The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1875-02-24
From the cinei anati Commercial
Indiana Marriages lIiegal-rhe In
Of 1852 Uneonseftuaienal- Nor
Divorees Needed Mated, Nss MAJ
PiPd.
INpIANApoLIs, Feb. Is, 1873.

Of 1882 Uneonsaftuaie ssal- Nor
Div0rees NEEDED Mated, NSs Mar
/ ried-
INDIANAPOLIS, Feb. Is, 1875.
THE MARRIAGE Law rScoxsriTurIos4L
Il have a sensation for You" sais.
a we'll known citizen, whom it Ii
safe to say is not married, and FROM
surface indications does not want
to be. Il want to tell you that
all the marriages which have been
solemnized in the State since 1852
are illegal" a1e IS
But can you prove it, / asked
Beyond question" was the re-
ply
Then here's work for the
parsons and County Clerks, I OBJ
served. ''But the proof want to
see the proof
'-Coonle with me into the Secre
tary Of States Office and I vii
show you"
We accordingly bent our steps
thither, and he. first got down the
Constitution of the State of Indiana.
and turning over the pages. called
my attention to the following
clause:
Section 1, Article ", of the
Constitution of 1851 distinctly
says: The style of every law shah
be-. BE it enacted by the General
Assembly of the State of Indiana,
and no law shall be enacted except
by bill. :"
Nov to the point he said;
getting down a huge volume of the
enrolled acts of the original laws,
he continued: -.--.
.The Legislature of the following
year, 1852, pas sed Bill 136, de.
nominated AN act declaratory of
the law regulating marriage, and
enforcing the provisions there's
by proper penalties But not on
section of the act was prefaced by
the above quoted enacting clause
of the Constitution" I
Looking carefully over the re
quirements of the Constitution.
The section reads as follows:
"No marriage shall be void or
voidable for the want of any license
or other forinality required by law.
if either of the parties thereto be
heve it to be legal marriage at the
time"
But this section can be constru-
ed to apply only to marriages con
tracted previous to the date, which
is March S, 1852
It will be asked how could such
violation of the Constitution be
overlooked. It is easily explained
The Revised Statutes of Indiana
hade the enacting clause in them,
but the original enrolled bill, No.
236, which may be found among
the acts and joint resolutions of
1852, does not contain the necessa
ry enacting clause, and is therefore,
unconstitutional
Section l begins as follows:
Marriage is declared to be a civil.
contract, etc. ~
MATED NOT MARRIED.
The misery and relief that must
enter into the married souls of
Indiana upon this announcement
can not be reckoned. Those happy
in their choice will make what
haste they can to legalize the con
tract, and it will be delightful
opportunity for the mismated to
swing clear of their responsibilities.
What will become of the children
is too grave a question to consider
hastily. ..... ..s+
There is no telling but what very
many who chafe at the bonds of
we,llock will hug them closer now
they know there is chance TO
shuttle them Off As for divorce
litigation, it is at an end = a.
OUR RELIEF.
The so called marriage statute of
1852 has a section furnishing cons
tracing parties where white man
or white woman marries a man
or woman possessed of one eighth
or more of negro blood This Is
void of course, and as our State
prisons and jails contain score
or more Of prisoners convicted of
violation of this law, its unconsti
nationality will give them their.
tickets of leave.
THE REMEDY.
A measure is already on foot to
have proper Legislative action to
the embarrassing oversight
Of the Indiana Solons of twenty
three years ago. L. r.
The New York World, intensely
partisan "a it is, cannot but speak we'll
"a Capar,l RutIar r. COWS.