The daily Cairo bulletin. (Cairo, Ill.) 1878-1???, 1882-02-01
A Perplexing Wedding,

~ AVi PiVAinS VOuhluSi
May a man marry his wife's deceas-
ed sisterpo was question which used
to be put, as hoax, to college fresh
men, by experts in the junior class;
and the tyro would often argue at good
length until broad laugh among by
ISLANDERS revealed the trick in the query.
"May man marry his deceased wifes
sister?" is the form in which the inquiry
is raised by late chronicles.
A recent story from Long Island is
that a wife and mother, enfeebled by
disease, and believing that she was soon
to die, sought to assuage her anxiety
for tho future of her little ones by pro-
noting match between her husband
and her sister. The invalid no doubt
had read extensively in the cautionary
literature relating to step-mothers, and
could not bear to leave the selection of
one for her babes to chance--or, what is
much the same thing, the widowers
choice. Her sister, the children's low
ing aunt, would be, she was sure, still
more loving as mother. She adjured
the sister and the husband to give her
the comfort of seeing them solemnly
married before she should close her eyes
upon the world. They at length acced-
ed; wedding was held; whereupon,
being relieved in mind, she straightway
began to recover in body, and at last ac-
counts was much better than had been
expected. In short, she is getting
well. And the question in the neigh
borhood now is, What about that we'd
ding?
1t "goes without saying that this
ceremony was no marriage The con-
sent or request of the wife could not
take the place Of a divorce, or dispense
with the law which forbids marriage
by one having q wife living. 1t is not
clear that it would even warrant
prosecution for bigamy. True, here was
married man formally taking another
wife, Every outward aspect of bigamy
is presented. But judges have maxim
that there is no crime where there is no
criminal intent; and jury would per-
haps be told that If they believed that
the husband and the sister did not intend
or suppose they were contracting pres
ent marriage, but only meant by the
ceremony to attest in the most binding
manner to the dying woman that they
were to be married as soon as they law
fully might, there was no bigamy The
case, though a very earnest one, would
probably be likened in law to mock
marriage, such as is sometimes per-
formed in jest at an evening entertain
ment.
What is better worth knowing is that
serious questions have arisen whether
engagements to marry, made while one
of the parties is already married, are of
any effect. Suppose the wife in the
story had died, and the husband had
been disposed to say TO the sister; 81
only promised to marry you, and went
through the pretence of doing so, to re-
lieve my wife's mind" Could she sue
him for preach of promisep Cases have
occurred in which man already we'd
ded has courted another woman, and OBJ
tanned her promise to marry him when
he should become free by divorce or
death. And if he has, when that time
came, refused, and she has brought
SIT, lawyers for her have argued that
his engagement was binding one; it
was like contract to sell farm which
one expects TO buy, and he must perform
it or pay damage GJt the current of
thought among Judges is that all such
engagements are contrary to public
policy and void. A married person
cannot make binding premise to mar
ry, not even with reference to a time
when freedom to fulfill il is expected.
Whoever, knowing the marriage, trusts
to such a promise, does not even gain
right to sue for breach. But man
who being married pretends to be single,
and in that character engages himself to
woman ignorant of his ties, cannot es-
cape damages on this ground, ~ Y
Tribune.
------------~zb y -