Smyrna times., 1879-12-24
Conflict of the Marriage Laws.

One can easily soc that great prudence
AMI sagaclty are required from the courts
in administering the conflicting marriage
laws OF the States. For the States have
differed widely. Some command a cere.
mony by minister or magistrate; others
allow the parties to make the contract in
any way they please. When Mrs. Bis.
sell sued Mr.. B. for divorce, about ten
years ago, in New York State, he declared
that he had never been married to her.
" Yes he has, said she. I'VE were riding
in carriage one day. We had been
engaged to be married on that day. He
gave me ring, and SAID This is your
welding ring; we are married; | will live
with you and take care of you all my life as
my VILE. ! took it for wedding ring.
ana went to live with him as his wife
ana she proved that at the boarding, house
where they lived he introduced her and
pad her board as his wife. The Court held
TINS to ba valid marriage. In another
| instance man deludPd Brooklyn servant
@lrl by mock wedding, bringing a crony
| 10 personate priest, who read marriage
service. When prosecuted for bigamy, he
| pleaded: No priest, therefore no marriage
| But the judges said that if there was an
| actual agreement there was a real marriage;
Il clergyman was needless; and that the
law OF this State IS so liberal that men of
that stamp have need to be careful or they
may "blundsr into bigamy." And in
Missouri, in a lawsuit by grandchildren to
recover property belonging to their grand.
father, the story of his marriage was that
no clergyman or justice was called, but the
happy pair stood up in the boarding house
parlor one evening, and told the lady's
| relatives and the boarderS that they had
decided to be married; after which they
behaved as such. The Court said that was
enough, so far as the grandchildren rights
were concerned.
Quite the contrary was decided in Mary.
land, where one of these marriages without
a ceremony and only by words of present
contract was questioned. The Court said it
was void; that by the law of Maryland
some official ceremony must be superadded
to the parties contract. An Oregon lady
once claimed a share of deceased mans
estate as his widow. She could not show
that he had ever taken out a marriage
license, so she declared that they were mar.
| ned 10y private contract one time when they
were taking sea voyage and while they
went where there was no law commanding a
license. The Court, without protesting to
doubt the lady's word, said that the story
was not sufficient, if true; that by the law
OF California and Oregon parties cannot
become married except hy consent avowed
before an authorized officer and in the
presence OF two witnesses.
strong argument can be male in favor
| OF each of these conflicting views. But
what confusion may arise when persons
| married in State of liberal laws remove
| INT rkn ~,
Missouri couples 90 to live in Mary land or
California, are they respectable married
persons or not? Quite lately the Supreme
Court at Washington was called upon to
decide this question. A man of Pennsyl.
vanla. where, apparently, the law does not
require an official wedding, travelled into
Michigan, where the statue prescribes a
ceremony by justice or minister, and was
there married. But the lady was an Indian
girl, and the statue was disregarded. Indian
forms were followed, or, perhaps, none at
all. He carried his du>ky bride back to
Pennsy lvania; they lived and acquired
property in Pittsburg; died; and when
| their heirs claimed their estate the answer
was made that the father and mother were
never lawfully welded. The Supreme
Court administered justice in this instance
by saying that, as the Michigan law did not
say in so many words marriages shall BE-
void unless celebrated by AN officer, it ought
to he enforced in some other way than hy
adJudging them void, and furnishing limo.
cent posterlty. But sometimes the statute
does not say that they shall Toe void. An
example is found in the case of marriages
between black and white person these
are explicitly declared void and punishable
10y the laws of several States, while in Others
they are tolerated If, then a couple of
different color go to State where they NAV
lawfully wed, and are married, and then
return to one whore this is unlawful, what
shall be done? The Supreme Court is
vPxed with a case of this kind this Winter.
All this shows that there would be great
advantage in uniform National marriage
law.-N. !. Tribune.