The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1874-06-04
rs MARxsAGE TO HE A FARCE,


that, before a marriage takes place, there
must of necessity be an agreement between
two parties. In nearly all other contracts
this simple agreement is all that is neccs-
sary, prccaution being taken to preserve
proof Of its having been made by reducing
it to writing and attaching the signatures
of the parties thereto, or making the CON
tract verbally in the presence of one or
more witnesses. II n party to one of these
contracts violates its terms, the other is re-
lieycd from a performance of his part
thereof, and can recover damages of the
first party il he has sustained any loss. A
deed of real estate is in certain sense
contract. but its execution is complete and
final and the transaction between the par
ties at once ends with the execution
thereof and the paying Of the consdera-
ton. But the contract of marriage-saye
the original agreement, which is the basis
OF the contract differs from any or all
of these. The law throws many safeguards
around the final exception of the contract,
if we may so speak. For instance. in this
State ~ well as in others, license. from
the oiilc3 of the town clerk, is required au-
thori2ing, in effect, although such are not
its terms. the parties to be married. only
certain officers can legally pronounce a
couple to be husband and wife," and a
record of each marriage must be kept by
the officers AMI in the town clerks office.
To certain extent, these are mere matters
OF form save that the ceremony must be
performed by person authorized or sup
posed to be authorized so to do-because
the marriage would not be void If they
were all omitted, but. on the contrary,
would be 10 all ntcnts and purposes as lc-
gal rs if the lctterof the law had been COM
piled with. In order to prevent mock mar
riagcs, the law has wisely provided that if
either party believes the person Officiating
as Il minister or other officer to be such
and legally authorized to act in such cases,
then the marriage shall have the same ef
feet as il the person was minister of the
gospel, justice of the peace or other proper
officer.
But in all cases the law prcsumcs that
the minister or other officer is in the l,c,,son-
III presence of the parties to be and who
are married. 1t does not say this.
perhaps, in express terms, but it presumes
il. As evidence TO show this, it may be
said that every "ritual" that has been
| framed would be nonsense if the contract
ing parties and officiating clergyman, jus
ticc or other officer were not face TO face
The noyel question arises whether a mar
riage can be legally solemnizcd where the
parties are fifty or II hundred miles distant
from the clergyman, and the only ceremo-
ny, il ceremony it can be called, was per-
| formed by means of tnlnsr.t'h. IL 10 tnut
this question may be understood that we
have been thus particular in explaining the
law in reference to this class of contracts.
The Rev. William c. Pratt, Methodist
minister of Kcokuk, Iowa, has seen fit Ia
marry, or undertook to marry, couple in
Bonapartc, in the same state, by means OF
the telegraph, he standing in one office and
they in another, the "talking" being done
by the operators at either end The core
mony commenced by the Rcy clergyman
sending a dispatch as follows Please
join hands and take the pledge" to which
the response came, signed or purporting
to be signed by the parties, 9 We take tic
pledge. Whereupon the minister agair
telegraphs; BY authority | pronounce
you husband and wife, and may God bles,
YOU"
In order that this strange performance
may be fully understood. we give copy
of the "pledge;'
You mutually and solcmnly promise be
fore God and the witnesses present tina
you will each take the one you hold by thu
hand to be your lawful and welded com
paniOn that, forsaking all others, you vii
clcavc TO each other in sickness and II
health, and perform all the duties of
faithful companion until you are separated
by death. Ii to this you agree, send me
message to that effect.
The Journal Of Te,egruphy, to which w
are indebted for copies of the dispatchc
and 'pledge,' says that this is the frs
authenticated marriage ceremony per
formed through the medium Of the telc
graph We should hope so, and we trls
it will be the last, unless we are ready t.
throw aside all the barriers and guard
which law and religion have thrown aroun,
it, and digest it of all solemnity. We will
not stop to inquire whether or not such
marriage is or is not legal. Probably, i
the parties live together as husband an
wife, in some states and in some proceed
ings, that would he considered suflicien
proof of marriage, but DIS we look ut il
the question is full of difficulties. TIL
clergyman cannot tell whether he is MAJ
rying the parties he thinks he is, or som
other persons personating them for som
criminal purpose; indeed, he cannot tel
that there is more than one person at til
other end Of the line, and lie having pre-
tended marriage performed with some al
sent person for the purpose of affecting til
title to property at some future time,
raise a question in reference to some futur
marriage, or for many other reasons thi
a we can well imagine. If clergyman ca
. legally marry couple by telegraph, VIII
can he not do the same by mail or throug
, an express company? The only differenC
- would be the length Of time which woul
be occupied in the transmission of me
sagcs. If its object IS to make n farce
, the marriage ceremony, and this perform
y ance is nothing else but farce, it is we
" commenced, If the courts hold il lega
:, then anything will be legal marrag
Il The next step is to allow operators to d
. vorce by telegraph, and then the day
- - longed for by Woodruff and company wi
y have been glorlously ushered in.