with
stones in their hands, made ashamed by
his divine words, slunk silently away.
And to that SHINING wOman's heart went
such words of pity as never before went
to creatures Of her class-as have never
since gone. The world has not vet
caught the divine compassion of Christ, |
the world yet stones its Magdalens, and
men, more guilty than they, make haste
to cast on them the first stones.
Nowhere in the Bible, from Genesis to !
Revelations, do we find any command |
that adulterous husbands shall be stoned !
TO death, or any permission given wo-
men to obtain divorces because Of hus- |
bands adultery.
II Colonel Kerr and his adherents
base their advocacy Of his divorce bill !
on their belief in the divine originatiOn |
Of the Scriptural law it is pretending to |
follow, how can they reconcile il to their !
religious oonscieDces to depart from the !
exact letter Of the Scriptural law? Why |
not frame their bill in the very words Of
Moses? Those words are all terse, few
and plainly understood. No man and
no woman can mistake them. They
have the merit Of perfect candor-of ex-
pressing exactly what the spirit Of the
law indicates, which Colonel KeTr's bill
does not. Moses meant to put the power
Of divorce solely in the husbands hands,
and his law makes no pretense of equal
ity between husband and wife, which
pretense Colonel Kerr's bill does make.
/ would like to ask the Trenton Gazette,
or any other paper or person who urges
the passage Of Colonel Kerr's bill on the
ground that il is in accordance with
Scripture, why they do not advocate
other Scriptural laws found in the Bible,
side by side with the law of divorce they
30 much admire?
Would the Trenton Gazette like to
have q law for the better regulation Of
the boys of Tennessee, after the Scrip
tuFal one found In Deut. xxi, Is:
II a man have a stubborn son, then shall
HIS father and his mother lay hold OF him,
and bring him unto the elders OF his city, and
unto the gates OF his place.
Aud they shall say 10 the elders Of the city,
This our son Il stubborn, he viii not obey our
voice, he Is glutfenous and drunkard.
with stones that he die.
Imagine the mothers and fathers of
Memphis, who are 80 unfortunate as to
have dissipated or disobedient sons, lay
ing bold Of them and taking them up
TO such fstei Imagine the piOus, gray
haired old gentlemen Of Memphis gath
cred together, on the bluff, or in the
Square, or at the turnpike, with wagon
loads Of stones to stone to death the
unhappy victims of the grogshops that
invite them to their ruin; or, perhaps,
some poor boy, who has been unlucky
as 10 have inherited from his ancestry a
sullen and stubborn nature!
Yet the Legislature that would make
such scenes frequent or possible, would
be no more untitled TO this age or peo-
Die. than a law that would hold a
woIaan forever tied to a drink-demon-
lied man.
We might also ask those who admire
Colonel Kery's bill because of its Bibli-
cal basis, how they would relish their
mutton and beef il the butchers of Ten
nessee were governed by the scriptural
command found in Deut. xiv, 2l.
YesiialI not eat Of anything that dieth Of it.
self Thou shall give IL unto the stranger that
Is in thy gates, that be may eat it, or thou
mayegt sell Il unto an alien.
These laws were given to the Hebrews
many thousand years ago. That they
were fitted for the people and the age
that received them, may not be denied;
that they are, in toto, untitled for our
age and our people, none but the ad
mirers of Colonel Kerr's bill will ven
ture TO dispute.
The deeply, rejecting Trenton Gazette,
points to Ms. Woodruff as ''living
instance Of the necessity Of a law to
prevent divorces and Of the evil of easy
divorces
They rather should point to her as
living instance Of the evil of drink, and
Of the necessity Of law to lesson the
number OF grogshops in the country.
The only detailed account extant of
the singular career Of Mrs. Woodruff, il
given by Theodore TIlton in a little
pamphlet biography; all the thousand
and one tales told of her, may be but
the stones the world yet thinks itself
called on to cast on the unfortunate and