New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-10-08
PRICE THREE CENTS
EASY DIVORCE DEFENDED.
ADIRONDACK MURRAYs LECTURE.

DIVORCE PROPER RESULT OF MODERN LIFE
W. Fl. II. Murray lectured last night at CHECKER
ing Hall on the subject of american Divorce"
The popular interest IN the theme had doub tess
been heightened by the publication Of an article
in Yesterdays TRIBUNE, and il showed itself IN the
gathering of an audience several times as large as
that which heard the same lecturer a week before.
Nearly all the seats in the hall were occupied.
Those who heard the first lecture obtained the key
| to MIR. Murrays position IN reference to the prob
lens of modern life. They we're aware that be
lookcd upon the process of social evolution as ths
only one by which these propems could be solve d.
and that modern tendencies of life and thought
were In direct and vigorous opposition to tte
antique crystalized forms Of belief. THIS
idea was the core Of his discourse upon
divorce. Entertaining and forcible as he was, to
those who disagreed with him not less than TO those
who approved his theory, he was even more busi-
ness-ike IN his manner on the r0strum than before.
| From the sth bow and the opening words Il pro-
pose to discuss" to the closing FL thank you,D
companied with a slight inclination of the head,
the speaker passed in rapid succession over the diff
ferent phases OF his argument 1t was rare that 10
allowed himself even the privilege of an eplgram-
matte comment on his conclusions. As he camo on
the stage from the door at the slde he carried in his
hand the bound volume of manuscript. Laying
this volume down on the readin y-deskal opening
| it, he said
Ipropose odiscuss with your kind permission tonight
the subject OF American divorce, and propose discuss
it seriously and though-fulIy look upon it
worthy Of your careful attention. Anything less
than moral earnestness in my treatment Of the subject
before you tonight woId be unworthy Of IT, nuwOrJhy
| OF myself, unworthy Of you.
There two parties at This day in this country OF
this question These are the party which. holding
by the traditions of the past, maintains the in
dssoubilty of the marriage tie-in other words what
may be called the church ecclesiastical party-and
the party OF people comprising those who think that
marriage, Ike other contracts, is rightly subject t. dis
solution at the just demand Of the parties 10 it. But
the church party does assert shat the bond Of
! marriage is absolute and continuous.
Practically the church has nothing to do with the mat
AIKEN this thing ont Of ecclesiastical control Within ths
circle of the church which includes the fewer num-
Der Of men AID women, the churcn's authority and It's
formulated law may be enforced, but this authority as
TO society in general Is merely advisory. It's Laws hoVs
cha ged FROM time to time. Jesus mentioned adu tery
alone as sufficient cause for divorce PAM added
| wful deseruOn. Luther, who modified his views
greatly In the course or MS IRE, included Oller calses
finally valid. Zwingle added proper reason for
consort He also considered cruelty to be a good cause
divorce CALVIN allowed divorce when wilfuI deser-
The tendency has been to multiply the causes
! OF divorce IN modern times. The church teachers
| have themselves the necessity or admiL-
| ting the practical validity OF causes which IN the
| past would been rejected. II was to
BE- expected that this increase would accompany Tho
evolution OF human life, aud is preemlnenty pr per
mat II should De acc'ped loi ngauy III @ Ld" % motSrn m
poses. They alone can decide whether tho
ppurposes Of marriage are subserved by their
nn1n tngTel9r%e % Sy @ e Acne stC can ot S ias
extends ouly 10 guardianship Of personal rights and
tue social welfare. The church only advise against
both of the parties feel or feels, Is "a I'm
possible for them to I'VE together tn the former martial
relation and this conclusion Is justified by the iul ana
searcnUg nyes CATION the part Of unprfj ldlced
arOor then divorce should follow. IN effect tue piTues
do divorce themselves as they before hal married tle
THE oMNIBUs CLAUSE DEFENDED.
The legislation OF the different States is diverse Some
States require that divorce shall only be granted IN GER
tain specified cases, while Others admit OF discretion
ary uower In the court II /, this omuibls clause, 50
| called IN the statutes OF Maine and ol 0ther
| STATS that IL subject 70 the hcrccst assaults In
sermon pamphlet, memorial and petition, the srgu-
! mcuJ being that The tendency OF sIch legis4t-
WHO argue thus / claim tHat the clause should stand
When application for divorce Is made somebody
should decide This decision may be ntnsIed tiIHer 10
the church, The legislature the people or the courts one
OF uese In fact dcciie. Ia accord with our system
to act through the courts As IN tne infinite variety
OF cases the people cannot specny tHe i,i,y dIy VI
powers should be granted the Supreme Court Of eIe1
! State These courts are, as rule maze UP OI men
conservative IN temper Judicial ~ tralns systemaue
m luer modes OF thought careful IN their haolts o n'
nave been found useful and necessary IN reaching the
truth by means OF human testimony Inc Justice Justice
| decisions reached cannot be Questioned. Tas
outcy against legislation which confers dlscleloH
mower on the courts in regard divorces Is IN Yan DC
cGuse discretionary power must be lodged somewhere
and no other Instruments Of the people are as wen Ied
| for welding u as are the courts OF law -. ,,.
90 aot nesirae to say that this QUERY against tle
n controversy to be decided without full examnaJion
Iu tine state Of Connecticut IN 1850 the numD,r oI az
men nWtI'' and 33S women had decided rnat las
true end Of marriage was NOT server J." IN ~
several and that IN each case the ogoa I' VIC
petitioner iddclally approved Ihs approNH vas
not gwen except after careful neaI'ns ~ ~ co1,d IA
asked secure justice. The presumption - ~ tStS
| the supposition tnat these divorces were nsAHaiy
BHS tne only way TO test the matter would be to in
quire the effect IN each case upon the paees tue
| selves upon the children II there wer1 any aad
upon the community in which these divorced couples
naiyduals. | give you the facts, as know tlen, "a
| two of these cases. The one was that OF rehned
| to maturity Alter years Of such horror as only
sensitive woman could endure, ormented by the haDn2i
% ind ~ ist ZEN minutes TO grant her freedom. Who
| VII. question tho courts action in such casei ms
| other example was that OF young woman, nSfdy,
married TIc, appealed to the court agsinso tho
brutal cruelty with which she was treated by her nus
band. The scars aud bruises upon her Do1E AZ mrIv - @
witnesses, and her petition was granted IN HVe ,hUu.es
Could anything be more Just than TINS decision ieI e
! the Scripture had been followed 70 'ue T7 Te,.sI
| she could not have been ireeI lneso
two instances take 70 be fair indication OF te ehsre
ter OF all II Is easy for he masazihsI Vr tne % H
or the ecclesiastical petitioner 10 the SlSatuIeIo
| weave argument against tuls discretionary poHtE
granted tho courts bur these arguments Will have no
weight with PRACTICAL men and women. The preYaeRce
of divorce does prove uuftncsS OF the legislation
The legal remedy may as good could be devised al
the circumstances considered and tie only PROOF OF us
unsuab bcuess must be the discovery OF somebody III
ureG In person property by the application OF the rem
edy. ,--. ....
The marriage contract shown by experience Is n0t
made more permanent by lessenng the statutory l3c
ties for seycrng IT, Those who think that they can fo
duce the number OF divorces by mitudthe number OK
recognized causes might well try 10 cure the smaI-
poX by removing tho pustules in the skin Ihe AVS
fla iIp
the laws that relate marriage should provide thaL 10
shall rot be degraded by association with drunkenness
cruelty descrtOu with iglure 10 support or with phys
al corruption aud ewdneSs II the laws OF MARRIAGE 90
not protect II in these particulars the young women on