Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1879-09-04
DAKOTA DIvORCE LAW,
From the New York Tribune.l

IHIom tue NEW 1ofE lTipuucsl
A recently reported decision Of the d.
kota District Court is well adapted to
cause extensive fitting Of disaffected
spouses to that Territory, and to stimu-
late the desire, already keen, among the
friends OF a pure and stable marriage
tie, for some comprehensive improve
ment of the law of divorce. The hero of
the narrative is the same Mr.. Vosburgh
who attained notoriety in New Jersey a
year or two ago by his trial and acquittal
on the charge Of attempting to poison his
wife. Since that trial he has moved to
Dakota, and has appeared there in a suit
for divorce. The law of the Territory al
lows a divorce for either OF six causes
named, one Of which is extreme cruelty"
and this cruelty is defined to be the infic-
ton OF g~rievous bodily injury or griey-
GUS mental suffering upon the other by
one party to the marriage. Ninety days
residence is exacted from a plaintiff. I'm
der these laws Mr.. Vosburgh brought suit,
setting forth the course taken by his wife
in circulating against him the charge of
poisoning, as the extreme cruel
ty" which had caused him ''griev-
GUS mental suffering" There was no
trick of concealment to obtain a divorce
by default. The wife appeared and an
swered, and was represented by counsel IN
the trial. Upon that trial the husband
narrated the course pursued by his wife in
preferring the charge of poisoning, mt its
effect upon his feelings. His counsel read
one or two corroborative affidavits. The
wife's counsel stated that they had de-
liberately decided not to submit any evil
dence and the Court ~adjudged that, ire
spective of the wife's procuring AN in
dictment against her husband, her circu-
lating the charge, and giving the District
Attorney aid in the prosecution, was
''cruel treatment; and, if it were not,
that her reiterating the charge of poison
ing in her answer and Withholding all evil
dence to sustain it, constituted treatment
most cruel and inhuman." For these rea-
sons a divorce Was granted; the plaintiff
being ordered to pay $25 alimony every
half year, for five years.
As the wife appeared and was heard,
this story has no bearing upon one
grave abuse under the divorce laws, the
obtaining q decree upon default, by de-
vices which conceal the proceeding from
the defendant. Upon the other branch
of the subject, the prosecution Of suits
by collision between the husband and
wife, it may have an important and most
unfortunate influence. The trainers of the
National Constitution included a provision
requiring the courts of each State to give
'full faith and credit" to the judgments
of courts Of other States. From this
provision, which has worked we'll enough
as respects ordinary money judgments, a
concealed mischief has been developed in
its application to judgments of divorce.
For the States differ strenuously and
by wide lines in respect to grounds Of
divorce. South Carolina refuses all di-
vorce. New York allows full divorce solely
for the extreme violation Of the marriage
tic, and only to the innocent party. Other
States have laxer rules. Dakota allows
it for cruelty, of which a wife's slandering
her husband may be an example. And
Utah caps the climax by according it
whenever it is made to appear that the par
ties cannot live in peace and union" Now
If South Carolina or New York were left to
herself she would enforce her chosen policy
within her own territory by simply disre-
garding DEGREES made in Dakota or Utah.
But the Federal Constitution is considered
to preclude this. The courts nave seen
their way to say, as respects q decree OBJ
tanned without giving the defendant notice
and a hearing, that it is not such a judg-
ment as the Constitution means, and need
not have full faith and credit in other
otdics. Dut u JuuSuleut IouueTcu On
a hearing anywhere is enforced every
where. Hence have arisen woful con-
fusion and uncertainty, and the lax States
have been enabled in a great measure to
foist their peculiar laws upon the strict
ones. Thus, if the Dakota law and such
judgments as this of Vosburg can be
sustained, a husband and wife who
are willing to agree upon a divorce,
can obtain one by q few easy steps.
She ISLANDERS him. He spends three
months Summer vacation) in Dakota.
He makes oath that the SANDER has caused
him grievous mental suffering. And she
instructs her attorney TO inform the court
that she has no evidence to prove the SLAM
der true. And the favorable decree of the
court in such a sham trial as this may be
brought back by the plaintiff to a State
seeking by steady laws and policy to main
tain marriage, and there fourished in her
courts as a decree to which they must give
''full faith and credit"
Truly the land needs a reform in the
law of divorce. If it cannot be attained
by a uniform, National law, let it be sought
by some concurrence Of legislation and
some reasonable comfy of courts in adj
| ministration Of their local laws.