New-York tribune., 1883-11-04
THE COURTS. NOT THE LAW AT FAULr
UNIFORM LAWS NPRACncABLE-A LETTER FROM
FRANCIS II. OLMsrED.

To the Editor Of The Tribune.
Sp. There are hundreds of people living in
this state who either upon their own motion or against
their WILL have been divorced by the courts OF other
States for causes for which no absolute divorce can be
Granted by the Courts Of York; and has become al
most an every day for citizens OF this state
tired Of the marriage tie resort for relief 10 some neigh
bonp State where the divorce laws lax, and to
return 70 this state free they suppose from all the OBJ
catiops of the former alliance and ready to contract
new onethus practically multiplying the laws aud the
policy Of NewYork, which for years have attempted to
maintain that there shall Of right be but cause for an
absolute divorce between citizens Of this state Not only
This but we ind on the authority of the Court Of Appeals
that person divorced In this State for his adultery
and prohibited by statute from marrying again, and any
attempted marriage by whom is declared TO be utterly
void has but to 90 10 NcwJersey have the marriage
ceremony performed there and, returning to this state
obtain the sanction OF the courts TO marriage contracted
in defiance Of our laws That such things be strikes
tbe ordinary mind as anomalous and absurd, and the
effect Of them only 10 nufy laws bat to suuy
our legislators
Attributng most OF the evils which so loudly
complained OF 10 the lack Of uniformity In
be laws on the subject OF marriage
in the several States the remedy naturally suggested
an amendment TO the Constitution OF the United States
per1nitting the passage OF uniform divorce law
throughout the country. However desirable such
would be- its mpractcaby ,at least for years to come,
hardly questioned II scarcely reasonable 10 suppose
that Maine and South Carolina could unite any
mon ground in respect divorce policy and the ques
,op of States rights and OF delegatng such power
Congress would be enough 10 defeat such proposed
remedy Further legislation Ia demanded ny some and
the evils prevalent are attributed 10 defects the
Now ia il not possible that the defect lies in the
rather than I'm the legislature that the aIity IN the
administration and application o the law as u eIs u ana
not In the law iselfT
There no more clearly established principle Of the
unw11tten law Of nations, and distinctly recog
nzed by the courts Of this and Of every civilized State,
than that each nation or State has the exclusive right OF
determining the domestic and social condition status
of s own citizens who in such matters long their
citizenship continues owe IL their exclusive allegiance
and that any interference in these respects by foreign
State s usurpaton Of power which " does possess
and which is a. Intellectual ia unwarrantable Now
let the courts practice what they preach y let these
principles be as unhestatingy applied as they
are uneguivOcaly laid down by them. Whenever
the validity OF foreign divorce comes under their notice,
in the case Of citizens Of this State at least let the juTis
dction of the foreign court be carefully scunized and
In case such divorce had been granted 90 persons not
then citizens the foreign state In fraud OF the law
OF the which they owed allegiance let the courts
then as they do in theory. pronounce such divorce
null and void and any subsequent marriage legmae.
Would not such COurse do much 10 check the food Of d.
yorces in this country and create hesitation at least,
about "going 70 Indiana" or any other State
20 get divorce Moreover the consideration that any
marriage made subsequent TO snch divorce would be
outside the pale o. the law would remove Of the chief
motives for the divorce
In re- pec TO the conflict u marriage and divorce laws
the position of New-York Connecticut for example,
toward each other differs in essential rePect from that
OF England and Scotland WAcr for gcnera,ions very dif
feren systorns OF laws IN h, -pC force
eide by side. Though on i eeount ~ ihe past many