Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1888-02-25
PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMEND
MRNTS.

PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMEND
MENTs.
The House judiciary Committee ha
reported in favor Of amending the Consti
tuition Of the United States, so as TO declar,
that polygamy shall not exist or be Lawful
in the United States, or in any place sub
ject to their jurisdiction that polygamy
shall consist in the marriage relations by
contract, or in fact, existing at the same
time between one person Of either sex anC
more than one person of the other sex
that Congress shall have power, concurrent
with the several States, to enforce this Act
There IS no conceivable reason why these
amendments should not be submitted and
adopted. They would, as part of the con
stitutional law of the land, put at rest for
ever all the chatter about controlling pc
lygamy in Utah, and prevent crime and
immortality Of the polygamous order taking
refuge behind religious privilege.
The proposed amendments ought to be
accompanied by another and distinct prop
osition-that Congress shall have authority
TO pass marriage and divorce laws for uni,
form application throughout the republic
OF course such a suggestion is met with
the cry OF invasion of State rights" But
what right of the citizen is more sacredly
guarded because Legislatures pass mar
riage and divorce laws, instead of Con-
gress The theory of the republic in
wolves reciprocity between the States,
and recognition by each State of the laws
and judicial DEGREES of the others.
This theory is defeated by the fact of con-
fficting marriage and divorce laws, by
which one can be the lawful husband of
several wives, by marrying in one State
and removing to another, and repeating
the process. So, too, one may be freed
from marital bonds by DEGREES in one State
which other States will refuse to recognize
as of any validity whatever. What harm
can come from abandoning all the complex
ity of the present and adopting, through
Congress, a uniform system concerning the
domestic relation Of marriage, and uni
form rule for the severance of the bonds of
matrimony? 1t is replied, perhaps, that
1t is dangerous for to yield up to the Fed
eral Government even the least rights re-
served to the States, because each conces-
sion makes it so much the easier to SIR
render another, and thus we may go on,
step by step, to eventual complete central
ization, and the loss of all State character.
! But there is no logical force in this objec-
ton: it amounts only to nervous fear, I'M
warranted by any experience of the past
or evidences of the present, and not ja'ti-
fed by any possible evil in the PROPOSE ION
made. 1t ought to be sufficient to iud re
all things of this character on their merits.
ais it desirable that the conflicts and coz
tentions due to the attrition Of State laws
concerning marriage should be eliminated
from our system?" Yes" I" Is it desir-
able that marriage i'll one State should be
honored and recognized as marriage in all
the State, ~ Certainly" "Will it not
conserve the morals of society and the
sanctitv of the home, and strengthen re-
spect for matrimony, if the causes for di-
vorce, and the methed of procuring it, are
made the same in all the States; would
-. II a. oo,,d;t;o,, of tho Iaws touI IN
check fraud and deceit, outrages upon
wives, and wrongs upon husbands, ofienses
to decency, and corruption at the bar and
in the Courts?" Unquestionably." How
then, with all these benefits in view can
men consistently oppose measure that
promises so much of good and that marches
so directly in the path of progress and to-
wards the betterment of social and moral
conditions?
The truth is, that the political fear of
invasion of State rights is warranted only
when it is proposed to deprive the State of
exercise that will in some way weaken the
guarantees of freedom, and do violence to
the social organization. That which most
conseryes popular morals, most insures the
stability of the Republic. Intelligence
alone VIII not keep lis nation. However
wise and literate we may become, if
there is moral decay there will be retro
erosion and descent in the scale of
strength and power. The independence
of States will avail us nothing if they
foster social evils, that by uniformity of
legislation may be stamped out. Divorce
is increasing at fearful rate the sacred
ness Of matrimony only safeguard
and ioundation-stonc of the family and
upon the preservation of which the per-
petuitv OF our institutions depends
steadily declining by reason of the ease
with which it may be assumed, and the
greater facility with which its obligations
NAV be laid aside While we progress in
wealth. advance in commerce and aug
men, our Importance by development of
our resources, we foster system that ia
miIiarizes us with that which, but half
century ago, was social disgrace, and not
tolerable in selfrespecting society.
So. then, our domestic laws are not
keeping pace with our commercial and in
dustrial growth, nor moving abreast with
our intelligence and the light of the age
so long as we permit the conflict of mar
rage and divorce laws TO continue. 1t
ought not to be possible for that to be
marriage in one section of cur common
country which is adulterous in another; it
should not be possible that one can have
legal recognition in one State as hus
band or wife, that is denied in another
State. There are but two means through
which to attain the ends desired. One is
by the agreement of all the States upon
uniform codes defining marriage, and pro-
viding causes for divorce and the penalties
attaching thereto; the other, National leg
islation. The latter can be had by agree
ment Of three-fourths of all the States; it