The star. (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1874-1875, 1875-02-20
Tilton on Diyorce-yiews Brought out at the
CrOss-ExaminatiOn.

Q.-Your attention was called to the
suJ Jjeet of liberality of divorce and loos-
ness of marriage, want TO ask you what
your views are upon that subject?
A.-That is two subjects. Loosness Of
marriage is one thing, ana hberality OF
divorce is another. 1 have never since
came to the years OF having any thoughts
at all, entertained any other views on
the subject of marriage and divorce than
those which L will express now very
briefly. FIRST as to marriage, hold con-
Oernlng it the one common opinion en-
tertained throughout all christendom,
held, believe, i'll all civilized society by
all good men and women, tnatit is the
union of one man aud one woman Tor
Lille, for better or for worse, through
storm and calm, not only for life perhaps,
but possibly beyond life. AS TO divorce,
| hold the common opinion entertained,
not in this State or in our Knickerbock-
cr legislation, but that wide and more
general opinion which is incorporated
| in the legislation OF the New England
States on the one hand, and the Western
States on the other. 1t seems to be not
generally known that the State of New
York has very singular, unique, and
exceptional code of diyore. THIS State
is out of harmony with all the sisterhood
OF States on the subject OF divorce. For
instance, here, under our legislation,
there is divorce for one solitary cause,
and for that alone, whereas in COnnecti-
cut, Massachusetts, and New Hamp-
shire on the one hand, ana i'll Pennsylva-
MIA and OHIO on the other, there is di-
vorce Tor IL multitude Of reasons. l will
give an illustration. hold, for instance,
as the great body Of the American peo-
Dle do, that if u Woman's husband treats
her Drutaliy she is entitled, Ii she wishes
it. to have divorce. | hold that il he neg.
IL cts to support her and al lows her to 20
INTO extreme poverty and priVation, she
is entitled, il sn6 wishes it, to have di-
vorce, hold that if le is an habitual
drunkard, rendering the life of vile
and children dangerous from his frantic
spasms, she is entitled, Ii she wishes it
10 divorce. So L might state other
grounds on which a woman is entitled,
when she wishes it, to divorce. Now,
sir, those grounds are held legal and val
id for divorces in almost every State OF
the Union except New York. A woman
who goes into a court in New Haven and
says to a Judge and jury that her hus.
band brutally treats ner will get a di-
yorce, because the law doesn't interfere;
the law permits divorce. But if that
same woman, living not in Connecticut
but in Brooklyn, should 60 into Judge
Reynolds court and carry the same evil
dence before Judge and jury, she could
get no divorce, and the Judges reply
would be. "Madam, however Just your
cause is, the law OF this State peremptor-
lily forbids divorce save for one cause.s
Now, thought that the civilization Of
our day, the good Of society, the peace OF
the family, The sanctity Of marriage, all
combine to demand that we should
change our New York code of divorce,
and adopt in its place the New England
code or Western code. Sensation.1
Q.-lt is your doctrine that the hrls-
bald and vile should be separated at
will, according TO their own notions Of
propriety, butt should be regulated by
iawI
A.--Certainly, sir; my only point is
that the law should not interfere in such
cases as 1 have named. Let me give
you another illustration. For instance,
the law OF New hampshire permits di-
vorce for desertion. the time being one
year; that is to say, that in New Hamp-
shire, which is 20 good old New England
State, Ii man runs away from his wife
and stays away year, the law gives her,
Ii she wants 1t, divorce. But i'll the
State of New York a man may run
away from his vile and go to China and
and live seventy years, and she can't
get, however much she may desire it, a
divorce.
Q.-It is not your doctrine that q man
has a right to desert his wife because he
has discovered AN affinity in another wo-
man2
A.-No, sir. That is the doctrine Of.
devils,