The San Antonio light. (San Antonio, Tex.) 1883-1886, 1883-04-07
DIVORCE.
An Interesting Article on That Subject
by Judge John jam aon.


American Review for April, says
at is conceded by all codes that permit
divorce at all, that adultery is a sufficient
cause. In the history of opinion in regard to
it, however, there may be noted three grave
inconsistencies in the Bible the adultery held
TO justify divorce a vinculo seems to have
meant, as it did among the ancient peoples
generally, only the adultery of the wife; when
the rule was extended so as to deal equallyt
with both sexes, the divorce permitted for i
was confined to separation mensa ct thoro;
and finally, the sincerity of the Church in
opposing divorces was placed in doubt
by its practice Of authorizing them for
money, by papal dspensation--thus, for
mere purposes of revenue. winking at an
infracton Of the supposed divine law against
divorces. AS TO the first, the reason given for
the limitation was, in the main, selfish, pc
cuniary one, personal to the husband-the
danger of having cast upon him the care of
spurious offspring. Spurious as to whom
or course, to him alone, since as to the wife,
the term could have no application. But was
the offense, when committed by the wife, ever
intrinscally more destructive Of the integrity
of the marriage, or in its consequences more
fatal to the interests Of the family, or Of the
public, than the adultery of the husband for
merly winked at by the law and tolerated by
the church What force to Justify even a
separation, as against wife, was there in the
danger OF spurious offspring, in a state Of
society like that which existed in France from
the time of Louis XVI. down to the revolu-
ton, OF which there could be no more graphic
or accurate description than that of Mehemet
Ehendi, Turkish Ambassador, when he
said to a Frenchman 1.-The Turks are
great smpletons in comparison with the
Christians. We are at the expense
and trouble Of keeping a seraglio, and
in his our house; but you ease yourselves of
the burden, aud have your seraglios in your
friends houses" So of the rule authorizing
divorces a mensa for the adultery of both
sexes, it clearly was not the rule of Iesus, but
an extension of it, to meet social exieencies
II the rule could be extended at all for such
purpose, why might it not be extended so as
to cover all the real exigencies of society I?
Looking alone to the consequences is adul-
terry, by whosoever committed, deserving of
greater condemnation than extreme cruelty.
which, if repeated, is made the ground of d.
vorce? Cruelty is defined as physical vio-
lence endangering health or life, and making
longer cohabtation practically impossible
From the nature OF the case, such cruelty is
commonly exercised by the husband upon the
wife. A brutal temper can wreak itself upon
its object in but two ways-by acts of vio-
lence, and by injurious words. The acts are
commonly blows with thehst, or with the FIRST
weapon that comes to hand, dragging the wife
by the hair of the head. and the like; the
words those dreadful epithets which, addressed
TO woman, wound more cruelty than blows
II the offender be the wife, there are assaults
with dangerous weapons, poison in ones
coffee, with the most opprobious adjectives in
the language applicable to man. Such con-
duct indicates temper incompatible with the
marital relation, and, while it may inhct less
poignant mental distress than the scriptural
cause, it ought not to be permitted, on any
terms, 10 continue. 1t renders one great OBJ
ject of marriage, the right training OF offspring,
impossible.
In the present state of our laws there NAV
be much drinking Of spiritu rus liquors with
out legally endangerng the status OF marriage
SO long as husband is able to give to his
family maintenance and education suitable
to their condition in life and adequate to their
physical necessities. however loathsome he
may be to his wife, however unkind to his
children, however useless to society, be may
continue to squander his means, TO brutalize
himself, and to disgust his friends, with i'm
punity. Before he can be divorced for drum
kenness he must fail TO give to his family a
pecuniary support. AS if the mere failure to
feed and clothe his wife were the greatest, the
most intolerable irjury to her, and the COM
pulsory making OF her, year after year. the
mother of offspring likely to become drunk
ards ought to 60 for nothing While de-
manding the production of the technical evi.
dence required by law, no judge passing upon
cases OF that kind, can or ought to overlook
the terrible evidence of physiological fact ex
hibited in the swollen face, the shaking hands
and the tainted breath No such man ought
to be allowed to become the father of any wo-
mans children. The best good, therefore, OF
the wife, OF the children and Of the public,