The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-03-18
FACT ABOUT DIVORCES
STRANGELY INCONSISTENT LAWS IN
THE DIFFERENT STATES.
Need of a Universal Law Clearly
shown by the LoophoIes in Statutes
That Are CleSerIy Used.

Inc recent ScanQalS IN the NaildeIDut anu
Aston families direct attention again TO the
strange and Inadequate laws of the various
States covering the granting of divorces.
What is a just ground for divorce in one
State is not just ground in the neighboring
State. Restrictions governing the remar-
riage of either party to a divorce may hold
good in one State and not in another. In
fact, the whole system of divorce LAWS in
this country is so complicated as to have
given birth to an organized movement for
a universal law which shall apply to every
State and Territory.
OF the forty-four States in the Union,
forty-three of which have separate and diff
| ferent laws governing divorce, one stands
out independent and alone IN that it has no
divorce laws. This is the State of South
Carolina.
To a person at all interested in the d.
vorce question, the diversity of causes and
the difference Of the laws governing the
granting of legalized release from marital
woes is a very instructive study. There are
many serious phases of the question, and
also some amusing complications.
Ten years ago Chicago was the great d.
vorce center, and the very fact of a person
going there to reside for a few months was
equivalent to going for q divorce. Chicago
DEGREES were granted with such rapidity, for
SUCH IIlVldi cduS0S, dliu tHS SctoHo lhdl LIE
may, the third, fourth, fifth and so on ad
nbitum) followed so quickly upon the grant
ing of them that Chicago was called the
"divorce mill,' a name which, has since
| spread, and is now applicable to several
other cities and towns which have fostered
and n~urtured the traffic.
A universal divorce law is a reform that
has been agitated for many years, 1t is
urged that such a law would be a barrier
in the path of those seeking q release fraud
ulently. and a stepping stone and safeguard
to those entering upon the step through ne
cesSity.
AS the law row stands, a divorced per-
her status in society. One State allows
divorce for one ground; another State does
of It's limits by one of its residents; yet
the parties in a divorce suit may remarry
and return to their native States to live
and if the other side chooses to make a
fuss they could be served with papeIs
in a divorce suit with the new wife named
often enough pretty safe in marrying and
returning, because the other party has an
affinity waiting the new marriage when the
proceedings in the first instance have been
THE e. YORK Law.
New York allows divorce but for one
cause, the statutory offense, but for that
reason we find the new States and Ter
ritories, with the short terms of residence
and large gamut of causes to be picked
and chosen from as the favorite hunting
grounds of the would-be Divorces. This
State is cited as a crying example of the
urgent necessity of a universal law. Were
| New York less stringent on the question
of undoing the calling marriage bonds it
is believed that many scandals would be
prevented and those prairie cities and
| towns now held in subsection and sup
pressed in their growth by the nefarious
practices of their aWyers and divorce seek
ers would be enabled to expand and grow
in a natural way.
Let it be supposed that a plaintiff secures
a divorce in New York. The defendant is
| prohibited by law from marrying again in
| this State. This sounds very harsh to the
| sinner and at first glance there appears
no way to escape from the restriction inn
posed against remarriage, What does the
Jersey, gets married, comes back to New
| York and goes on in the even, tenor of
his or her way, Indifferent to the courts
| rulings.
For some years Delaware aud Rhode
| Island have been very popular among So
ciety people contemplating a divorce. Their
| proximity to New York makes them very
pleasant abiding places. 1t is also posi-
bic TO pass a yew weeks or months in the
metropolis and till hold a residence i'm
either State, which win eventually result
visit friends in New York.
BY far the most notable divorce colony is
that which migrates to North and South
Dakota. Sioux Falls and Yankton, in the
latter State, bear the palm for popularity.
Fargo and Grand Forks are the favorife
abiding places in the former State, and
they have been steadily growing in favor.
Recently, however, the bishops of South
influence to iengthen the term of residence
from three months to six months. They felt
bic 10 the State. But last week the six
months law was repeated and the three
m St5II sid pesid Faffs + hoI agai IN s omn It. law
yers are so widely known and advertised.
its attractions to an Fastener tsuch as they
city in the Northwest can offer, that so
far it has felt no falling off in its divorce
traffic since the passing of the six months
residence law.
To a stranger the condition of affairs
there seems a moral inpossibility. There
is a colony of men and women there who
come from all parts OF the United States;
fit in among the natives, but are not Of
them, and they live their short lives of
a breath of wind In a cornfield, cut a swath
which closes behind them and leaves no
trace of their passage.
II DAKOTA COLONY.
This colony has so impregnated the whole
town that any newcomer is Immediately
regarded as a new member. A gentleman
once asked upon learning the foregoing
fact: But suppose / went out there with
my Wife to settler" ut would make no diff
ference" was the reply, mo one would be-
lieve you were married" And this is equally
true of other large towns in North and
South Dakota.
Oklahoma, too. has made a bid for the
divorce seeking element by holding out an
inducement in the shape of a short-term
residence. A number of Oklahoma divorces
ha been granted to prominent New York
PEG. ? and the divorce colony there is grow
ing.
The causes for divorce are very numer-
Gus in some States. and a seeker can
scarcely fail to find a loophoIe through
which he may gain a release. The follow
ing causes are from the laws of some of
the more prominent States:
Connecticut-Fraudulent contract, wiIlful
desertion for three years with total neglect
OF duty, absence seven Years unheard Of.
habitual intemperance. intolerable cruelty.
sentence to imprisonment for life, any in
famous crime involving a violation of con-
jugai duty and punishment by Imprisonment
in state prison. Either party may remarry.
Previous residence required, three years.
Delaware-Desertion three times. habituaI
drunkenness, physical incapacity. extreme
cruelty, conviction of felony, parties mar
ried under age, fraud and force in proeur-
ing marriage, willful neglect of husband to
provide for wife during three years. Either
party may remarry again, but party guilty
of adultery may NOT marry party with whom
crime was committed. No statutory pro-
vision as to marrying
District of misunderstanding at mar
rage; incapaeity; habituaI drunkenness;
cruel and abusive treatment endangering
life or health: willfuI desertion for two