Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1879-10-10
DISPENSING wITH.rHE MINISTER
IN MARRIAGE.

DIST IN oANNN w - a -
IN MARRIAGE.
The confusion and Inconvenience
which frequently result iron a lack OF
uniformity i'm the marriage laws Of the
several States is Just now being Illus
tratcd i'm a ca,e in Massachusetts,, and Is
the most novel in its character OF any
We have met.
The facts are briefly these: Last July
the Rev. Mr.. Munsou, Second Advent
minister. of Worcester, undertook, at
the close oi the services in his church,
ta marry himself toa Miss Eaton. No
other c'ysyman or legal representative
of the Commonwealth oiiciated he
simply took the lady To Ice his vile
and she declared her willingness To
take him as her husband. the parties
were Of iull age, the usual notice was
filed i'm the office OF the city clerk
and the parties 10 the contact
believed the ceremony they had
performed constituted a vJ.iJ mar
rias,. The Commonwealth, however,
was Of ancutjrrly different opinion, and
the Rev Mr.. MUNSoN was crimlnally
prosecuted I'm the Superior Court and
found guilty. An appeal has been
taken to the supreme Court OF the
State. where the case WAS argued a lew
DAYS ago. In behalf of the State 1t is
cuutcuIyj that the presence of a clergy
man or civil officer was necessary to
make tine marriage valid, and IN q case
which arose some years since in the
same State 10 was SD held by the SUI
prrme legal authority in the Common
wealth. The defendant, on the other
hand. contends that the statute provi-
sious ON the subject prescribing the
presence Of ministers or civil masls-
istrates are merely permiSSiye, not man
datory, and that their absence does not
create such an iniormality rs to nu,liiy
tine marriage. The marriage laws OF
Missouri and Massachusetts, are
nearly similar, AMI this position
Of tine defendant has been sus-
tanned by the Supreme Court OF
Missouri The Supreme Court OF the
United states has also thrown the weight
oius authority ON the same side, but
notwi,hStauIiugthcSr two decisions the
Massachusetts, precedent is the other
way. The decision in the ease will be
watched with interest, not only IN the
OH EIv State. but outside OF IT, Mean
while Mr. Nilsson occupies the curious
position ui being legally married ac-
rurliu, tu United States and Missouri
law and of being Illegally married and
therefore guilty OF q crime according to
tine law of Massachusetts,,
While the law of West Virginia is
framed with q view OF giving the con-
tracing parties the benefit of any
dpub, as to thc legality OF the marriage
ceremony. it they were acting in good
faith, We are not right sure that a mar
rsl.r ceremony wouJ Dee regarded as
.,........r...,..-,:....,,,.l.r,,,l,
-. r..,.,......,,.I .,;,.,,,,... ,,i,b
=, -. ..:,..r ..,,...r
~ .,,N l..'....' ,.', r.,.,,,. nor
som u.a.,..q tY brau,huriz,j 90 sol
cuuil' tHc same shall be- deemed or all
e.. T..,..f.1 rr..4 sd an firta y.r|T.lrfN
Judged To- De- N'l.. n', S.' r ,.,J '",''' NJ.
,',r, ~, arv var, If authority in such
persons. ii the marriage De- in all other
respects lawful amt h' conSnmma'yd
with 'n'' hr''yI ON ,.l' i'l', ~ '.'' !l',
g.. low. I'm Iq.,fr,I, i,ir,.I i'm mar
rflsr."
There is thus no gu. 81 on under the
liberal provisions of the above section,
that oiuf"i may ,urc.cIi in making
marriage ceremony valid, although he
NAV act without authority OF law. No
deception can thus Doe pract;ycI upon
the contracting parties, but u they be-
licvcd they were being lawfully married
even 1t they were not, the law steps m
and renders the act valid.
Eut while the law does not permit IN
uocrnt persons 20 suffer from fraud or
irrrgularity in such eases, II prcScrl5eS
who shall have the right to perform the
rites of matrimony. H0vinsspcclI'ed anu
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, 10 necessarily implies
that only these shall act in such eases.
Itimp,icS, We think. that a third party
shall o1icjJtc i'm all such ceremonies. Ii