, 1881-07-03


ton Of benefits elsewhere:
DIVORCE MADE EASY.
It is evident that the divorce practice in
the Chicago courts requires strictcr atten-
ton from the Judges than has been given it
for some time past. The Taylor case shows
how: easy, informal, and reckless the practice
of granting divorces has become One Will
iam 4. Taylor was able to obtain a divorce
from his wife, both living in Chicago, with
out her knowledge. The husband seems to
have had no grounds for divorce, and yet
was able to procure Que so expetlitiously and
quietly that the first intilnation the wife had
Of the fact was the notice of the marriage of
her husband to another woman, she contlnu-
ins to live with him for months after he had
procured the unknown divorce! II there
were no other evidence Of the baseness OF
the divorce practice than the bald statement
Of this one case there would be sufficient
warning Of the necessity for reforin-
In the Taylor case it seems that all appear
ance was entered fur the wife BY all attorney
named Kinney. The answer was filed and
Immediately Withdrawn, aud thereafter the
proceedings progressed smoothly and secretly
until the decree was granted. Mr.. Kinney
explains that . man called at his office with
written authority for him to appear as Mrs:
Taylor's attorney; that he declined to act
upon such document alone. not knowing
that the signature was genuine; that, the
next day. a woman appeared who repre-
sented herself as Mrs. Taylor, and expressed
a desire to have the matter disposed
Of Is quickly aud quietly as possi-
BILE; and that thereupon he Chimney ac-
copied the fee, entered an appearance,
filed an answer. then Immediately withdrew
it under instructions, and thus permitted tile
case to proceed without further obstacle to a
fraudulent decree. Even admitting AR.
Kinney statement to be probably correct,
and copceGtiug that he was deceived, it
seems as though he did not exercise proper
caution in the matter. Lawyers ought to
feel responsibility to public morality and
principles OF justice as we'll as to clients who
pay them their fees. 1t is not easy to UNDER
stand how an attorney can reconcile his con-
science to undertake the ostcnsible defense
of divorce case which is really intended to
facilitate and hasten a decree without first
satisfying himself that he Is representing the
real defendant. In the Taylor case the wife
was personated by some other woman, and
the attorney seems not TO have taken any
pains to discover the fraud:
The practice Of trying divorce cases has, we
believe, assumed almost the Uniform course
of reference to a Master in CEancery. The
petition is filed, and then the answer, it there
be one, After that the papers in the case are
Il In tr frtt1
evidence is taken, it is usually in some out
of-the-way place before Il Master, who re-
ports his opinion to the Court, which almost
always enters decree in keeping with the
Masters report, and without further cert
mony OF delay. The result of this practice is
that divorce is made altogether too easy. The
proceedings are relieved OF all disagreeable
details or hun,iliatins publicity. 4 single
line in the Law columns Of the newspapers
announcing the decree is about all the people
eyer have an opportunity OF knowing about
a case, and even this much publicity is fre-
quently avoided by adroit attorneys.
There is now no longer any reason why the
Judges should pass over divorce cases SO
Aippantly. The Courts are no longer oyer;
crowded with business. There are enough
JuQEeS 70 give ai tut HuSiutoS t4lat cuIltS ue"
fore them personal and adequate attention.
The facilities for divorce under the law are
broad enough to warrant the Judges In con-
timing applicants to strict Interpretation Of
the Statute and ample proof Of the alleged
causes It is not desirable that Chicago
should regain the reputation it once had Of a
stop-over place for divorces. Something has
been done in the way OF suppressing the
shystertng attorneys who used to adYertilseto
procure divorces on the railroad plan at q
small cost and without publicity. But the
Taylor case shows that the abuses in this
practice have not all been squelched. OF
course, if the wlfe's present statement be
proved, the decree will be SET aside, and the
husband may possibly DO punished for blsa-
my. But in the meantime the second wife
has been wronged in a way for which there
is no remedy. The safety against fraudu-
lent divorces is almost entirely in the hands
Of the Judges, and it is only through public
trials and the most rigid examinations that
Innocent wives or husbands can be protected
from the Vaccinations OF intriguing spouses
who seek the aid Of unscrupulous Or careless